[google28b52e0868d1e307.html]

Search This Blog

Thursday, 15 February 2018

SAM ADAMS INDEPENDENCE BAPTIST CHURCH: MISREPRESENTATION OF THE PRE-WRATH RAPTURE

If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame. (Proverbs 18:13).

"The pre-trib and the pre-wrath positions are preposterous."
Sam Adams - Pre-Wrath (& Pre-Trib) Rapture Doctrine Shattered: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7b5sBaqAQ1A
http://www.independencebaptist.com/post-trib-rapture.html


I am extremely unhappy that Sam Adams has made some very irresponsible statements about the pre-wrath rapture view. Not only has he condemned the pre-wrath position as "preposterous", he goes even further, and states that the pre-wrath position is actually worse than pre-trib! Nothing could be further from the truth!  Unlike pre-wrath, the pre-trib view undermines the gospel and gives believers the false hope of escaping the great tribulation. (Ephesians 6:12). By making such a reckless statement, Adams completely fails to take into account the dire consequences of the pre-trib deception which facilitates the potential for many believers to fall away. (Matthew 24:10). Although pre-trib has been debunked repeatedly, inexplicably, many Christians are still caught up in that deception. On the other hand, far from being a "compromise doctrine", the pre-wrath position effectively passes the scriptural test of authenticity. (1 John 4:1). Since Adams has issued an open invitation for anyone to correct him, my analysis follows:

Adams first objection is that both the pre-wrath and the pre-trib rapture necessitate two separate returns of the Lord. This is to limit the Parousia, the term applied to the Second Coming of Christ, to the events initiated in Revelation 19. However, it appears that the Parousia refers to a period of time preceding Revelation 19. For instance, the harpazō (catching away/rapture) is not the earthly event described in Revelation 19, and yet the apostle Paul describes it as the Lord's Parousia. (1 Thessalonians 4:15).

Alan Kurschner makes a very interesting point:

"The presupposition is that the depiction of the battle of Armageddon in Revelation 19 with Christ appearing in the sky with his heavenly armies indicates the beginning of his parousia (incidentally, this is a presupposition held by pretribulationism, as well). Yet, many posttribs recognize this causes a discrepancy because the book of Revelation shows the day of the Lord’s wrath unfolding before the battle of Armageddon during the trumpet and bowl judgments. In other words, how can the parousia begin at the battle of Armageddon but at the same time affirm that his judgment does not begin before his parousia? They also recognize the discrepancy of affirming that God’s people have been resurrected between the sixth and the seventh seal in Revelation 7 and, at the same time, claiming that the resurrection occurs in association with the battle of Armageddon in Revelation 19 that they say initiates the parousia. How then do they attempt to reconcile these problems?" {1}

How exactly does Adams explain Jesus' return with his resurrected saints. He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God. And the armies of heaven, arrayed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses. (Revelation 19:13-14). ..fine linen, bright and pure.. fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints. (Revelation 19:7-8).

Adams claims that the reference to the "first resurrection" in Revelation 20:4-6 proves that the first resurrection occurs after Armageddon. However, in technical terms, the wording and tenses of the verbs in the Greek suggests that the first resurrection was already past, and that John was seeing the saints already ruling on thrones after having been raised.{2} The verb for "lived" (Revelation 20:4) is in the aorist tense, which refers to the whole action of being brought from death to life, not necessarily as occurring at that time.

Adams: "As is shown below, all scriptures dealing with the timing of the rapture show it to occur after the great tribulation, in particular Matt. 24:29-31, Romans 8:18-23, 1 Cor. 15:51-52, 2 Thes. 2:1-8 and Rev. 20:4-5." When exactly does "the great tribulation" come to an end?

Adams: "(1) ..the (pre-wrath) position wrongly holds that time of great tribulation that Christ spoke of (Mt. 24:21) does not include the outpouring of God's wrath, but is merely a time of persecution of Christians, and (2) the position still requires two 'comings' or returns of Christ, one before God's wrath is outpoured and another afterward, which is impossible."

Adams objection that the tribulation includes God's wrath is completely unscriptural and very misleading. I have written elsewhere that wrath (orge) and tribulation (thlipsis) are distinct terms in the scriptures and should not be confused. Indeed thlipsis i.e. affliction/distress, will come upon unbelievers after the tribulation, but the root cause of their distress will be the wrath of God, whereas the great tribulation referred to in Matthew 24:21 is obviously the persecution of believers by the Antichrist. The scriptures teach that the persecution against believers comes to an end before the wrath of God is poured out, and precedes the signs in the sun moon and stars. The scriptures are clear: Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. (Matthew 24:29). Matthew 24 describes the precise events described in Revelation 6 preceding "the great day of their wrath", when the sixth seal is opened:

When he opened the sixth seal, I looked, and behold, there was a great earthquake, and the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood, and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale. The sky vanished like a scroll that is being rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. Then the kings of the earth and the great ones and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains, calling to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb, for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?” (Revelation 6 6:12-17).

AFTER THIS.. the 144,000 of Israel are sealed (Revelation 7:1-8); AFTER THIS.. the great multitude coming out of the great tribulation are in heaven. (Revelation 7:9-17). These events are followed by the 7th seal and the seven trumpet judgements and the three woes. The denial of a chronological order of events regarding the seven seals, trumpets and bowls is to reject the plain teaching of the scriptures. Where there is a numbered sequence, we must acknowledge that events will occur in the order stated. The seals, trumpets and bowls cannot be rearranged to occur out of order to suit our own presuppositions: Now I watched when the Lamb opened one of the seven seals.(Revelation 6:1) We have repeated statements separating the seals: When he opened the second seal... the third seal... the fourth seal etc. (Revelation 6:3,5,7,9,12). There is a also a progression of different events. Similarly the trumpets also indicate chronology. (Revelation 8:7,8,10,12).. following which: the blasts of the other trumpets that the three angels are about to blow! (Revelation 8:13). The first woe has passed; behold, two woes are still to come.. Then (καί) the sixth angel blew his trumpet . (Revelation 9:12,13). Then (καί) the seventh angel blew his trumpet.. (Revelation 11:15). Need I go on? I am not sure if Adams is KJV only, in which case καί may be translated differently.{3} Nevertheless in other respects, the King James Version also indicates chronology.

Adams: "Believers will be resurrected at the same time as creation is restored. This cannot precede God's wrath being poured out on the planet. The parable of the wheat and tares indicates that the wicked are taken first."

I have never heard the argument that the resurrection of the saints and the redemption of creation will occur at exactly the same time. Adams refers to Romans 8:19-23, and in particular: For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. (Romans 8:19). Doesn't this verse suggest that the sons of God are revealed prior to the emancipation of creation? The events are analogous, but nothing in this passage indicates that the two events will occur simultaneously. Randy Alcorn: "As the creation fell on our coat-tails it will rise on our coat-tails." {4}

According to Adams, the parable of the wheat and the tares (weeds) proves that the tares are burned before the wheat is gathered:

“Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.” (Matthew 13:30).

The tares are gathered and put into bundles first, which implies that they are to be burned after the wheat harvest. The sequence indicates that the wheat, not the tares take precedence.

Later Jesus clarifies the parable to his disciples:

The harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels. Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear. (Matthew 13:39-43).

The phrase.. "Then righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their father", does not indicate the time when believers will receive their resurrected bodies, it indicates the end result of the preceding events i.e. the resurrected saints will then be at liberty to shine like the sun, after the wicked are burned. (cf. Daniel 12:3). Adams makes the common mistake of overthinking Jesus' parables, with the result that he engages in too much speculative scrutiny.

Jesus Himself contradicts the error that the wicked will be taken first: Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.. (Matthew 24:30-31). ..Then two men will be in the field; one will be taken and one left. Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one left. (Matthew 24:40-41). Matthew 24:30-44 and 1 Thessalonians 4:16-5:5 refer to exactly the same events.

Adams assertion that pre-wrath is a new position is also erroneous. The term "pre-wrath rapture" is relatively new, and yet as well as being affirmed in the scriptures, it is also attested to in the Didache chapter 16.{5} The modern pre-wrath view was pioneered by Robert Van Kampen and later promoted by Marv Rosenthall. It is presently being defended, amongst others, by Alan Kurschner of Eschatos Ministries.{6} A comprehensive pre-wrath rapture defence by Paul Dorgan can be found on YouTube.{7} 

The Pre-Trib Hijack Of Earlier Writers:

John Gill (1748)

Gill is often cited as a pre-trib proponent. However, no time scale indicates that he was pre-trib.

"..here Christ will stop and will be visible to all, and as easily discerned by all, good and bad, as the body of the sun at noon-day; as yet He will not descend on earth, because it is not fit to receive Him; but when that and its works are burnt up, and it is purged and purified by fire, and become a new earth, He'll descend upon it, and dwell with his saints in it: and this suggests another reason why He'll stay in the air, and His saints shall meet Him there, and whom He'll take up with Him into the third heaven, till the general conflagration and burning of the world is over, and to preserve them from it.." {8} 

Morgan Edwards (1742-1744)

Morgan Edwards is also often quoted as a pre-trib proponent. However the pre-trib camp believe that the rapture will occur prior to their version of the tribulation, which they define incorrectly as a seven year period. In contrast, Morgan Edwards approximate estimate for the rapture was three and a half years before the millennium. This places him in a "mid trib" position, and not pre-trib as the pre-trib camp wrongly define the entire 70th week of Daniel. Thomas Ice's failure to mention Morgan Edwards' complex historicist view of eschatology is also very telling. Morgan Edwards believed that the tribulation had already been going on for hundreds of years, which invalidates any comparison with a pre-trib "seven year tribulation". The pre-tribbers have deceptively hijacked Morgan Edwards to fit in with their own deeply flawed position. In my view, we cannot say precisely when the rapture will occur, apart from the scriptural evidence that it becomes imminent following the sixth seal. No one knows the day or the hour.. (Matthew 24:36).

"The distance between the first and second resurrection will be somewhat more than a thousand years. I say, somewhat more--, because the dead saints will be raised, and the living changed at Christ's 'appearing in the air' (1 Thess. 4:17); and this will be about three years and a half before the millennium, as we shall see hereafter: but will he and they abide in the air all that time? No: they will ascend to paradise, or to some one of those many 'mansions in the Father's house' (John 14:2)." {9} 

Pseudo Ephraem is yet another example of pre-trib rapture dishonesty. Pseudo-Ephraem teaches that Christians escape tribulation by death, not by rapture! "Then the Evil One will become enraged With the saints at that time; He will draw his terrible sword And sever the necks of the righteous ones." {10} 

As Dave MacPherson points out: "Not only have these (pre-trib) promoters covered up and twisted what McKibbens/Smith and Alexander have written, but they've also concealed and perverted Morgan Edwards' and Pseudo-Ephraem's own words!" {11} 

In contrast to the PTRC and the Thomas Ice's of this world, the pre-wrath camp do not need to resort to dishonest tactics and scripture twisting.

Intra-Seal is a further rapture theory that has muddied the waters in recent times. (Ezekiel 34:18). The Intra-Seal rapture theory, devised by Jacob Prasch of Moriel Ministries, is a perversion of the pre-wrath position. Prasch has mixed elements of pre-trib and pre-wrath in a clumsy attempt to jump onto the rapture bandwagon! Intra-Seal should be dismissed as the fraud that it is.{12}

Adams main problem, apart from his presuppositions, is chronology, which sad to say, is all over the place. Adams teaching is perhaps in part a rebuttal of Steven Anderson (Faithful Word Baptist Church), with whom he has some issues. I am no fan of Steven Anderson for a number of reasons, but in this particular instance his pre-wrath rapture teaching is reliable. {13} It is a pity that Adams cannot put his time to better use instead of refuting those who have put much superior scholarship into understanding the scriptural timing of the rapture! Adam's eisegeses add nothing positive to the debate concerning the timing of the rapture.. in fact, his misrepresentations, are, in my view, obtuse and a hindrance to a true understanding of the scriptures.

{1} http://www.alankurschner.com/2014/02/22/seals-trumpets-bowls-at-the-same-time-or-one-after-the-other-i-e-concurrent-recapitulation-or-consecutive-progressive/
{2} http://www.answersinrevelation.org/014.pdf
{3} http://biblehub.com/greek/2532.htm
{4} https://www.epm.org/resources/2010/Mar/22/how-will-earth-be-redeemed/
{5} http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0714.htm
{6} http://www.alankurschner.com/
{7} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiKBysLf6MQ&index=3&list=PLDS6L4dOrrh2b31rfWbTduK8Dv7LlQNlk
{8} https://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition-of-the-bible/1-thessalonians-4-15.html
{9} http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/morgan-edwards-another-pre-darby-rapturist
{10} https://www.liquisearch.com/apocalypse_of_pseudo-ephraem/translation_of_pseudo-ephraem
{11} http://www.brotherpete.com/index.php?topic=3528.0
{12} https://www.amazon.co.uk/INTRA-SEAL-RAPTURE-DECEPTION-EXPOSED-devised-ebook/dp/B06X6N2JJT
{13} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA66405B4wU

31 comments:

Mike Heath said...

Hi Treena,

It seems from this article that you are a mid-trib premil Christian, and judging from your reaction here, those who don't agree with you can have the Prov 18:13 verse used against them.

I am somewhat surprised by your statements, as it seems that you are using Prov 18:13 against those like G.E.Ladd (Post) and J.F.Walvoord (Pre) and many others including all who take a different view of the millennium (Like me). This is rather narrow to say the least.

The discussion here could fill up with justifications and arguments for different eschatological views, but it wouldn't be helpful, and I won't take part of that.

I agree with Sam's statement about pre and mid, and so do many Bible scholars who cannot possibly be labelled with Prov 18:13. Indeed, even though I totally disagree with Walvoord and to a lesser extent Ladd or Spurgeon, I acknowledge their desire to be Biblical and to search the scriptures and that they excelled far higher than I will ever achieve.

I understood from your blog that your heart is in the same place, that you want to search the scriptures, and you want to discern the real pedlars of false doctrine and false gospels today - the deceivers and liars. I am not comfortable that sincere and faithful Bible believers (even if I strongly disagree with them) should be labelled as people who speak before they hear. This is not the problem and it is not fair.

//Mike

colin said...

I hadn't hitherto heard of Sam Adams; who is he?

As you well know, I am certainly NO fan of the pre-wrath/intra seal hybrids, but nevertheless they are a WHOLE lot better than the false any moment pre-tribulation rapture theory.

God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

I am actually pre-wrath premillennial Mike.
I am disappointed that Sam Adams has described pre-wrath in such negative terms as "worse than pre-trib" and also "preposterous". I am simply responding to those accusations, as I find them very offensive.
I have studied the pre-wrath view very thoroughly, and I do find it to be scriptural. I would not ordinarily argue with those who promote the post-trib view as I do not consider this view to be a threat to believers. I have attacked the pre-trib view repeatedly however. I can't say how sincere scholars like Walvoord were, and as much as I respected Dave Hunt, pre-trib does need to be refuted. I feel that Adams highly offensive attack on pre-wrath merits such a response - in my view he has attempted to suppress sound exegesis.
God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

I started listening to Sam Adams a few weeks ago Colin. His analysis of Donald Trump made sense to me, but his distortion of pre-wrath is very biased.
Independence Baptist Church have their own channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvjyizps9SGzi8nqvW3diuQ
God bless.

colin said...

Mike, there is really no distinction between the pre-trib and mid-trib views, they both teach a false 'rapture' deliverance before the great tribulation. Pre & mid tribulationism postulates a seven year period of "great tribulation", yet the Bible teaches that the great tribulation is only the second half thereof! So to be a (true) mid-trib believer you would have to believe in a rapture at precisely the mid point of the last 1260 days! Treena certainly doesn't advocate this! But I can quite see how you have confounded pre-wrath with mid-trib!
Hope this helps!
God bless.























































colin said...

I will have a listen!
God bless.

Mike Heath said...

Hi Colin,

It is a view I have barely ever seen, and certainly never known anyone who took this mid-trib/Pre wrath position. I plead some ignorance here fore sure and right now I don't understand the distinction.

The only point I am making at this time is that the way Christians of different persuasions (Biblical Christians) treat each other in these matters should be in a Christian spirit. We all get wound up when we read stuff we don't agree with, and we can spend a lot of time refuting each others views, then accusing those who disagree a suffering from cognitive dissonance or something similar when they cannot immediately answer.

I suspect you and I could refute the mid-trib or pre-wrath ideas, then you and Treena could refute preterism, and I could refute literal millenialism, and no one would benefit.

It is good to be able to stand up for the Biblical truth, and help others to understand the issues at stake with reason and good argument, but not to label those who have a different view as something deviant, ignorant, or worse. Good Christian friends may be wrong about almost everything, but let us treat them as mature Christians or else it puts a big question mark over our own maturity.

//Mike

Treena Gisborn said...

I suggest you watch Paul Dorgan's YouTube video on pre-wrath Mike. He gives a comprehensive view with convincing scriptural support. The pre-wrath position is definitely NOT mid trib.. it is post tribulation/pre-wrath, occurring after the sixth seal of Revelation is broken. In other words, the saints go through the tribulation, but they escape the wrath of God upon the wicked. Many people criticise the pre-wrath view without understanding it properly.
It depends how you define a "Christian spirit". I have answered Adams pre-wrath objections without insulting him personally. I think this is allowed?
Adams would demolish and preclude anyone from testing pre-wrath, without first testing its claims for themselves. I suspect that pre-trib would not have gained such a foothold without the some of the questions encountered with post-trib.
God bless.

Mike Heath said...

Hi Treena,

Thanks for your comment. I have looked up a few references and watched one of the Dorgan videos on the millennium to start with. I confess first of all that this prewrath is new to me, and even now I don't have a good grasp of it. Dorgan introduces the subject (millennial views) very well, and makes the same case I am arguing for above regarding how we treat one another with our different views of eschatology when our gospel message is the same.

Regarding his views, I started making notes but then I gave up. Clearly we are not on the same page and there are too many differences, even if we both claim to uphold the authority of the Bible. I appreciate that he accepts symbolism as well as literal meanings when appropriate, according to context. I was glad that he used MacArthur videos - he is great! - but of course his interpretation of Revelation based on all the information available from Daniel, Ezekiel, Joel, Revelation etc, is dispensational and I guess quite different to Dorgans, which I suppose is why the video cuts off where it does.

I can see that we (you and I) are miles apart in our thinking in eschatology and also the way we interpret scripture.

Just to illustrate, not to argue, for me Revelations starts with "soon and near" and ends with "soon, soon and near". I don't consider it legitimate to use other Bible verses to change the meaning from "soon" to something else. The same can be said for interpretation of Genesis where the same technique is used, and then totally undermines the whole Bible not just eschatology. I am of course referring to 2 Pet 3:8-9 (a day as a thousand years) which is greatly misused in my opinion. The reason revelation was given in the first place according to Revelation 1:1 was "The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place." - it is pretty clear and repeated, and was for the Christians alive at that time as well as those like us in the future. If "soon" didn't mean "soon" to the early Christians then they have a right to complain to God!

My point is only that the way we understand scripture is different, but we both seek to be faithful to it.

//Mike

colin said...

Treena,
The fact that a literal millennial reign on Earth by a Christ like figure is held by cults a many is no doubt a major stumbling block causing unbelief in the One TRUE Christ ruling from Mt Zion in a soon coming Day. Also, is it not a fact that within professing Christianity pre-trib dispensational theology has caused untold damage to the "Faith once delivered unto the saints" in this regard? How we've been bombarded with false predictions of His 'any-moment' Coming from many in this deluded camp?

The 1 Corinthians 11.19 Scripture you quote, should make us think before we speak? If we know that an object isn't straight, can we name it such? Satan poses as an "angel of light" (2 Cor 11.14) if this be the case (which it is) then should we not be zealous for the truth? We KNOW what the Savior said about the "lukewarm"? What would Phinehas (Numbers 25.7) think of all the compromise and Luke warmness going on in Christendom today for the sake of 'love'? If he were around today, he would be going around thrusting a javelin into practically nearly everyone!

Many believers only want to believe what they can understand, (think on this) God's Book is no ordinary book, it is inspired from above! To someone that died in the Faith 1900 years ago, Jesus is Coming very, very "soon"! For such an one entered into eternity, and in that realm a thousand years is but a day! How long has the apostle Paul been in the grave? Not even two days! To the "souls" that are "under the altar" (Rev 6.9-10) even five minutes is TOO long!

When eternity arrives (as it very soon will) those that through God's sovereign grace ALONE have put their trust in Him will certainly not "complain to God!" Perish the thought!

God bless.

Mike Heath said...

Hi Colin,

I agree with your comment about the damage caused by dispensationalism, no doubt about that.

It is true that literal millennialism of many kinds flourished in the last two centuries - I never fully got my head around JW eschatology or SDA eschatology (it is a bit more varied). Yet it is also true that non-literal millennialism includes Catholics and many a spiritually dead reformed church, so historical connections have limited value, and the argument of guilt by association doesn't work either way.

Hi Treena,

Bearing in mind the recent discussions on this page, I wonder how you define the Wolves in "beware of the wolves".

On another note, do you know anything about Knutby in Sweden? The story of the bride of Christ and very strange goings on since around 2002, including some loss of life, jail time, and more. I guess it doesn't get out in English so much but it might.

//Mike

Treena Gisborn said...

Thank you Colin.
We stand together in our disdain of ultra dispensational pre-trib theology.

My understanding of the pre-wrath rapture view did not come overnight. It was rather a long process before the pieces of the jigsaw began to fit together. I never really did accept pre-trib, even though it was the accepted view in the circles I once moved in. I did not really have a view on the rapture at all up until about ten years ago. I have listened intently to Joe Schimmel's teaching on post-trib in his Revelation Series. As much as I respect Joe Schimmel, I was/am unable to quite correlate the post-trib position. Critically, it is important to recognise that believers will go through the great tribulation and in this respect pre-wrath and post-trib are agreed. I just cannot account for Sam Adams hostility towards pre-wrath. How can it possibly be "worse than pre-trib"?

God bless

colin said...

Treena,
Like you, I also came into the Faith as pre-trib, this is the default position nowadays unless we have been raised otherwise? If we have anything to be thankful for dispensational pre-tribism it must surely be that the truth of the pre-millennial Advent of God in Christ was contained therein? The Bible plainly reveals that it is possible to "hold the truth in unrighteousness" Rom 1.18.

I think we would all do well to re-read Revelation 20 twice a day, everyday for at least the next week or two, and we may just BELIEVE what God has said!!!
God means what He says, and says what He means. Where the plain sense is good sense, it is the right sense.

God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

AMEN Colin.

One of the evidences of spiritual maturity is: "..that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes." (Ephesians 4:14).

But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained their sensibilities to distinguish good from evil.(Hebrews 5:14).

..for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. (1 Corinthians 11:19).

God bless

Treena Gisborn said...

BTW Adams verbal abuse of others makes my refutation of his pre-wrath views look very mild.

He must have been taking lessons from Jacob Prasch, the expert reviler!

Adams calls one poor man a "theological moron". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCjkwmQuTS4
He calls Steven Anderson "a heretic, liar and ignoramus, or all the above". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFk9dtk3J0M
He calls hyper Zionists "useful idiots" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bddKdck7-4

colin said...

I just cannot understand for the life of me why intelligent people like Adams and Prasch need to resort to such verbal diatribes? Have they never read 1 Peter 3.8-10, for just one example? We can stress a point of view very forcefully without hitting the boiling point, surely! When the aforesaid rant as they do, I lose all respect for them and their ministries.

When I said earlier I was pre-trib by default, it wasn't that I understood its theology (it cannot be understood!) its just that I was surrounded by many who kept saying the Lord could come back before tea-time! Diligent study of God's word proves this not to be the case, certain events have to take place first, most notably the revealing of the "man of sin" himself! As an immature Christian, it seemed right to me that The Lord could come back at anytime, for after all He is God! But His written word doesn't teach this. A crude analogy; A man says to his wife "I will return in exactly one months time, back here at this train station at 6.00pm" they say their loving farewells, the train departs, but the wife sits waiting in the car all the time in case he comes back at any moment! Didn't she believe him?

As for the Lord's pre-millennial return, I really cannot understand how a diligent Bible student cannot see that it IS a great biblical truth, and one that we should be very dogmatic about. But then, if people choose to read the works of post/ a millennial theologians and their spiritualising away of the prophetic word, this will no doubt happen.

God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

My view is that it is down to pride Colin. They should be careful though.. revilers will not inherit the Kingdom of God. (Corinthians 6:10; Proverbs 11:2).
People who live in glass houses should not throw stones!
Good analogy.
God bless.

Irv said...

Thanks for your mind-expanding article, Treena, which has upgraded my outlook in various ways. I'm glad you brought up the pretrib hijacking of earlier writers like Morgan Edwards and Pseudo-Ephraem, both of which have been featured in past days on your splendid blog by MacPherson's pen. Edwards is especially interesting because of the way Tommy Ice out-Iced even his own dishonest revisionism of Edwards' 1788 book.
Ice knew he could create a pretrib Edwards by quoting Edwards' statement about Christ returning "about three years and a half before the millennium" by covering up Edwards' historicism which could look at "days" in scripture and think "years" - something we can't avoid seeing on his pages.
(Edwards' two "beasts" of Rev. 13 had already outgrown their allotted time of 1260 days; both the Papacy and the Ottoman Empire were already centuries old when Edwards took up his pen. And Rev. 11's two witnesses had also been in existence awhile and Edwards said "there are no more than about 204 years between now and their death...." - additional evidence that Edwards held to a 1260-YEAR tribulation! How can 204 years fit into 3.5 literal years?)
It's interesting - actually disgusting - that when "Dr." Ice analyzed Edwards' work, he stopping quoting just before Edwards combined his rapture with Matt. 24's posttrib signs including the sun/moon darkening!
MacPherson has shown that Edwards' scheme of a rapture three and a half years before the end of a 1260-YEAR tribulation is hardly a pretrib rapture! (MacPherson's entire piece on Edwards appeared on this blog last August.)
Again, thanks for your enlightening and much needed web presence, Treena. God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

Thank you Irv. You are very knowledgeable about Morgan Edwards work. Thomas Ice's revisionist tactics are scandalous!
Having studied the pre-wrath rapture position over quite a long period, it does make sense to me. I do hope that readers of this post will give it some serious consideration and study before rejecting it on the presuppositions of Sam Adams.
God bless.

colin said...

That is a very pertinent comment from Irv, Edwards knew nothing of any pre-trib rapture for the scheme wasn't known until circa 1830!
The criminal lengths that these hirelings will go to in order to misrepresent people to further their false theories is nothing short of scandalous.
But, it just shows that with a little digging, what can be unearthed? Obviously Edward's scheme of prophecy left a lot to be desired, but nevertheless, accrediting to a man what he never said is tantamount to lying. Ice knew exactly what he was doing (he is no fool).

How any man can trust him or his cronies on any point after such shocking tactics is beyond me, let alone invite him to preach to their congregations!

God bless

Treena Gisborn said...

I have slightly edited my paragraph about Morgan Edwards to indicate his historicist views and Thomas Ice's total lack of integrity. I wasn't really up to speed on Morgan Edwards, it is a while since I read Dave MacPherson's book, The Rapture Plot. God bless.

colin said...

I'm not "up to speed on Morgan Edwards" either, and haven't read his book (don't intend to!).
I came to believe that the pre-trib rapture is a false teaching via other routes, plus my own study of God's Book. Nevertheless, Macpherson's diligent and no doubt painstaking detective work exposes the fallacy of the pre-trib Dispensational school; that they need to sink to such depths to shore up their precious unbiblical theory! This veritable fact on its own should make believers show pre-trib a clean pair of heels!

The PTRC should be renamed the Pre-Trib Revisionist Centre!

God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

“No-Pre-Trib” has responded to this post via Messenger:
"In my opinion posttrib, midtrib, prewrath, and intra-seal have more in common than they have different. I'm personally posttrib and think it is unfortunate that this Pastor chose to use such hyperbole against the prewrath position. The way I view future predictive prophecy is the way it was described by Paul in 1 Cor 13:12 "For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known." What is the practical implication if one is wrong about the timing of the rapture? Pretrib is the only position that leaves believers unprepared to face what is to come and it has the least exegetical Biblical support and therefore it must be opposed. The other 3 views are debatable but I certainly would not castigate a brother like Jacob Prasch over his intra-seal view even though I don't agree with it. I consider him an ally and one with a heart for truth."
I think this is an unfortunate response in various ways. To hide behind 1 Corinthians 13:2 is really not appropriate when Matthew 24, the book of Revelation, and many other scriptures give us so much information about end time events. I personally believe that God intended us to study the scriptures so that we should be prepared for MANY false teachers . "No Pre-Trib" (I am assuming that the message was from Scott Pruitt), seem unwilling to discuss the WHOLE debate concerning the rapture and has restricted itself to opposing pre-trib. This is commendable of course, but other false teachers out there have issued their own perversions of the rapture. I speak primarily about Jacob Prasch. We are meant to test the spirits. (1 John 4:1). I wonder why Prasch has so many scriptural errors in his intra-seal theory? Actually when I questioned Prasch closely about his intra-seal theory, I was repeatedly castigated! A little leaven leavens the whole lump. (Galatians 5:9). Do we really NEED another rapture theory out there, or does this muddy the waters and confuse people further? Prasch denies the presence of the Holy Spirit for the entire 70th week of Daniel... I think this is quite important! As far as Sam Adams is concerned... I am surprised that no one from the post-trib camp has taken him to task.

colin said...

I agree with you regarding 1 Corinthians 13.12, we could use that Scripture as an 'honest' cloak to cover many a heretical teaching!

As you know, I am staunchly post-trib, and I believe it to be unequivocally and clearly taught in God's word. Nevertheless, I can see why some buy into the classical pre-wrath doctrine as taught by Van Kampen, it is very convincing (having studied it in great depth), though I am NOT persuaded!

Has Scott ever read Prasch's "Shadows Of The Beast"? If not, he certainly ought to. He would soon know the dishonest theological hotchpotch that it really is!

God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

I do respect your post-trib views Colin as I do others.
Considering the battle we are up against with pre-trib, you would think that there would be no "old boy network", but this does seem to be the case. Some would rather hold onto their association with Prasch no matter what error he teaches. (John 12:43).
I do feel disappointed, but not surprised.
God bless.

colin said...

In my last comment; more specifically, I meant that Prasch's awful Intra-Seal theory is a thoroughly dishonest theological hotchpotch.

I think you are so right about the "old boy network". It is the truth that matters, John 12.43 is very apt.
God bless

Treena Gisborn said...

Thank you Colin. It is a very disappointing response from “No Pre-trib”. I did have some confidence in them, but it seems their association with Prasch is more important than the truth. Prasch’s reversal of Pentecost and the end of grace for the entirety of the 70th week is VERY serious error. God bless.

Alan said...

Yes, it is clear that Adams has not taken the time to learn about prewrath. He uncritically accepts his post-trib presuppositions as givens. He should consider well these critiques of his post-trib view from a prewrath interpretation.


Thanks,
Alan Kurschner

Treena Gisborn said...

Thank you Alan. It does take God's grace and some work on our part to understand pre-wrath, but lets hope that Adams gives it some careful consideration. God bless.

colin said...

I quote from Leon Morris's REVELATION (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries) on Revelation 20.1-5.

"The angel had a key to the abyss and a great chain." Both are clearly symbolical for there cannot be a key to the abyss nor can a spirit be shackled with a chain.

This is the typical exegesis of those who are NOT pre-millennial! If God says "the angel had a key", then he does! Likewise if God says a "great chain" will shackle Satan, then it will! Who are we to argue? Morris goes on to say of the thousand years "we should take this symbolically"! Six times this number is mentioned in this chapter, and we are asked to believe that it doesn't mean what it says!
These non literalists also deny the truth of two resurrections, yet further on Morris concedes "It is a strong point of the pre-millennial view that a first resurrection implies a second" (he's right there!).
Of the heavenly city in Rev 21.17, Morris says of the 144 cubits (72 yards) "It takes no builder to discern that a wall 1,500 miles high needs a broader base than 72 yards. Clearly the number is symbolical." Well! I say that God could support a city 1500 miles high with a wall the thickness of a cigarette paper!

Can we not see the damage that theologians of Morris's school are doing to those who would study unfulfilled Bible prophecy?

God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

Certainly the early church believed in premillennialism Colin.. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and others. The first opposition came from the heretic Marcion, and later Origen openly challenged the doctrine. The scriptures are clear enough and should be taken literally (where appropriate) I agree. The testimony of these early church leaders is I believe reliable. God bless.