211

REVELATION 3:3

...If therefore you shall not watch, I will come upon you as a thief, and you shall not know what hour I come upon you.

Genesis 12:3

Genesis 12:3

Jerusalem Post

MEMRI

Blog Archive

Profound Prophecy




Minature Earth

Photobucket

Act for america

It Will Cost You

A Call To Wonder

What Is Salvation

PreTrib Rapture?

Obsession

Third Jihad:Short

West Needs To Know

Geet Wilders Fitna

Undercover Mosque

Undercover: The Return

Khosrow's Story

Ali's Story

Mohammad's Story

Khalil's Story

Parousia Conference on End Times Events

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 5:21 PM 0 comments

Photobucket

The following are eight lectures from Marvin Rosenthal, Charles Cooper, and Roger Best recorded at a "Parousia Conference" in Holland, Michigan.

These were originally posted at www.prewrathrapture.com in May of 2007. You can visit the original article by CLICKING HERE


1. Panorama Of Israel's History - Rosenthal

2. Millennial Questions & Hermeneutics - Cooper

3. Rapture Positions - Cooper

4. The 70 Weeks of Daniel 9:24-27 - Rosenthal

5. Introduction to Matthew 24 - Best

6. The Timing of the Rapture - Best

7. The Day of the Lord - Best

8. Questions & Answers - Cooper & Best

Category : edit post
Category : edit post

Pre-Mature Pre Trib Rapture

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 4:54 PM 0 comments

Rapture

Category : edit post

Ryan Habbena: Parable of the Fig Tree

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 4:46 PM 0 comments


To Listen to the Episode about Ryan's New Book Click HERE

Category : edit post

Vincent Sawyer: The Day of the Lord

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 4:37 PM 0 comments

Category : edit post

Vincent Sawyer: PreWrath Part Two

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 4:36 PM 0 comments

Category : edit post

Vincent Sawyer PreWrath Part One

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 4:33 PM 0 comments

Category : edit post

Pastor Vincent Sawyer: On Pre Wrath Position

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 4:30 PM 0 comments

Category : edit post

Ryan Habbena: Pre Wrath Rapture Part 2

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 4:18 PM 0 comments

This is part two of the discussion with Ryan Habbena about Pre-Wrath Rapture.

CLICK HERE

Ryan Habbena: Pre Wrath Rapture Part 1

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 4:09 PM 0 comments

Christians with a pre-millenial, futurist view of eschatology differ on their views of the timing of the rapture of the church. The most common views are: Pre-Trib, Mid-Trib, and Post-Trib, placing the rapture before, in the middle of, or after the 70th week of Daniel - commonly called “The Tribulation”. A fourth, distinct view of rapture places the rapture at some unknown time in the second half of the time known as Daniel’s 70th Week.

Pastor Ryan Habbena of Twin City Fellowship church in St. Louis Park, Minnesota holds to the Pre-Wrath view of rapture. In this episode, he explains this view, and compares it to the pre-tribulation view that has been popularised by the best-selling “Left Behind” series of novels. As a Pre-Tribber, I also present Ryan with questions to better understand his view.

This episode is a bit longer than those we’ve done so far, so it has been split into two segments to accomodate those who may wish to burn it to CD. This is part one.

Click HERE

Charles Cooper: Damaged Foundation 4

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 3:40 PM 0 comments

In this episode of Prewrath Radio Online, we look at the final leg of what was once thought to be a strong support for a pretrib rapture in the book of Revelation. The absence of the term "church" in chapters 4-19 is a two-edged sword, pretribulationism has fallen on.


Charles Cooper: Damaged Foundation 3

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 3:38 PM 0 comments

In this episode of Prewrath Radio Online, we examine implications of the loss of Revelation 4:1 as a support passage for a pretrib rapture. Pretribulationists are now admitting that this passage has nothing to do with a pretrib rapture. This is strike two!



Charles Cooper: Damaged Foundation 2

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 3:34 PM 0 comments

In this episode of Prewrath Radio Online, we examine implications of the loss of Revelation 3:10 as the determining passage for a pretrib rapture.



Charles Cooper: Damaged Foundation 1

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 3:30 PM 0 comments

This audio is Charles Cooper speaking about the Damaged Foundations of the "Pre- Trib Position" Part One. For more information about the Pre-Wrath Position go to www.prewrathrapture.com

In this episode of Prewrath Radio Online, we examine the loss of Revelation 3:10 as foundational support for a pretrib rapture.


Walid Shoebat: Why I Left Jihad

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:52 PM 0 comments



Dr. Mark Eastman: The Value of Man

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:51 PM 0 comments

Category : edit post

Dr. Mark Eastman: Christ The Suffering Servant

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:50 PM 0 comments

Category : edit post

Dr. Mark Eastman: The Mystery of Life's Origins

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:49 PM 0 comments

Dr. Mark Eastman: So You Want Evidence?

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:47 PM 0 comments

Dr. Mark Eastman: The Existance of God

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:46 PM 0 comments

Dr. Mark Eastman: DNA Evolution's Death Knell

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:45 PM 0 comments

Dr. Mark Eastman: Cosmos and Creator

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:41 PM 0 comments

The Real Islam

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 11:02 AM 0 comments

This article originally appeared Sunday March 28th 2010 at www.IslamWatch.com It is authored by Arslan Shaukat. To read the original article follow this link:

"The Real Islam" Posted at www.IslamWatch.com


Islamists under various labels are trying to sell Islam to ignorant Western non-Muslims as a moderate, peaceful creed. But there is only one Islam, manifesting the life of Muhammad and commandments of the Quran, and there is nothing peaceful or moderate in it. This clever ploy of the taqiyah-tactician Islamists must be exposed, if we are fight Islam effectively...

Presently, the world at large is witnessing a rise in resistance against Islam and Islamism. The battleground has largely been the World Wide Web (WWW). Websites like Faithfreedom.org, Islam watch, and Jihad watch, have proven to be fantastic platforms for liberalists, anti-Islamists, and ex-Muslims to express their convictions about Islam. Also, a handful of people like Ibn Warraq, Wafa Sultan, Geert Wilders, Ayan Hisri Ali, and Robert Spencer have effectively utilized international news and print media to express their highly critical convictions about Islam. But, undoubtedly, it has been the WWW that has served as the best platform.

Simultaneously, the Islamic Ummah has gauged this challenge and is busy, more than ever, to discredit, refute, challenge and suppress the elements that are a threat to Islamic theology and its status quo. We are, indeed, witnessing an ideological war between atheists, ex-Muslims, and anti-islamists on one side and Muslim apologists, scholars and the Muslim Ummah on the other. Unsurprisingly, this war quite often turns violent and bloody (i.e. murder of Theo-van-goh, the teddy bear affair, Danish cartoons and attack on Kurt Westergaard, murder of Fanish Masih and incarceration of Imran Masih etc.).

Now, the bulk of debate between anti-Islamists and their Islamist counterparts revolves around a singular issue: What is 'real Islam’? The debate always becomes about the 'real' Islam. When all is said and done, there is only one question: what is real Islam?

I am of the view that using the word ‘real Islam’ in itself is problematic, but for the sake of brevity, I will use two terms to show two views of Islam: ‘real’ and ‘moderate’ Islam.

The ‘real ‘Islam

A set of beliefs or an ideology can be said to be “real”, if it mirrors the original and unadulterated aspirations, convictions, and teaching of its founder. This much all of us can understand. Islam can be said to be 'real' only when it is a manifestation of the teachings of Muhammad, the Quran, and the Hadith.

Thus, ‘real’ Islam is what is stated in the Quran. The ‘real’ Islam is what Muhammad did and said. The real Islam is what is in the authentic Hadiths.

Within the context of ‘real Islam’ as defined above, what are some of its features and characteristics? To go through the entire Islamic doctrine will be impossible in a single article, so I will just concentrate on one aspect of ‘real Islam’ and one key issue: Is Islam religion of peace or religion of war?

Quran

Even a cursory study of the Quran makes it abundantly clear that Islam promotes war and bloodshed.

It orders the believers to wage war.

Quran 9:111: “Verily, Allah has purchased of the believers their lives and their properties; for the price that theirs shall be the Paradise. They fight in Allah's Cause, so they kill (others) and are killed. It is a promise in truth.'

Quran 49:15: Only those are Believers who have believed in God and His Apostle, and have never since doubted, but have striven with their belongings and their persons in the Cause of God: Such are the sincere ones.'

Quran also makes it clear that the nonbelievers are the worst of creatures.

Quran 98:6: “Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islam, the Quran and Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him)) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikoon will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.

Quran makes it abundantly clear that Islam must prevail over all other theological systems which are considered false and against the will of Allah.

Quran 61.9: “It is He (Allah) who sent His messenger (Muhammad) with the guidance and the true religion (Islam), in order that it may prevail and triumph over all religions, much to the dislike of the idolaters.”

I have quoted these verses specifically to make it clear that ‘real’ Islam has no intention, whatsoever, to be a peaceful, moderate or a docile religion.

Muhammad

Now let's have a glimpse of a few deeds of Muhammad.

Muhammad, the inventor of Islam was involved in wars, both defensive and offensive. He actively took part in many of them i.e. Badr, Khandaq, Uhud etc. He decimated many a Jewish tribes of Medina i.e. Nadir, Qanuqah, and of course, the genocide of Banu Quraizah was a direct consequence of what Muhammad desired (Life of Mahomet, William Muir).

He broke treaties, looted, massacred with no regards to human rights, compassion or fairness. He took many wives and even raped women captured in these raids. Muhammad gave Muslim men the license to enjoy women captured in wars as many as they can capture or afford to buy, even if they (the captive women) are already married to someone else (Q 4:3; 4:24).

There is hardly anything peaceful or moral about Muhammad's life and what he did or said. Although Muhammadan and post-Muhammadan Islamic history is filled with treacherous and violent episodes of bloodshed, wars and genocide, for the present article, the above few quotations from the Quran and titbits from the life of Muhammad will suffice. These incidents are historical facts recorded in authentic hadiths included in Sahih Bukhari etc.

It’s very easy to conclude that the ‘real’ Islam is a vile ideology soaked with blood, war, lust and greed. It is an all-encompassing dogma that shackles its subjects in a perpetual state of frenzied delusion about the grandeurs of heaven that they will get if they wage war against the infidels. Islam is war. And Muhammad was a warrior (and a very successful one).

Motion of Islam of Muslims and Islamic apologists

It is unfortunate that politicians, scholars, state heads and news & print media seems to have ignored the historical and factual Islam altogether. Instead, we are bombarded with statements such as:

1. ‘Islam is a religion of peace.’

2. ‘Some evil people have hijacked Islam for their own benefits.’

3. ‘Islam encourages brotherhood, coexistence and mutual understanding among all human beings’, and so on.

Also, Muslims and Islamic apologists are busier than ever in proclaiming that Islam is a religion of peace and Muhammad is the best ‘role model’. Of course, their claims are rubbish.

What Islamists are trying to accomplish is forward the idea that there is somehow an Islam that is moderate, enlightened, peaceful and brotherly. They call it the ‘moderate Islam’. Now, manifestly, and as shown in the preceding sections, all such notions about Islam are utterly false.

But how come Islamic apologists can lie so blatantly and unabashedly about Islam. How is it possible that they construe Islam in such a diametrically different manner than what it actually is?

There are a number of reasons:

1. Muslim apologists lie. They do taqiyaah.

2. They are themselves somehow deluded about the real nature of Islam.

3. Islamists are well aware that when a lie if repeated often enough, it can turn into a truth. They are also well aware that, in order to promote their religion, they are allowed to use any means necessary that includes propagandizing the notion of a peaceful and moderate Islam.

4. The Muslim apologists, who came to the West, have accepted many of the liberal and democratic values and sociocultural norms of the West, and they conceive Islam form a uniquely Western perspective. In other words, they themselves have become adulterated with Western ethos and values. This adulteration in turn gets mixed with their conception of what Islam is. And this gives rise to their misplaced notion of ‘moderate Islam’ and belief in the notion of ‘moderate Islam’.

The correct approach to the debate of ‘real’ and ‘moderate’ Islam

Although it’s not completely wrong to use the term ‘real Islam’ as the term stresses the importance of going to the source of Islamic theology (and that is the Quran and the life of Muhammad.) However, it would be better simply to call Islam Islam; nothing more, nothing less. And by Islam, it is to be understood that it is a manifestation of the Quran and Muhammad.

On the other hand, there is no such thing as ‘moderate Islam’. There is just Islam. Islam is inherently not moderate as shown in the previous sections. Islam is a dogma that strives to perpetuate itself through war, terror and subjugation. Islam, when established within a society, becomes the law and encompasses every aspect of the society. And an Islamic society like that of Pakistan, Iran etc. are not moderate in any manner or form. The routine killing, lynching, and burning of blasphemers (in case of Pakistan) are a small example of how Islamic societies actually operate.

‘Moderate Islam’ is a deluded concept concocted by Islamists to fool the masses.

There is no moderation in Islam. There is just Islam in Islam.

What must be done?

Islamists are busy fooling the masses with their rhetoric of a peaceful and moderate Islam. Their attempts should be exposed and stalled. Islam must not be given any chance to be accepted as ‘just another religion’. We, the atheists and anti-islamists must defeat this notion of moderate Islam. The fallacy of the concept of Islam being moderate can be very easy and conveniently exposed by simply stating the historical and Quranic facts.

It’s very important that ex-Muslims, anti-islamists, and atheists squarely challenge this notion of ‘moderate Islam’.

Calling Islam Islam

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 10:52 AM 0 comments

This Article is a re-post with permission from it's author that was originally posted on Sunday January 10, 2010 by Bosch Fawstin. To read the original article at the author's website follow this link:

http://fawstin.blogspot.com/2010/01/calling-islam-islam.html

Western intellectuals and commentators refer to the enemy's ideology as:

"Islamic Fundamentalism", "Islamic Extremism", "Totalitarian Islam", "Islamofascism", "Political Islam", "Militant Islam", "Bin Ladenism", "Islamonazism", "Radical Islam", "Islamism", etc....

The enemy calls it "Islam".

Imagine, if during past wars, we used terms such as "Radical Nazism", "Extremist Shinto" and "Militant Communism". Those who use terms other than "Islam" create the impression that it's some variant of Islam that's behind the enemy that we're facing. A term such as "Militant Islam" is redundant, but our politicians continue praising Islam as if it were their own religion. Bush told us, "Islam means peace" -- after 2,996 Americans were murdered in its name. He maintained that illusion throughout his two terms, and never allowed our soldiers to defeat the enemy. And now we have Obama, who tells us, from Egypt: “I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear." Washington's defense of Islam has trumped the defense of America and this dereliction of duty could well be called Islamgate.

Islam is a political religion; the idea of a separation of Mosque and state is unheard of in the Muslim world. Islam has a doctrine of warfare, Jihad, which is fought in order to establish Islamic ("Sharia") Law, which is, by nature, totalitarian. Sharia Law calls for, among other things: the dehumanization of women; the flogging/stoning/killing of adulterers; and the killing of homosexuals, apostates and critics of Islam. All of this is part of orthodox Islam, not some "extremist" form of it. If jihadists were actually "perverting a great religion", Muslims would have been able to discredit them on Islamic grounds and they would have done so by now. The reason they can't is because jihadists are acting according to the words of Allah, the Muslim God. From the Koran:

"Slay the idolators wherever you find them..." Chapter 9, verse 5


"When you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads until you have made a great slaughter among them...." Ch. 47:4

Beyond the doctrine, there is the historical figure of Mohammad, who, more than anyone, defines Islam. How would you judge a man who lies, cheats, steals, rapes and murders as a way of life? This evil man is Islam's ideal man, Mohammad. Whatever he said and did is deemed moral by virtue of the fact that he said it and did it. It's no accident that the only morality that could sanction his behavior was his own. Nor is it an accident that Muslims who model themselves after him are the most violent. For the 13 years that Mohammad failed to spread Islam by non-violent means, he was not so much peaceful as he was powerless. It was only through criminal activity that he gained power and a large gang of followers. But he wanted his moral pretense, too, so he changed Islam to reflect the fact that the only way it could survive was through force. And so, acting on Allah's conveniently timed "revelation" that Islam can and should be spread by the sword, Mohammad led an army of Muslims across Arabia in the first jihad. From then on, violence became Islam's way in the world. And today, acting on Mohammad's words, "War is deceit", Muslims use earlier "peaceful" verses from the Koran as a weapon against the ignorance and good will of their victims. Those "peaceful" passages in the Koran were abrogated by later passages calling for eternal war against those who do not submit to Islam. How Mohammad spread Islam influenced the content of its doctrine and therefore tells us exactly what Islam means.

Note also that the only reason we're talking about Islam is because we've been forced to by its jihad. And where are Islam's "conscientious objectors"? Nowhere to be found, for even lax Muslims have been silent against jihad. But that doesn't stop desperate Westerners from pointing to them as representives of "Moderate Islam". Far from being a personal faith, Islam is a collectivist ideology that rejects a live-and-let-live attitude towards non-Muslims. And while the jihadists may not represent all Muslims, they do represent Islam. In the end, most Muslims have proven themselves to be mere sheep to their jihadist wolves, irrelevant as allies in this war. Recovering Muslims call the enemy's ideology "Islam", and they dismiss the idea of "Moderate Islam" as they would the idea of "Moderate Evil". When, based on his actions, Mohammad would be described today as a "Muslim Extremist", then non-violent Muslims should condemn their prophet and their religion, not those who point it out.

Islam is the enemy's ideology and evading that fact only helps its agents get away with more murder than they would otherwise. Western politicians have sold us out, so it's up to the rest of us to defend our way of life by understanding Islam and telling the truth about it in whatever way we can. If we can't even call Islam by its name, how the hell are we going to defend ourselves against its true believers? One could argue that we'd be better off if the West would just choose one of the many terms currently used for the enemy's ideology. For my part, I call the enemy what they are, "Jihadists", and our response, "The War on Jihad." But behind it all, it's Islam that makes the enemy tick.

Despite my frustrations with the refusal of many to call Islam "Islam", I know that those who speak out against Jihad put themselves in danger, and I respect their courage. But it's important that we acknowledge Islam's place in the threat we face and say so without equivocation. Not saying "Islam" helps Islam and hurts us. So let's begin calling the enemy's ideology by its name. Let's start calling Islam "Islam."

Revelation 3:10 Part Seven

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:59 PM 0 comments


Revelation 3:10 Part Six

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:58 PM 0 comments


Revelation 3:10 Part Five

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:54 PM 0 comments


Revelation 3:10 Part Four

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:52 PM 0 comments


Revelation 3:10 Part Three

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:51 PM 0 comments


Revelation 3:10 Part Two

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:50 PM 0 comments


Revelation 3:10 Part One

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:49 PM 0 comments

March 14, 2009
Revelation 3:10

In this brief seven-part series (50 minutes total), Charles Cooper unpacks the significance of this prophetic verse. Pretribulationists have used this proof-text as an attempt to support their system. But a closer examination will reveal that there is no defense for pretribulationism here.


A Challenge for Pre Tribulationists

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:46 PM 0 comments



Pre Mature Pre-Trib Rapture

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 2:19 PM 0 comments

THE PRE-MATURE, PRE-TRIB RAPTURE

By James Trimm

http://www.nazarene.net/_halacha/pretrib.htm

The doctrine of the Pre-Trib Rapture is a late Christian doctrine which is running rampant in Messianic Judaism. This late Christian doctrine did not even emerge in Christendom until the nineteenth century. This late Christian theology has somehow managed to find favor with many of the Messianic movement who claim to be restoring the ancient Jewish roots of the original followers of Yeshua. In this article it will be proven that the doctrine of the Pre-Trib rapture is:

1. A late invention of Christendom with NO Jewish roots whatsoever.
2. A doctrine which runs counter to the teachings of the scriptures themselves.
3. A doctrine of "peace and safety" which may destroy the faith of many in the end.

TERMINOLOGY

Before beginning lets define some basic terms we will be using:

RAPTURE – This term has become very controversial. In the occult the term has been used for centuries to refer to occult levitation. The biblical origin of the term however, in 1Thes. 4:17 where we read the words "caught up," the Latin Vulgate uses the Latin word "RAPTOS" here. The "rapture" then, is the "being caught up" described in 1Thes. 4:17.

NATZAL – Hebrew word for "deliverance." This word has come to be used by many Pre-Trib Messianic Jews as an attempt at a Jewish/Messianic term for the pre-tribulation rapture.

KH’TAF – Aramaic word for "caught up" in the Aramaic text of 1Thes. 4:17.

POST-TRIB - The view that the KH’TAF (rapture) will is simply part of the second coming of Messiah and will therefore take place at the end of the tribulation and the beginning of the millenial Kingdom.

PRE-TRIB – This view maintains that the rapture is a separate event from the second coming of Messiah and that it will take place seven years earlier, immediately before the tribulation.

MID-TRIB – This view also maintains that the "rapture" is a separate event from the second coming of Messiah and that it will take place 3 ½ years earlier, halfway through the tribulation, at about the time of the "abomination of desolation" (the revealing of the Anti-Christ).

PRIOR-RAPTURE – This is any view which maintains that the rapture and the second coming of Messiah are separate events and that the rapture precedes the second coming of Messiah by some period of time.

PARTIAL RAPTURE – This view maintains that only part of the Body of Messiah will be "raptured."

PASHAT – The plain, simple, literal meaning of a text.



WHERE’S THE PASHAT?

One serious problem with Christendom’s pre-trib rapture teaching is that it has no basis in pashat. Although pre-tribers often claim that their beliefs are based on the plain literal meaning of the scriptures, the reality is that such an approach does not produce a belief in a pre-trib rapture. Even Hal Lindsey, perhaps the worlds best known advocate of a pre-trib rapture, admits that his belief in such is not based on the plain literal meaning of the scriptures. Lindsey admits that he cannot "point to any single verse that clearly says the rapture will occur before… the tribulation." (The Rapture by Hal Lindsey p. 32). Instead Lindsey claims "pretribulationism is based largely on arguments from inference and silence." (ibid p. 31).

If pretribulationism does not come from a pashat understanding of the scriptures then one must ask, where did it originate and why do so many believe it?



DISPENSATIONALISM AND PRETRIBISM

During the 1820's and 1830's a Christian theologian named John Darby (founder of the Plymoth Brethren) developed a new systematic theology called Dispensationalism. Dispensationalism has since become very popular in Christendom. Somehow this late Christian invention has gained the favor of many claiming to be returning to the Jewish roots of the original followers of Yeshua. It is a fact that Dispenstionalism did not exist until the nineteenth century. It has no roots in Judaism whatsoever and did not even exist in Christianity until the 19th century.

Like most 19th century theologians John Darby was an anti-nomian, he believed that the Law of Moses had passed away at the cross. Darby was disturbed however with certain problems created by that theology. Darby noticed that during the seven years of Daniel's final week the offerings are being made at the Temple.

Since the Law of Moses was clearly being kept during this seven year tribulation, Darby conluded that the Law comes back into effect at the beginning of the tribulation. This train of thought caused Darby to segragate biblical and prophetic history into compartmentalized ages.

Darby theorized an age of Law that ended at the cross and an age of grace or church age that began at the cross. Then at the seven year tribulation the age of Law kicks back in and the church age of grace ends.

This created a problem for Darby's theory. How can the age of Law return if the Church is still here? Darby saw the age of Law as an age in which God delt with Israel and the tribulation as a return to God dealing with Isarel. So what happens to the Church? Surely the Church will not leave Grace and come under the Law of Moses. As a result Darby adopted the idea of a pre-trib rapture which had become popular among the Irvingites.

This idea had the Church leave the earth at the beginning of the tribulation, leaveing Israel behind to enter the tribulation and the age of law's return. Darby now had another problem. If the Church is raptured leaving Israel behind, then what about so-called "Jewish Christians." Do they get raptured with the Church, or stay behind with Israel?

Darby proposed yet another solution: Church/Israel dichotomy. This theory taught that a Jew who becomes a believer in Messiah becomes part of the Church and is no longer part of Israel. As a result no one can be both a part of the Church and Israel. Jewish believers, according to this theory, stop being Jews and become part of the Church of God, which he taught containd people that are not Jews or gentiles. Thus the three pillars of Dispensationalism are:

1) The Law is not for today
2) The pre-trib rapture
3) Church Israel dichotomy

Now Messianic Jews cannot accept number one or number 3. Number two was only needed because of a belief in number 1. Number 2 does not work without number 3 which was created to solve problems created by number 2. As a result Messianic Judaism is incompatble with Dispensationalism. Two of the three pillars wich must be present to support Dispensationalism are noncompatable with Messianic Judaism. Moreover the only remaining pillar cannot stand alone, it only exists to solve a problem created by number 1 and it cannot stand without number 3. When examined in light of the truths that Messianic Jews have, the whole structure of Dispensationalism comes crashing down. It is a late19th century invention of Christendom with NO roots in first century Judaism at all.

HOW MANY COMINGS OF MESSIAH?

Almost immediately it becomes apparent that prior-rapturists believe not in two comings of Messiah, but three comings of Messiah. Sine the post-tribulation return of the Messiah has been clearly recognized as the "Second coming of Messiah" for centuries, the prior rapturists must either relable this coming "the third coming of Messiah" or, as most of them do, insist that their prior-rapture is not actually a "coming of Messiah." Prior-rapturists insist that their prior rapture is not a "coming" of the Messiah, but merely an "appearance" of the Messiah. If this is true then the scriptures should clearly bear this out. If the prior-rapturist theory is true then the scriptures should teach a pre-trib "appearance" of Messiah which is not a "coming of the Messiah" followed by a post trib "coming of the Messiah." We should not see the KH’TAF (rapture) refered to as a "coming" of the L-rd in the scriptures. We should also not expect the post trib coming of the Messiah labled as an "appearace." Now lets examine the scriptures:

I charge you therefore before G-d, and the L-rd Yeshua the Messiah, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his Kingdom. (2Tim. 4:1)

Here it is clearly the end of the tribulation and the beginning of the Kingdom which occurs at the appearance of Messiah.

So Messiah was once offered to bear the sins of many;and to them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.(Heb. 9:28)

Here the text seems to discuss the post-trib coming of Messiah . If prior-rapturists are correct then this text should either read "come the second time" or "appear a third time."

Be patient therefore brothers, unto the coming of the L-rd. (James 5:7a)

This text seems to tell us that our hope is to look for the "coming of the L-rd" not an "appearance of the L-rd."

For this we say to you by the Word of the L-rd, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the L-rd shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the L-rd himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of G-d: and the dead in Messiah shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up (raptured) together with them in the clouds to meet the L-rd in the air: and so shall we ever be with the L-rd. (1Thes. 4:15-17)

This passage is the definitive rapture text. But look, this passage is describing a "coming of the L-rd."

It becomes clear by examining the texts that prior-rapturists believe not in two comings of the Messiah but three. This theory is clearly at odds with the scriptures which teach only two comings of Messiah.

THIEF IN THE NIGHT

One of the catchphrases used by prior-rapturists is the phrase "thief in the night." The prior-rapturists use this term to describe their prior rapture as a "secret rapture" in which the Church is secretly snatched away. This is however a complete misuse of the biblical term "thief in the night." The "thief in the night" parable is one of the many parables Yeshua told (Mt. 24:42-51) it is referred to in the scriptures on three additional places (1Thes. 5:2-10; 2Pt. 3:10; Rev. 3:3 & Rev. 16:15). A true analysis of the term "thief in the night" as it is used in the scriptures will reveal a post-trib rapture which is anything but a secret prior-rapture.

The first place to look is the parable itself. The thief in the night parable is given by Yeshua in Mt. 24:42-44:

Watch therefore: for you know not what hour your L-rd does come. But know this, that if the good-man of he house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up. Therefore be you also ready: for in such an hour as you think not the Son of Man comes.

There are a number of important elements to this parable. First it should be noted that the "thief" in this parable is clearly the Messiah. However in the parable of the Thief in the Night the Messiah is a thief who comes at an unexpected time. He is not pictured as "stealing the church away" If anything the assembly is the victim of his surprise visit, but not the thing being stolen. Secondly we not that the thief/Messiah comes at a time that the Assembly does not expect him. Finally it is significant that the thief comes at a time later than the Assembly expected and found the Assembly sleeping. Throughout the scriptures sleeping is a type of apostasy (see Is. 29:10 = Rom. 11:8).

The Thief in the Night parable is part of a section of scripture beginning in Mt. 24:42 and ending in Mt. 25:13 in which Yeshua illustrates that the Messiah comes later than expected to a sleeping assembly which expected him earlier. Yeshua first states this theme in verse 42. Then in Mt. 24:43 Yeshua give the thief in the night parable. Then in verse 44 Yeshua restates this theme. Then in Mt. 24:45-51 Yeshua gives the parable of the "faithful and wise servent." In this parable also the Messiah comes at a time later than the servant expected (verses 48 & 50) to find an apostate servant (verses 48-49). Finally Yeshua gives the illustration of the "ten virgins" (Mt. 25:1-12) in which the bridegroom comes later than the virgins expected. The virgins (at least some of them) are clearly believers for five of them have oil in their lamps. The bridegroom comes to find the virgins sleeping. Even though many of them had oil in their lamps, they thought the Messiah would come sooner than he did and as a result the fell into a sleep of apostasy. Rather than teaching a pre-trib rapture this section of scripture warns us that much of the assembly will expect the Messiah sooner than he comes (pre-trib), and when the Messiah comes later than the Assembly thought he was supposed to (post-trib) these believers fall into apostate sleep. The pretribbers have been falsely taught by many of the teachers of Christendom that the Bible teaches Messiah will rescue them from the tribulation before it comes. When this does not happen many of them will lose faith and think that the scriptures are a lie. They will fall into an apostate sleep.

In Rev. 3:3 we read:

…If therefore you shall not watch, I will come on you as a thief, and you shall not know what hour I come upon you.

This passage clearly refers to the material in Mt. 24:42-44. Here Messiah is addressing the Assembly at Sardis (actual believers) and indicates that he will come at a time that the Assembly does not expect. The implication in the phrase "If therefor you shall not keep watch…" is that the Messiah will come later than expected to find sleeping/apostate believers.

In 2Peter 3:10 we read:

But the day of the L-rd will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.

The "day" referred to here is the 1,000 year day of the millenial Kingdom (2Pt. 3:8; Ps. 90:4; Rev. 20:2, 7). This 1,000 year "day" begins with the second coming of Messiah (Rev. 19:11-20:2) and ends with the destruction of the earth by fire (Rev. 20:7-21:1). Here the "L-rd will come like a thief" (2Pt. 3:10) definitely refers to the second coming of the Messiah at the end of the tribulation and the beginning of the 1,000 years. This is anything but a stealthy silent secret rapture thief. This is a noisy thief who will cause the heavens to pass away with a "roar."

In Rev. 16:15 we read:

Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watches, and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.

This passage occurs in context of the events of the 1,000 year day mentioned above. Moreover the passage also reflects a thief that comes later than expected to find an apostate Assembly.

Finally in 1Thes. 5:2-10 we read:

For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the L-rd comes as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction comes upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. But you, brethers, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober. For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night. But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for a helmet, the hope of salvation. For G-d hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our L-rd Yeshua the Messiah, Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.

Now in reading this passage we should recall the Thief in the Night parable that is clearly being referred to here. Here we learn that the sleeping apostates will be duped by a "peace and safety" doctrine (verse 3) however "sudden destruction comes upon them…and they shall not escape" (verse 3). Here those that expect the Messiah to come later than he does believe in a "peace and safety" teaching and fall into apostasy when the Messiah does not come as soon as they expect but instead "sudden destruction comes upon them" something they apparently expected to "escape." At this point they seem to fall into a sleep of apostasy. A great falling away comes when pretribbers are disappointed when they enter the tribulation instead of escaping it in a pre-trib rapture. But wait! Look at 1Thes 5:1! This whole section of scripture refers to the timing of the "rapture" event of 1Thes. 4:16-18. In fact, the chapter change from 1Thes. 4:18 to 5:1 occurs in the middle of a paragraph!

The reference to the thief in the night parable in 1Thes. 4:16-5:10 is also important for another reason. This reference gives us some context for the "rapture" event of 1Thes. 4:16-17. The thief in the night parable of Mt. 24:43 takes place in a large segment of Matthew (Mt. 24:29-25:46) which clearly discusses the post-trib (Mt. 24:29) second coming of Messiah. The thief of Mt. 24:42-44 comes at a time that is like "the days of Noah… before the flood" (Mt. 24:37-41 with Mt, 24:42-51). Luke also discusses this time that is like the days of Noah (Mt. 24:37-41 = Lk. 26-36). Luke goes on to say that those "taken" in Mt.24:37-41 = Lk. 17:26-36 will be consumed by birds of prey (see Lk. 17:37 = Mt. 24:28). These men consumed by birds of prey are those who come against Israel and are destroyed at the second coming (Rev. 19:11-21 esp. 19:17-18, 21). The timing of the "thief" event is therefore that of the second coming of Messiah in Rev. 19:11-21. Since the timing of "thief" event of 1Thes. 5:2-10 is that of the "rapture" event of 1Thes. 4:16-18 (1Thes. 5:1 states clearly that 1Thes. 5:2-10 refers to the timing of 1Thes. 4:16-18) then the "rapture" of 1Thes. 4:16-18 is simply a part of the post-trib coming of the Messiah.

IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE TRIBULATION OF THOSE DAYS (Mt. 24:29)

In order to get a good picture of just what the KH’TAF (rapture) event of 1Thes. 4:16-17 is we must let scripture interpret scripture. This is a concept in Jewish hermeneutics called G’ZARAH SHEVAH (equivalence of expresions). This is the second of the seven rules of Hillel. The first scripture that we should compare 1Thes. 4:16-17 with is 1Cor. 15:52.

Now 1Thes. 4:13-17 reads:

But I would not have you to be ignorant, brothers, concerning them which are asleep, that you sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Yeshua died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Yeshua will G-d bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the L-rd, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the L-rd shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the L-rd himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of G-d: and the dead in Messiah shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the L-rd in the air: and so shall we ever be with the L-rd.


Lets compare this passage with 1Cor. 15:50-55:

Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of G-d; neither does corruption inherit incorruption. Behold, I show you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?


Certainly these two passages obviously speak of the same event. The question is what kind of context does 1Cor. 15:50-55 give to the "rapture" of 1Thes. 4:13-17?

1. The event of 1Cor. 15:50-55 facilitates the inheritance of the Kingdom.
2. 1Cor. 15:54b quotes Is. 25:8
3. 1Cor. 15:55 quotes Hosea 13:14

Isaiah 25:8 and Hosea 13:14 clearly speak of the beginning of the Kingdom. Taken together it would seem that 1Cor. 15:50-55 places 1Thes. 4:13-17 in the context of the beginning of the 1,000 year Kingdom.

Now 1Thes 4:13-18 and 1Cor. 15:50-55 are generally regarded as the "rapture" verses. In fact the word "rapture" comes from the Latin Vulgate word for "caught up" in 1Thes. 4:16-17. Let us compare these with the generally accepted "second coming" verses.

Some of the generally accepted "second coming" passages are: Dan. 7:13-14; Mt. 24:29-31; Mk. 13:24-27; Rev. 11:15 and 20:4-6. In these passages we can immeditely identify four elements:

1. Messiah will supernaturally appear in the sky.
(Dan. 7:13-14; Mt. 24:30; Mk. 13:26)

2. There will be a supernatural gathering together to him in the sky.
(Mt. 24:29-31; Mk. 13:24-27)

3. A last (seventh of seven) trumpet is blown by one of the seven angels which stand before G-d.  (Rev. 8:2; 11:15; Mt. 24:31; Is. 27:13)

4. A (first) resurrection of the just (Rev. 20:4-6)

Now lets compare these four elements with the "rapture" passages of 1Thes. 4:13-18 and 1Cor. 15:50-55:

1. Messiah will supernaturally appear in the sky. (1Thes. 4:16-17)

2. There will be a supernatural gathering together to him in the sky.

(1Thes. 4:17)

3. A last (seventh of seven) trumpet is blown by one of the archangels.

(1Thes. 4:16; 1Cor. 15:52)

4. A (first) resurrection of the just (1Thes. 4:16; 1Cor. 25:52)

By comparing these four elements we find that the "rapture" of 1Thes. 4:13-18 & 1Cor. 15:50-55 is identical to the second coming of the Messiah in : Dan. 7:13-14; Mt. 24:29-31; Mk. 13:24-27; Rev. 11:15 and 20:4-6. This conclusion has been reached by many commentators. For example Halley’s Bible handbook says regarding 1Thes. 4:13-18:

It [the event in 1Thes. 4:16-17] is mentioned or referred to several times in almost every New Testament book. The chapters in which it is explained most fully are Matthew 24, 25; Luke 21; 1Thesalonians 4, 5; 2Pt. 3. (Halley’s Bible Handbook p. 626 on 1Thes. 4:13-18) (See also Halley’s comments on Mt. 24:31 on p. 447)

Also in his book MESSIAH: A Rabbinic and Scriptural Viewpoint, Messianic Jewish writer Burt Yellin writes regarding 1Thes. 4:16:

In 1 Thessalonians 4:16, Paul tells us of the return of the Messiah: "For the L-rd Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet (shofar) of G-d; and the dead in Messiah will rise first…" When read together with Revelation 11:15-17 we find that this resurrection will Take place on the seventh trumpet blast. (p. 99)

If we were to take the "rapture" passages of 1Thes. 4:13-18 & 1Cor. 15:50-55 to be a separate event from the "second coming" passages of Dan. 7:13-14; Mt. 24:29-31; Mk. 13:24-27; Rev. 11:15 and 20:4-6 as the prior-rapturists do then we have some major chronology problems. Such a chronology would have the trumpet blast of Rev. 11:15 & Mt. 24:31 being blown after the "last trumpet" of 1Thes, 4:16 & 1Cor. 15:52). Such a chronology would also have the general resurrection of the just in 1Thes. 4:16 & 1Cor. 15:52 taking place before the "first resurection" of Rev. 20:4-6). The KH’TAF (rapture) is clearly the event which Mt. 24:29 states occurs "immediately after the tribulation of those days…"

THE PASHAT

Hal Lindsey, one of the chief apologists for the pre-trib rapture states:

The truth of the matter is that neither a post-, mid-, or pre-Tribulantonist can point to any single verse that clearly says the Rapture will occur before, in the middle of, or after the Tribulation. (The Rapture by Hal Lindsey p. 32)

Now, we agree that it is true that Lindsey cannot "point to any single verse thet clearly says the rapture will occur before… the Tribulation." However, Lindsey is clearly wrong to state that we cannot "point to any single verse that clearly says the rapture will occur… after the Tribulation." This article has already shown that the scriptures clearly teach a post-trib KH’TAF (rapture). The following are single verses that clearly say the Rapture will occur after the Tribulation:

For it was not David who ascended into heaven ,But he himself says: The L-rd said to my L-rd Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet. ( Acts 2:34-35 (quoting Ps. 110:1)) (see also Heb. 1:13; Mt. 22:44; Mk. 12:36)

This passage clearly states that the Messiah will remain at the right hand of the father until his enemies are made his footstool in the 1,000 year Kingdom. This passage clearly teaches the rapture will not occur until after the tribulation, at the beginning of 1,000 year Kingdom.

And that He may send Yeshua the Messiah appointed for you, whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things which G-d spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets from ancient times. (Acts 3:20-21) (see also Rev. 10:7 & 11:15)

This passage also teaches that Messiah will remain in heaven until the Kingdom comes.

Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our L-rd Yeshua the Messiah, and by our gathering together unto him, That you be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Messiah is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called G-d, or that is worshipped; so that he as G-d sits in the temple of G-d, showing himself that he is G-d.

This passage clearly teaches that the rapture CANNOT occur until AFTER the revealing of the Anti-Christ midway through the seven year "Tribulation" (see Mt. 24:15; Mk. 13:14 & Dan. 9:27).

COMMONLY MISUNDERSTOOD PASSAGES

Unable to find support for their pre-trib rapture theory in the PASHAT (literal meaning) of any Scripture passages, Pre-Tribbers have resorted to REMEZ (implied) and DRASH (allegorical) interpretations. As Lindsey admits in his book THE RAPTURE saying that it "is in some measure true" "…that pretribism is based largely on arguments from inference and silence." (p. 31).

THE WRATH TO COME ARGUMENT

Using this argument pre-tribbers use texts which they say imply the church will not enter the tribulation, which they say hints at a pretrib rapture. The Pretribber will argue that the Tribulation is "G-d’s wrath" and that the church will not suffer "G-d’s wrath" (Rom. 5:9; 1Thes. 1:10; 5:9-10; Jn. 5:24). By using this argument pretribbers ignore the fact that the Anti-Christ, one of the major figures of the Tribulation, is the devil’s wrath (Rev. 12:12; 13:2). They also ignore the fact that the Messiah may deliver us from this wrath by destroying the AntiChrist at his second coming. Moreover they ignore the fact that by context, the wrath Messiah saves us from is in that we are "justified by his blood" (Rom. 5:9) and so we "shall be saved" (Rom. 5:9) clearly the wrath here is the Lake of Fire not the Tribulation. (Jn. 5:24 uses the word "condemnation" but the same argument applies.)

THE LUKE 21:36 ARGUMENT

This argument was first used by prior-rapturisms 15 year old inventor, who misquoted the verse in her discusion with Darby. This verse says "…pray always, that you may be accounted worth to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man."

To begin with this verse only says to pray and does not promise a result. Secondly the passages simply says "escape" not "raptured", this could simply refer to survival. The most important flaw in this Pre-Trib argument is what is meant by "all these things." This phrase seems to refer to those things listed in Luke 21:34 which would cause one to be off guard at the second coming (Lk. 21:34-36) and not the Tribulation at all. Finally, we must ask pretribbers what is meant by "accounted worthy"? If these are the church then those in the church are "accounted worthy" of their salvation. This runs counter to the Scriptures which clearly teach that we do not earn our salvation, but that we receive it as an act of grace that we are not worthy of.

THE REVELATION 3:10 ARGUMENT

Pretribbers will also point to Rev. 3:10:

I also will keep you from the hour of temptation Which shall come upon all the world, To try them that dwell upon the earth.

To begin with the word "keep" here does not mean "rapture" and could simply refer to survival with G-ds help. More importantly the context of the passage is not prophetic but written to the "assembly at Philadelphia" (Rev. 3:7) or those believers that lived in Philadelphia in John’s time. Revelation is divided into three sections (Rev. 3:10) things which John saw (Rev. 1) things which are (Rev. 2-3) and things which shall be hereafter (Rev. 4:1). Rev. 3:10 therefore applies to the time of John and not the future tribulation in the last days.

THE HOLY SPIRIT TAKEN OUT OF THE WAY?

This argument was first used by prior-rapturism’s 15 year old inventor. This argument uses eisogesis (reading ideas into a text) rather than exogesis (reading ideas out of a text). In this case Prior-rapturists read "Holy Spirit" into the "he" in 2Thes. 2:7. By this reading the Anti-Christ is revealed (2Thes. 2:8) and the Tribulation begins after the church (and therefore the Holy Spirit within them) are removed by a pre-trib rapture. Prior-rapturism’s inventor first proposed this idea after having a weird vision in which it was "revealed" to her that "then shall the wicked be revealed" immeditely follows "…two shall be in one bed, the one taken and the other left…" (Lk. 17:34f; Mt. 24:40-41). Prior-rapturism’s inventor taught a partial prior-rapture in which those "taken" were identified as "those who were filled with the Spirit." She falsely identified "taken" in Lk. 17:34-35 & Mt. 24:40-41 with "taken" in 2Thes. 2:7. Those "taken" in Lk. 17:34-35 & Mt. 24:40-41 are not "those filled with the Spirit" but are compared to those "taken" by the flood in the days of Noah (Mt. 24:39). Their bodies will be fed to birds of prey (Lk. 17:37) at the secod coming of Messiah (Rev. 19:17-18, 21). In fact the Shem Tob Hebrew Matthew adds in Mt. 24:41:

this is because the angels at the end of the world will remove the stumbling blocks from the world and will separate the good from the evil.

Although restraint of some kind is removed in 2Thes. 2:7 the Holy Spirit is not.

THE REV. 4:1 ARGUMENT

Being unable to prove their argument by a literal understanding of the Scriptures, prior rapturists turn to arguments based purely on allegory. In this argumernt prior rapturists say that John represents the Church and that he is getting "raptured" just before Rev. describes the Tribulation. There is absolutely no support for this argument from the text.

THE ENOCH ARGUMENT

This argument is also pure allegory. This argument says that Enoch was translated before the flood. The Prior-rapturists say Enoch = the Church and the flood = the Tribulation. Actually in the scriptures (and even the Book of Enoch) the flood represents the day of judgement and the days before the flood (the "days of Noah") represent the tribulation. Moreover, Elijah was also translated AFTER surviving a Tribulation period (2Kn. 2:9-11; 1Kn. 17f) 3 ½ years of which are often paralleled in the scriptures to the second half of the 7 year "Tribulation."

JEWISH CUSTOMS

Certain Messianic Jewish scholars have sought to find evidence for a pre-trib rapture allegorically from Jewish customs. One of these involves Rosh HaShanna and Yom Kippur, another the Jewish wedding. These are weak attempts at finding allegory to prove something that has no support from any PASHAT (literal) interpretation of any passage and which has no roots in Judaism to begin with but was invented in Christendom in the 19th century.

RAPTURE OR REGATHERING?

To understand the truth about the KH’TAF (rapture) it is important to understand just what this event is. Christendom generally teaches that the Rapture is a rapture of the Church, but the real truth is that the KH’TAF (rapture) is the supernatural regathering of Israel upon the return of Messiah. A serious examination of the scriptures makes this clear.

The Tenach foretells of a time when YHWH will regather Israel "from the four corners of the earth" (Is. 11:12) and "from the farthest parts under heaven" (Dt. 30:4). The Torah says that Messiah will "bring" them out of these other lands (Dt. 30:4). The word for "bring" here in the Hebrew actually means a forceful action. The Jerusalem Targum interprets this passage (Dt. 30:4) to mean that YHWH will "gather you together by the hand of Elijah… and from thence will He bring you by the hand of the King Messiah." According to Rashi’s commentary this means that they will be dragged through the air by the hand of Messiah to the land. Is this event the KH’TAF (rapture)?

The first evidence that the "bring" in Dt. 30:4 is the KH’TAF (rapture) is found in the wording of Mt. 24:31 = Mk. 13:27 which identify those being "gathered" as "the Elect." The term "the Elect" in the scriptures is a euphemism for Israel (Dt. 7:6; 10:15; 14:2; Is. 41:8-9; 42:1; 43:2f; 45:4; 65:9-22; Ps. 135:4; 1Pt. 2:9 = Is. 43:20f & Dt. 10:15). In 1Thes 4:17 Paul uses the term "we" but this is a term that elsewhere uses to refer to himself and his fellow Jews (Acts 17:1-4).

Further evidence to identify the KH’TAF event with the regathering of Israel is that of the trumpet. A trumpet is blown at the KH’TAF (rapture) in 1Thes. 4:16-17 and 1Cor. 15:50-55 as well a in Mt. 24:31 and Rev. 11:15. According to the Tenach a trumpet is also blown at the regathering of Israel (Is. 27:12-13.

Additional evidence which identifies the KH’TAF with the regathering of Israel is that of the resurrection. The KH’TAF is accompanied by a resurrection (1Thes. 4:16-17 & 1Cor. 15:50-55). The regathering of Israel also includes a resurrection (Ezkl. 37:1-14; Is. 25:1-12; Hosea 13:9-14:9). In fact, 1Cor. 15:54-55 actually quotes Is. 25:8 & Hosea 13:14. The use of Is. 25:8 & Hosea 13:14 in 1Cor. 15:54-55 is also important because of its finality. How can pretribbers believe death comes to an end at the beginning of the Tribulation?

There is yet more evidence that the KH’TAF is the regathering of Israel. Those "raptured" in 1Cor. 15:53 become immortal, but in the 1,000 year Kingdom there will also be mortals (Is. 65:20) If the Church is raptured in 1Cor. 15:53 and becomes immortal, then who are the mortals of Is. 65:20?

Final proof that the KH’TAF (rapture) is actually the regathering of Israel at the return of the Messiah is to be found in the text of Mt. 24:31 = Mk. 13:27 which actually quote the phrases "from the four corners of the earth" (Is. 11:12) and "from the farthest parts under heaven" (Dt. 30:4) right out of the Tenach passages which describe the regathering of Israel.

WHAT REALLY HAPPENS

Immeditaly after the tribulation (Mt. 24:29; Mk. 13:24) the Messiah will appear in the sky (Dan. 7:13-14; Mt. 24:29-31; Mk. 13:24-27; 1Thes. 4:16-17) there will be a final trumpet (Rev. 8:2; 11:15; Mt. 24:31; Is. 27:13; 1Thes. 4:16-17; 1Cor. 15:52) and there will be a resurrection (1Cor. 15:50-55; 1Thes. 4:16; Rev. 20:4-6; Is. 25:8; Hosea. 13:14; Ezkl. 37:1-14) and a gatherring together to Messiah in the sky
(Mt. 24:29-31; Mk. 13:24-27; 2Thes. 2:1; 1Thes. 4:17). This is followed by the Messiah coming with many of His set-apart ones (Jude 1:14-15 = 1Enoch 1:9; 1Thes. 3:13; Rev. 19:11-16; Zech. 14:4-5). After this, the 1,000 year Kingdom is established (Rev. 20:1-3, 7). This KH’TAF will be the regathering of Israel to the Land of Israel at the return of Messiah and not a pretrib rapture of the Church.

James Trimm

Category : edit post

Crazy Love Response

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 1:59 PM 0 comments

Crazy Love Response from Capstone on Vimeo.

Category : edit post

Francis Chan: Crazy Love

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 1:54 PM 0 comments

Crazy Love Teaser from 242 Community Small Groups on Vimeo.

We're Going to Skip It

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 12:57 PM 0 comments

Skip1.org PSA from Skip1 on Vimeo.



Matthew 25: 34 "Then the King will say to those on his right hand, "Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited me; I was in prison and you came to Me." "Then the righteous will answer him, saying, "Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?" and the King will answer and say to them, "Assuredly, I say to you, in as much as you did it to one of the least of these by brethren, you did it to Me."

"Then he will also say to those on the left hand, "Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me."

"Then they will also answer Him, saying, "Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?' Then He will answer them, saying, 'Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.' And they will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

He judges even the very intent of our hearts. Won't you Skip 1 today, out of Love for Christ and "the least of these" ?

Francis Chan: Why I Skip (Calling)

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 12:34 PM 0 comments

Francis Chan "Calling" from Skip1 on Vimeo.

Francis Chan: Why I Skip (Saving For the Future)

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 12:32 PM 0 comments

Francis Chan "Saving for the Future" from Skip1 on Vimeo.

Francis Chan: Why I Skip (Suffering)

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 12:27 PM 0 comments

Franchis Chan "Suffering" from Skip1 on Vimeo.

Consistency Between Jesus and Paul...

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 1:21 PM 0 comments

On September 24th 2006 Alan Kurschner of www.Prewrathrapture.com published the article "Consistency Between Jesus and Paul: The Singular Future Parousia of Christ."

To Read the original article follow this link HERE.

In the comparative chart below I list more than 20 reasons why Jesus and Paul teach on the same, singular future Parousia (Coming). This is the position of the Prewrath Rapture. There is coherence and consistency between these two pivotal teachings on the Second Coming. But first a couple of preliminary remarks.

This article will perform a double duty. Both pretribulationists and many preterists have something in common: They do not believe that Jesus in Matthew 24 and Paul in 1&2 Thessalonians are teaching on the same "Coming." Pretribs believe that when Jesus refers to the Parousia he is talking about "Armageddon." In contrast, many Preterists believe that Jesus was prophesying the judgment on Jerusalem and Israel that would occur in AD 70; and other "Hyper" Preterists believe that Jesus came back in some spiritual sense in the 1st Century.

A note on the term and usage of "Parousia."

The Greek word for "Coming" is Parousia. In the New Testament it is mentioned 17 times prophetically of our Lord Jesus' Second Coming. It means "presence" and also carries the meaning of an "arrival and a continuing presence." It is not an instantaneous event but rather it will occur over an unknown duration of time. The term is a noun, not a verb. The Lord's Coming (Parousia) is a comprehensive whole.

The first Coming of Christ was not instantaneous. Rather, it was initiated by the virgin birth. But the birth of Christ was not the whole, but a part of his Coming. During the first Coming, God fulfilled certain Divine purposes: Jesus' birth, ministry of teaching, healing, the cross, burial, and resurrection.

So will the Second Coming of Christ be a comprehensive whole in which God will fulfill certain Divine purposes and events. We are informed that God's first Divine purposes will be to raise the dead in the resurrection and rapture those believers who are remaining on earth at that time. Then the Coming will continue to include the Day of the Lord's wrath, consumation of the Kingdom, Israel's salvation, Armageddon, and the ushering in of the Millennial age.

The term is always stated in the singular, not Comings.There is only one Second Coming (Parousia). Further, it is reading one's tradition in this term when it is suggested that there are "two stages of Comings." It is common to hear that Christ will come first for his Church secretly, then return seven years later with his Church. This notion is foreign to any Parousia text. There is only one future Coming (Parousia), in which God will fulfill certain Divine purposes.

In his book, The Rapture Question: Answered Plain and Simple, Robert Van Kampen recognized about ten parallels between these two passages below. In the chart, however, I have listed, in addition to his ten parallels, about ten more important parallels that should not be overlooked.

As an exercise, I would suggest starting with the first topic and looking up its comparative texts to discover for yourself the parallels and the consistency between Jesus and Paul.

469

This is a repost with permission from www.prewrathrapture.com. The Original Article was published by Alan Kurschner on 03/14/2010 at 1:19 am. To read the original article follow this link HERE.

If it Looks Like the Rapture, Quacks Like the Rapture...it Probably is the Rapture

469

(Click here for a larger image of this chart.)

Pretribulationists and Preterists claim that Jesus and Paul are not speaking about the same coming (parousia) in their end-time teachings. The preterists maintain this because their system requires that the coming that Jesus refers to is the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. The pretribulationist system requires that Jesus is not speaking about a coming that applies to the Church that begins with the rapture, since that would mean that the Church would be persecuted by Antichrist.

Both of those interpretations are convoluted at best. The prewrath position says, "Let's compare Jesus and Paul's teaching and see if they are consistently talking about the same event." And sure enough, the natural comparison above does leads to the conclusion that the 20 plus parallels between their respective teachings is overwhelming: Jesus and Paul are speaking of the same singular future coming. If this was any other doctrine such as the deity of Christ, this would not even be up for debate. But because tradition is very strong in some quarters, it prevents others from seeing the obvious.

The Bethleham Star

Posted by Daniel 8:23 On 1:05 AM 0 comments


http://www.bethlehemstar.net/
The Bethlehem Star Trailer

PART ONE



PART TWO


PART THREE



PART FOUR


PART FIVE


PART SIX


PART SEVEN


PART EIGHT







Academic Reading


These links go to full text resources, when available. If full text is not available on the web, these links take you to sources for obtaining the complete texts.


"When Did Herod the Great Reign?", Andrew Steinmann, Novum Testamentum, Volume 51, Number 1, 2009 , pp. 1-29


"Josephus Reexamined: Unraveling the Twenty-Second Year of Tiberius," David W. Beyer, Chronos, Kairos, Christos II (Macon: Mercer University Press, 1998) ISBN 0-86554-582-0.


The Handbook of Biblical Chronology, Jack Finegan (Revised Edition; Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 1998) ISBN 1-56563-143-9.


Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ, Harold W. Hoehner (Grand Rapids: Academie Books, 1977) ISBN 0-310-26211-9.


"Dating the Crucifixion," Colin J. Humphreys and W. G. Waddington, Nature Magazine, Volume 306, December 22/29, 1983.


"Thoughts on the Star of Bethlehem," Roger Sinnott, Sky and Telescope, December, 1968, pp. 384-386.


The Star That Astonished the World, Ernest L. Martin (Second Edition; Portland, Oregon: ASK Publications, 1996) ISBN 0-94-5657-87-0.

Category : | Read More...... edit post

PreWrath

Photobucket
Download Charles Cooper and others speaking about the PreWrath Position FREE from ITUNES Just Click the Icon Above
Photobucket
Photobucket
Photobucket
Photobucket
137
137
136
136
136
136
136
138_194
Dr. Mark Eastman: "The Agony of Love" Dr. Mark Eastman: " "

Khan

Photobucket

Shoebat

Photobucket

Richardson

Photobucket

Parousia





















Francis Chan

My Blog List