Hi Friends,
I received the following comment from Gail. However because of editing a private message I was unable to put it back as a comment from Gail.
So I thought it would be of interest to folks anyway.
Does anyone know if Tony Pearce or Hal Lindsey have changed or are having doubts about their stance on Pre-trib.
Here is Gail's comment:
Hi Bob,
This is in response to what Colin said in his humble opinion about him
not thinking Tony Pearce has a strong belief in the pre-trib rapture. It has
come to my attention that Hal Lindsey must be having doubts himself. A month or
so ago on a Hal Lindsey program centered around the killings in Africa and the
Middle East he brought up Matthew 24:9 where it talks about the Christians
being delivered unto death for his name sake: in so many words Hal referring to
those killings said “I believe these are the one’s persecuted just before the
Rapture of the church.” In the last few Hal Lindsey programs he asks his
audience what would they do if they were faced with physical persecution: would
they be ready? It seems to me that one of the most famous pre-trib teachers of
all time is facing some doubt to his stance on the subject these days. That’s
all I wanted to say. I will have no more comments on the rapture: ever.
Blessings, Gail
19 comments:
hi bob first i would like to say that i follow your blog and i do beleieve we are in the very last days of this earth prior to the return of our lord jesus christ the signs are surely all around us , i would like to respond to gails comment on hal lindsey who is a great bible teacher when she quotes as saying that hal lindsey is facing some doubt as to his stance on the rapture subject now im not well up on prophecy as im still learning but i just wondered how she came to that conclusion based on matthew 24:9 there has been persecution up through the centurys and still goes on today take egypt at this present time china ,eritea etc were christians are being persecuted on daily basis .
i think the question should be asked to us all are we ready if physical persecution was to confront us as it can i beleive in any part of the world but i dont think in asking that question that hal lindsey asked his audience would mean he has changed his mind or is retracting from his stance in a pre trib rapture god bless
Brother Bob; Just out of curiosity, why would you want to publish a letter, such as the attached, as the only purpose that I can see is that it serves to rouse the pot and ignite the rapture debate all over again? If that is what you were looking for, then you may or may not have succeeded? Alternatively, it also serves to provoke any feelings of ill feeling some may have towards Lindsay because of his pre-tribulation stance. Those sorts of criticisms will not come from this quarter though. It does not really matter as to what he believes relative to the Day of the Lord, whether that belief is pre, mid or post. So why would one even bother to mention it at all? There are still certain aspects of Lindsay's life that have left a lot to be desired. Nevertheless, for the sake of brotherly love, those indiscretions should never ever be mentioned. What he has done in his past is between him and the Lord, and not men. However, just so long as he has truly repented and found his peace with God that is all that really counts at the end of the day and not whether he has changed his mind relative to the timing for the Day of the Lord. Even though we may see there are faults with some of their varying interpretations of the scripture, the Lord told us in his word to uplift and edify another as brothers and sisters in the Lord, not to denigrate them. As that is the case, then, if you or I are truly Born Again, and we see Lindsay in the same light, then we should uplift him for his change of heart before the Lord, if indeed he has changed his mind relative to certain interpretations of the scripture, including the timing for the Day of the Lord. He is after all, only just one man out of the thousands and thousands of people who are Born Again Christians and that is all he is.
Bob Mitchell; What was the point in posting the attached letter from someone who has already made clear in times gone by that she does not believe in a Rapture of the Church herself? Strictly, from memory she had once said that the Bible does not teach Rapture. As that is the case, then, may rightly ask what was your motivation for posting a comment such as that on the front page of your blog when there was nothing wrong at all with it being edited and then posted in the comments section to begin with? Gail may have sent you that letter just out of politeness. That being, just to insinuate that there were more and more of the well-known pre-trib teachers now leaning towards a view that is different from what they have generally taught in the past. Furthermore, at the end of the day, the post tribulation view that you have held for some time relative to the timing for the return of the Lord was correct all the time. If there are now so many others who are beginning to change their minds comparative to the Rapture as has been alleged by the posting of this letter, it has served as an extremely gratifying experience from your perspective by uplifting and edifying your own ego. However, may I add that when the end times really begin to kick in there is going to be more than just one man who is going to change his mind relative to the timing of the Day of the Lord, or the Rapture of the Church as some like to call it. If indeed, he has changed his mind, which at this stage of the game looks more and more as if it may be nothing more than autosuggestion, or supposition, then what we are looking at is one man only. When the treaty of Daniel kicks in shortly, there are going to be literally millions and millions who are going to realize that what they have been taught in the past, (relative to an alleged rapture) was nothing more than one of the greatest deceptions that has ever infiltrated the modern day church. The aforementioned statement is not going to prove to be all that popular with the majority of believers, as most have been brainwashed into believing that there the Bible teaches a Rapture, when that is not the case at all. Kindest Regards
Hi friends the point of posting the comment, which I thought I had made clear, was that I was for some reason unable to paste it into the comments section and therefore felt in fairness to post it instead.
So let's not ignite the rapture question again but let's watch Jacob Prasch's testiimony as we can all benefit from his honesty and desire to spread the gospel.
Apologoies if I stirred any feathers.
Hi Bob, I watch Hal Lindsey's show all the time. and I am certain he has NOT changed his stance on this subject.
God bless,
Colin.
Thats wishful thinking on Gails part I think. From past comments she is not at all clear on the end times, her ideas on the subject are off kilter, so that affects her conclusions I found. Both guys know the difference between Jesus saying in this world you will have tribulation, which it has had, is having and will always have until the return. We don't get much to worry us about what we will do if people start bombing churches here in the west. Not like they have to in Africa, even today. Thats quite different from THE Tribulation aka the 70th Week, thats where Gail gets mixed up in my mind.
Hello there Shofar
Countdown to Calamity is Tony Pearce’s new book. On his site he cites 1 Thessalonians 4.16-18 then says ‘Since we do not know the day or the hour when this event will take place we need to be ready for it at all times, by accepting Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord and committing our lives to Him now’. That’s in keeping with his pretrib stance because he has said many other times that that is only true of a Pretrib Rapture because all other views will have preceding signs. You may not agree with that, but that is his usual position. He has also said lots of times about the chance of having to face tribulation; he hasn’t long ago had a nasty bout of tribulation with his illness. No Christian has been exempt from tribulation to one degree or another, some much worse than others but THE TRIBULATION as the day of Jacobs trouble is a particular event worse than the people of earth have EVER known, even worse than the holocaust. This is the subject matter of his new book and he ends his advert…
“All of this will reach its climax in the coming tribulation period and the rise of the Antichrist. The hope for the future is in the glorious return of our Lord Jesus Christ. First He will take His church to be with Him in the Rapture. Then He will return with the glorified saints to the earth and destroy the forces of evil. The 1000 reign of the Millennium will show us how the world should be run. ‘The government will be upon His shoulder’ (Isaiah 9.6) and the earth is filled with the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea (Isaiah 11.9). This is the prelude to the eternal state when we will always be with the Lord. Hallelujah!
‘Countdown to Calamity’ is available from us. Price: UK £10.50 (including postage), Abroad £12.00 (including postage).
http://www.wps6.co.uk/~dev_lfld/view_page.asp?page_id=203§ion_id=1
Then again you could always email him and ask him outright, he surely wouldn't mind!
Bob made the most sensible comment when he said, "So let us not ignite the rapture question again but let's watch Jacob Prasch's testimony as we can all benefit from his honesty and desire to spread the gospel". After all, how can those who claim to have inside information relative to the timing of the Day of the Lord/Rapture have any real clues at all as to just when it is going to take place when there is nothing at all that is mentioned in the word of God relative to the Day of the Lord? Accordingly, as mere mortals we should not even really be discussing this sacred subject matter. By doing so, we are really going where angels fear to tread. Can you imagine the absolute grief and panic if we knew when the hour and day for the return of the Lord was going to take place before it actually did? As that is the case, then what is the point of this rapture debate anyway if what we are aiming for is a goal that is simply unreachable until the timing is right and the Lord does actually return? The answer to that is a plain as the nose on ones face, there is no point at all.
In truth there is very much information in scripture relating to the day of the Lord. The problem is so many christians seem to rely on their favourite preacher and what he says than what scripture actually says or does not say. And there is the problem. When discussing the subject, events and statements from scripture are either left out of the message or ideas and statements not found in the word are inserted to prop up a system of belief. Hence when one speaks of the end and the day of the Lord there will always be someone who knows better because according to so and so this is what it really means. In other words the opinion and the statements of men over-ride the plain word of God.
One example and then I want to end this circular argument.
The Lord Jesus told Peter how the apostle would die. He would die when he was an old man. Peter in his second epistle and the first chapter says he is about to die as the Lord told him years before.
Pre trib teachers completely ignore this by stating the entire early church expected the Lord to return at any moment. That is simply not true. They knew Peter had to grow old and die before Jesus returned.Even if some of the early church did not know about the Lord's words to Peter and they expected an any moment return it is plainly obvious from just this one scripture that they were wrong. So for preachers to assert the early church expected Jesus at any moment is a gross distortion of what scripture teaches. So the argument gets nowhere because "my favourite preacher says..."
Hi All,
Thanks for posting my comment Bob. I understood why you put it on the front page. You had a glitch when trying to publish it as a comment because of editing: none the less it made me happy to see it posted. I apologize for the flack you got because of it. It floors me how some of your guests are constantly on your back about something: accused, charged, and convicted.
This comment was not to condemn, attack, or degrade Hal Lindsey in anyway. I like Hal’s show. I’m like Col I watch him every week. It is as Robert said I only wanted to point out that “I Think” from Hal Lindsey’s latest programs that he is “showing ‘some’ doubt” as to the timing. I did not say he has changed his stance.
The idea that he may be having some doubts as to the timing is strictly my personal view from listening to Hal in the past couple of months. I came to this view by using a little bit of common sense and the critical thinking skills I learned going to college. Think about the statement listed below and please consider the questions I ask: do a little critical thinking of your own. If you can provide an explanation for the questions please do.
Hal said “I think these are the Christians to be persecuted right before the rapture of the Church and that’s now”
I ask most humbly: does that make any sense? What did he mean by the Christians to be persecuted before the rapture? I have never heard that: have you? Don’t the pre-trib teachers usually say the verse concerning being killed is for the Jews? Where is the line drawn that divides Israel (the elect) and the Christians in Matthew 24? How many times have you heard a pre-trib teacher in relation to the pre-trib rapture/end times speak of any kind of physical persecution other than the Jews and the ones who are left behind during the tribulation?
Re: “That’s wishful thinking on Gail’s part I think.”
Why would I wish for Hal to be wrong? Don’t any of you pre-trib people realize that I and other post trib believers would like to have the luxury of believing in a pre-trib rapture? We don’t believe it because scripture does not enforce it.
“Robert,” I did say once that I didn’t believe in the Rapture but one cannot deny that the Bible does say we are caught up with him in the clouds. I have come to several conclusions on many things but after further study, prayer, and meditating on the word have come to what I think are more sound conclusions on some of the matters. The rest of the matters are either confirmed or on the back burner for later conformation or disapproval.
Blessings,
Gail
PS. I guess I’m going to have to be allowed to say that dirty word “Rapture” this time, but not in the context of debating it. I don’t care to debate it. The only way people will understand and know the truth is to read their Bibles themselves and rely less on man’s theories.
Bob,
I agree entirely.
To use a biblical phrase 'The blind leading the blind'.
The unscriptural gymnastics that have to be performed are akin to trying to get size 10 feet into size 7 shoes. A crude analogy I know, but the best I could think of just now!
Don't get me wrong,I would far, far rather believe in the pre trib rapture, but NOT if I am clear in my own mind that it isn't taught in the abiding Word of God.
I cannot quite understand why some folk find the subject a turn off-it represents the hope of the church! The Coming of our blessed Lord and Saviour, Titus 2.13. It is a biblical teaching! The Lord warned His people against deception.
I suppose the best selling pre-trib authors and ministries etc would lose too much face if they came to believe in the post trib rapture.....
Gee you folk get so uptight. You ask a question about what others think about Pearce and Lyndsay changing their stance about pre. Then when you get a reply on the very question to hand, you start insinuating we all have inferior intelligence to you. Cant speak for the whole gang, but why make the assumption I am not capable of reading the Bible for myself. Do you think we are all morons, its like your claiming unless everyone believes like you do, then we are bound to be wrong and make yourselves out to be the right on teachers with the right on answers, so do as you do and follow you. You are the IT dudes with all the answers for us to copy. Uuh no, I shant be doing that, I’m keeping my opinions to myself, but what you think you got sorted aint! That death of Peter stuff is a dead duck and all done, dusted and binned donkeys ago. Nobody bothers with it cos it’s a load of hysterical nonsense. Rhoda and the other guys thought Peter was dead in prison and freaked when he turned up… ah man!!!
John 21:18,19. “Most assuredly, I say to you, when you were younger, you girded yourself and walked where you wished; but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish."
Gēraskō - to gow old; i.e. forward in time from being younger to being older. It is tradition that paints Peter as a decrepit old man of very advanced years. It takes a nano-second of life to be ‘older’.This is another Postrib relic started by Pastor Oswald Smith of Toronto in a ‘flight’ from Pretrib on the feeble basis of the deaths of Peter, Paul and ‘many’ other events’ that had to happen before the Rapture could happen. He shouldn’t have flown so soon, as a plain reading reveals just some of the very obvious. “Peter must have been bewildered by Christ’s Word’s to him. Jesus had just spoken of the future ministry of Peter; now He spoke of Peter’s death. When Peter was YOUNGER, he walked where he wished, moving about without restriction. When Peter became old-ER he would stretch out his hands, looking for help. ANOTHER will gird you means Peter would be bound as a condemned criminal. The day would come when Peter would be totally under the control of Roman executioners who would CARRY him where he would not wish to go, to death vs.19. His death was HINTED at in 2 Peter 1:13,14.”
Don’t forget we know these things from the advantage of hindsight; the Disciples had no idea about the Church Mystery until AFTER she was born at Pentecost. That task was given primarily to Paul, and he was, as yet, still their enemy.
Imminent means pending and it don’t mean immediate or soon. Yawn
What I actually meant was "the timing" for the Day of the Lord. Common sense would dictate to anyone who has ever read or studied the scriptures, as much as I can lay claim to have done, that there is a lot of information relative to the Day of the Lord. However, there is nothing to indicate "the timing" for the Day of the Lord or the Rapture of the Church, as it is commonly known as. What that also indicates is that because of that one error, the whole meaning of that posting could have been taken out of the correct context of what I was really trying to say. Furthermore, what that also indicates that because of the frailty of human shortcomings, the correct meaning of what God was telling us in his word has also been taken out of perspective. That is why we have all of debate over when the Lord is going to return and whether it is pre, trib, or post comparative to the signing of the covenant of Daniel Chapter 9, Verse 27.
bob in john ch 14:1,3 jesus says that he goes to prepare a place for us and that he will come again to receive us unto himself that were he is we will be there aslo now if we are to be were jesus is and he has gone to prepare a place for us and jesus says that in his fathers house is many mansions i asume jesus is refareing to heaven the fathers house.
if the rapture of the church is to be at the end of the tribulation period and we know that jesus is coming back to earth after the 7 years to set up his mellenium kingdom on earth were does john ch 14:1,3 fit in also we know from pauls letters to the thessalonians in ch 1:10 what wrath was the thessalonians waiting to be delivered from so here we have the thessalonians waiting for gods son from heaven the lord jesus christ to be delivered from the wrath to come wich i beleive is the comming wrath of god during the tribulation period also i dont think it would make much sense if the church was raptured at the end of the tribulation period to meet the lord in the air then about turn and come straight back down to earth again god bless
With all due respect as regards the episode with Rhoda surely you are not asserting that fallen mankind is infallible?
The Lord's words in John 21.1 would surely overide and surpass that incident? Rhoda and the 'guys' as you call them were in the flesh and their faith was wanting? A good analogy I suppose would be when Peter took his eyes off the Lord ( Matt 14.30 ), he started sinking . They were the very words of the Lord in John 21.18.
Was the church born at Pentecost? The bible doesn't teach that. Man does.
As regards imminent, in the english language imminent does mean 'about to happen'. I believe that the Lord's coming IS imminent!
That does NOT mean I believe He will come 'any moment'. The Abiding Word of God clearly teaches that is NOT the case ( Matthew 24.15/ 2 Thessalonians 2.4) ....
Hi and thanks for the comments re the second coming and the message in John. I have republished the comment with my reply inserted:
....
if the rapture of the church is to be at the end of the tribulation period and we know that jesus is coming back to earth after the 7 years to set up his mellenium kingdom on earth were does john ch 14:1,3 fit in also we know from pauls letters to the thessalonians in ch 1:10 what wrath was the thessalonians waiting to be delivered from so here we have the thessalonians waiting for gods son from heaven the lord jesus christ to be delivered from the wrath to come wich i beleive is the comming wrath of god during the tribulation period
BOB:Here is the first problem. Can anyone show me, please,where the bible says the 7 years is the wrath of God. It is also known as the day of the Lord. But The prophets and Jesus state that there are cosmic signs before the wrath. Jesus places these same events AFTER the tribulation.
So how can the wrath of God be the entire 7 years??
Anonymous:
also i dont think it would make much sense if the church was raptured at the end of the tribulation period to meet the lord in the air then about turn and come straight back down to earth again god bless
Strange but the actual Greek term for us meeting him in the air is the same Greek term used for greeting a special dignitary outside a city and escorting him back to town.
hi brother bob in 1 thess ch1v10 and to wait for his son from heaven whom he raised from the dead ,even jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come and if we go to ch 5v9 for god did not appoint us to wrath ,but to obtain salvation through our lord jesus christ it seems that paul was expecting the lord jesus to return in his lifetime as he states to"wait for"
his son from heaven as it seems were aslo the thessalonian christians who were aslo expecting to be delivered from the wrath to come hense the only wrath i can think of to come would be gods wrath at some point in the tribulation period also in 5v9 paul states we are not appointed to wrath but to obtain salvation through jesus christ our lord is it not possible that paul was not only expecting an any moment return of the lord jesus but aslo to be delieverd from the wrath to come i know that the wrath that paul speaks of he does not give a specific time but hense the words to come do you think it is possible he was refering to the tribulation period god bless
Hi anonymous. Should not Paul have written "He shall deliver (not has delivered)us from the wrath to come if he was writing about the wrath of the tribulation. Just a thought. Because on the cross Jesus delivered us from God's eternal wrath to come on all unbelievers.
Yes we are to wait for his son from heaven as Paul stated. But does that imply an any moment coming? Not at all.
I am waiting for christmas but I know certain events have to take place before then; Summer, my birthday etc.
Likewise Paul was aware events had to take place before the return of Messiah. But he still looked forward to it and was waiting.
He knew Peter for one thing and it is almost a certainty Peter or others had told Paul the Lord had told Peter how Peter would die when he was an old man.
How could Jesus rapture Peter before he became an old man? If he did so Jesus would have been a deceiver and a false prophet which of course he was not.
How could Paul expect an any moment rapture when in Acts the Lord told him he would be going to Rome? He knew he had to get to Rome before any Rapture. He knew Peter must die before any rapture.
Therefore for preachers to assert the 1st century church expected the Lord at any moment is a blatent lie.
Did the early church believe in a pre-trib rapture? Please watch my dvd on Youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh-JDzUxLXA
Thanks
[Your view is my view, Bob, and we've come SHOFAR we can't quit now, eh? Saw this gem on the net & want to share it. Reg]
PRETRIB RAPTURE SECRETS
How can the “rapture” be “imminent”? Acts 3:21 says that Jesus “must” stay in heaven (He's now there with the Father) “until the times of restitution of all things” which includes, says Scofield, “the restoration of the theocracy under David’s Son” which obviously can’t begin before or during Antichrist’s reign. ("The Rapture Question," by the long time No. 1 pretrib authority John Walvoord, didn't dare to even list, in its scripture index, the too-hot-to-handle Acts 3:21!) Since Jesus can’t even leave heaven before the tribulation ends (Acts 2:34,35 echo this), the rapture therefore can't take place before the end of the trib! (The same Acts verses were also too hot for John Darby - the so-called "father of dispensationalism" - to list in the scripture index in his "Letters"!)
Paul explains the “times and the seasons” (I Thess. 5:1) of the catching up (I Thess. 4:17) as the “day of the Lord” (5:2) which FOLLOWS the posttrib sun/moon darkening (Matt. 24:29; Acts 2:20) WHEN “sudden destruction” (5:3) of the wicked occurs! The "rest" for "all them that believe" is tied to such destruction in II Thess. 1:6-10! (If the wicked are destroyed before or during the trib, who'd be left alive to serve the Antichrist?) Paul also ties the change-into-immortality “rapture” (I Cor. 15:52) to the posttrib end of “death” (15:54). (Will death be ended before or during the trib? Of course not! And vs. 54 is also tied to Isa. 25:8 which is Israel's posttrib resurrection!)
Many are unaware that before 1830 all Christians had always viewed I Thess. 4’s “catching up” as an integral part of the final second coming to earth. In 1830 this "rapture" was stretched forward and turned into a separate coming of Christ. To further strengthen their novel view, which the mass of evangelical scholars rejected throughout the 1800s, pretrib teachers in the early 1900s began to stretch forward the “day of the Lord” (what Darby and Scofield never dared to do) and hook it up with their already-stretched-forward “rapture.” Many leading evangelical scholars still weren’t convinced of pretrib, so pretrib teachers then began teaching that the “falling away” of II Thess. 2:3 is really a pretrib rapture (the same as saying that the “rapture” in 2:3 must happen before the “rapture” ["gathering"] in 2:1 can happen – the height of desperation!).
Other Google articles on the 181-year-old pretrib rapture view include "Pretrib Rapture Scholar Wannabes," “Famous Rapture Watchers,” "Pretrib Rapture Diehards," “X-Raying Margaret,” "Edward Irving is Unnerving," “Thomas Ice (Bloopers),” "Walvoord Melts Ice," “Wily Jeffrey,” “The Rapture Index (Mad Theology),” “America’s Pretrib Rapture Traffickers,” “Roots of (Warlike) Christian Zionism,” “Scholars Weigh My Research,” “Pretrib Hypocrisy,” "Appendix F: Thou Shalt Not Steal," "Pretrib Rapture Secrecy," “Deceiving and Being Deceived,” and "Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty" – all by the author of the bestselling book “The Rapture Plot” (see Armageddon Books).
Post a Comment