Fall 2007 Online Certificate Students:
View all sessions below. Then log all your comments, questions, discussion question answers, criticisms, or thoughts below.
NOTE: This is not the place for general discussion and questions. Go to the foyer for general discussion and refer to the FAQ on the right for question. Time spent in the comments section will apply toward your one hour of community time per week. To download audio sessions, visit the course homepage on the TTP site. The next session will be posted each Wed.
_____________________________
What are the different views of the rapture? [11:57m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download What is the pre-tribulational view? [17:27m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download What is the mid-tribulational view? [5:12m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download What is the post-tribulational view? [10:00m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download Questions about Heaven and Hell [24:44m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Powered by FireStats
November 6th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Group Discussion # 10
1. Review the arguments for the Pretribulationalist view of the Rapture. Which arguments do you think were the strongest? Why?
Number 3: There is no mention of the Church during the time of Tribulation in the book of Revelation. Bur a read of rev. 20:1-9 would definitely indicate a pre-trib rapture (number 7). But the non mention of the church after chapter 3 in Revelation broadens the Biblical base.
Which weakness do you think is the most problematic to the position? Why?
Number 1: It is characteristic of God to rescue His followers before judgment (e.g., Noah, Lot). There are many instances where the Israelites experienced judgment; captivities, slaughter, exile.
2. Review the arguments for Midtribulationalist view of the Rapture. Which arguments do you think were the strongest? Why?
Number 4: “The Church is delivered from the wrath of God. But the wrath does not begin until midway through the Tribulation.” is convincing if you believe in a literal 7 year period. It would also agree with Daniel 9.
Which weakness do you think is the most problematic to the position? Why?
Number 3: John mentions that midway through the tribulation, the seventh trumpet sounds. This is identical to the trumpet Paul mentions in 1 Thess. 4:16. Seven years, seven churches, seven seals, seven bowls, seven trumpets: why seven? Is there an idea of perfection? Is this all literal?
3. Review the arguments for Post-tribulationalist view of the Rapture. Which arguments do you think were the strongest? Why?
Although I believe these are all strong arguments, I’ll choose number 4: Matt. 24 seems to suggest that believers will go through the Tribulation. There is no hint of a rapture that “rescues” believers, only that because of the “elect” those days will cut short. Therefore, the elect obviously go through the Tribulation. Scripture seems to be preparing us for conflict, for tribulation, not just Matt. 24. Note II Tim. 3:1; I Pet. 2:21, 4:12-13.
Which weakness do you think is the most problematic to the position? Why?
Number 1: This was the view of the early Church. The circumstances of the 20th century gave rise to pre-millennial/pre-tribulation interpretation. Certainly the circumstances of that 1st and 2nd century church impacted interpretation. There was a belief in an eminent return.
4. Which position do you find the most persuasive? Why?
I’m not thoroughly convinced by any of the positions to embrace one. I wonder how our views would be different if we had not been raised with Scofield Notes or the Left Behind series. I will prepare my people to face the possibility of living through the tribulation and pray that rapture takes place first.
5. You can often find those who make one’s view of the Rapture a hallmark for orthodoxy. Some believe that the Rapture is biblical; some believe that it is heretical. Do you think that one’s view of the Rapture is worth dividing over? Why or why not?
It is silly to divide over this issue. I have an Elder who is an Amillenialist and is scholarly in his arguments. Another is an adamant pre-trib/pre-millenialist and has the charts to prove it. It is not an issue upon which to divide. This is NOT an essential.
6. Review the different views of hell. Which do you believe to be the most biblical? Why?
I was raised and throughout my adult life have believed in the literal view. Your arguments for the metaphorical view are convincing. I do believe Hell is a literal place and that it is eternal. A belief in Hell should intensify our evangelistic spirit and compel us to share the good news of salvation. Rom 6:23.
7. Heaven was described as “the place where God resides. Eschatologically, heaven is a restoration and reconciliation of all things that God created realized on the new earth, and much more.” How does this differ from the typical view of heaven? How does this help your understanding?
IT IS interesting, but my mind goes back to the words of a song penned in the 70’s; “Heaven For Me”.
8. How was your thinking challenged the most by the lesson? Explain.
I really enjoyed the balanced presentation of the three tribulation points of view. Rhome almost echoed what we teach: He is coming; we don’t know when; be ready!
November 10th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
EE -Week 10– Group Discussion Questions;
1. Review the arguments for the Pretribulationalist view of the Rapture. Which arguments do you think were the strongest? Why? (None; “None of them” is not a valid answer for our purposes).
– I think that numbers 1, 6 and 7 provide the best argument for a Pretrib rapture. God has charisticly rscued His followers before judgment, and there needs to be an unknown time, a “Thief in the night” before repopulation with unsaved people.
Which weakness do you think is the most problematic to the position? Why?
– Number 3… the church is not mentioned in Revelations during the Tribulation.
2. Review the arguments for Midtribulationalist view of the Rapture. Which arguments do you think were the strongest? Why? (None; “None of them” is not a valid answer for our purposes).
– I feel that numbers 2 and 3 are the best arguments for a Midtrib view. In 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 Paul makes it very clear that there will be signs before the Rapture, and both 1 Thessalonians 4:16 and Revelations chapters 10 and 11 mention the seventh trumpet midway thru the Tribulation.
Which weakness do you think is the most problematic to the position? Why?
— Number 1 is weak because Daniel 9:27 does not give a clear indication that Midtrib believers will be removed from the earth. Only implied.
3. Review the arguments for Post-tribulationalist view of the Rapture. Which arguments do you think were the strongest? Why? (None; “None of them” is not a valid answer for our purposes).
— It seems that number 1 is the best argument for a Postrib view. Usually thought not always the early church fathers were correct.
Which weakness do you think is the most problematic to the position? Why?
–The main weakness is that it is in total conflict with for argument numbers 2 and 6, all believers will not experience the wrath of God and thieves don’t give pre warnings of their coming.
4. Which position do you find the most persuasive? Why?
–Pretrib seems the most convincing to me (so far). It goes along with the little knowledge that I have before studying this. And it seems to have the most support for accuracy. It has the immediate rapture of believers and wrath of God for the non-believers.
5. You can often find those who make one’s view of the Rapture a hallmark for orthodoxy. Some believe that the Rapture is biblical; some believe that it is heretical. Do you think that one’s view of the Rapture is worth dividing over? Why or why not?
– Not worth dividing over. Yes it is a great discussion, and an important theological question, but like politics, God is not about a 2 or 3 party system.
6. Review the different views of hell. Which do you believe to be the most biblical? Why?
– I this it’s pretty clear that the Annihilationism view of Hell is accurate. Jesus in Matthew 25 “Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire…” and “Thus those condemned sill go away into eternal punishment.” In Mark 9:43, Jesus refers to hell as “the unquenchable fire”.
We can’t change this just because we don’t like it or it’s not fair. It’s judgment, period.
7. Heaven was described as “the place where God resides. Eschatologically, heaven is a restoration and reconciliation of all things that God created realized on the new earth, and much more.” How does this differ from the typical view of heaven? How does this help your understanding?
— All the cartoons and children’s story books show heaven with winged angles playing harps and everyone wearing white. Cute isn’t it? I now see heaven as a place God has for all of us believers where we are free from our past, released of our sins and eternally residing in pleasure with Him and our believing friends and family. Cute too eh?
8. How was your thinking challenged the most by the lesson? Explain.
– Challenged… I am like totally challenged dude. This has been a good lesson for me. It really needs to be a 10 week course within itself for more understanding and a more thorough unwrapping of revelations. But I’ll add that I’m more knowledgeable and a bit clearer that when we started.
November 12th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
EE - Session 10 - Group Discussion Questions
1. Review the arguments for the Pretribulationalist view of the Rapture. Which arguments do you think were the strongest? Why?
Number 4: Rev. 3:10 is a fairly straightforward statement that the Church will be removed before the wrath of God is poured out on the earth.
Number 5: 2 Thes 2:1-12 is another straightforward statement that “the one holding back lawlessness”, the Holy Spirit, will be removed before the worst of Satan is unleashed. This would imply that all in whom the Holy Spirit dwells will also be removed.
Which weakness do you think is the most problematic to the position? Why?
Number 3: There is no mention of the Church during the Tribulation in the book of Revelation, but as Rhome pointed out in the lecture, an argument of silence doesn’t really prove anything.
2. Review the arguments for Midtribulationalist view of the Rapture. Which arguments do you think were the strongest? Why?
Number 1: Great emphasis on a period of 1260 days, or 42 months or 3.5 years. In Daniel and Revelation there is clearly something happening at the midway point of the seven year Tribulation and the scripture indicating a safe place prepared by God would argue for the Midtribulation view.
Which weakness do you think is the most problematic to the position? Why?
Number 3: John mentions midway through the tribulation the seventh trumpet, identical to the trumpet Paul mentions in 1 Thes. 4:16. This seems less clear to me, these passages do not clearly define a Midtribulation position.
3. Review the arguments for Post-tribulationalist view of the Rapture. Which arguments do you think were the strongest? Why?
These all seem like good arguments to me and the most convincing off all the views. I especially find Matthew 24 compelling in that Christ himself is explaining the end times to his disciples and would have had a perfect chance to describe a rapture, but he does not.
Which weakness do you think is the most problematic to the position? Why?
Number 1: This was the view of the early Church. While I think the views of the early Church fathers is extremely important, the idea of progressive revelation has to be respected.
4. Which position do you find the most persuasive? Why?
Persuaded by the Amillennial view, the Post-tribulation view makes the most sense to me. I see the tribulation as part of the “Church age millennium” after which Christ will return to judge the world, gather up his Church and institute the new Heaven and new Earth.
5. You can often find those who make one’s view of the Rapture a hallmark for orthodoxy. Some believe that the Rapture is biblical; some believe that it is heretical. Do you think that one’s view of the Rapture is worth dividing over? Why or why not?
No. I can’t see how believing one view of the rapture/tribulation or another would, in any way, alter how one responds to the gospel of Jesus Christ. Regardless of your view on this subject we are still faced with whether or not we will place our faith in the death and resurrection of Christ. Learning how it all ends is just the bonus material at the end of the dvd.
6. Review the different views of hell. Which do you believe to be the most biblical? Why?
The metaphorical view seems most biblical to me. I think the descriptions in the bible try to describe what can’t be described. I would not discount the possibility that Hell is literally fire, but I think the writers of scripture were trying to use the worst thing they could imagine to describe what we probably don’t have words to describe.
7. Heaven was described as “the place where God resides. Eschatologically, heaven is a restoration and reconciliation of all things that God created realized on the new earth, and much more.” How does this differ from the typical view of heaven? How does this help your understanding?
Most folk theology simply describes Heaven as “up there”…somewhere removed from this place where God resides. To realize that Heaven is the restored creation on the new earth brings the biblical story full circle. The story starts in the garden with a tree of eternal life where God says it is “good”. With this view of Heaven we end with the garden restored, a perfect creation made perfect again where we will be doing exactly the things that Adam and Eve were doing before the fall; living as perfect humans reflecting the image of God in the presence of God.
8. How was your thinking challenged the most by the lesson? Explain.
I was challenged to try and understand how we are to use the limited understanding we have of the rapture, tribulation, millennium, etc…etc. It doesn’t seem worthwhile to spend too much time on this…time that could be spent making disciples!
November 13th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
Discussion Questions 10
1. Review the arguments for the Pre-tribulationalist view of the Rapture. Which arguments do you think were the strongest? Why? (Note: “none of them” is not a valid answer for our purposes).
A. It is characteristic of God to rescue His followers before judgment (e.g., Noah, Lot)
B. The Bible says that believers will not experience the wrath of God (1 Thessalonians 1:10; 5:9)
C. There is no mention of the Church during the time of Tribulation in the book of Revelation.
D. Revelation 3:10 says that the church will be rescued from the Tribulation.
E. The restrainer mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 is the Holy Spirit, who must be removed before the Tribulation. If this is so, then the Church (the temple of the Holy Spirit) must be removed.
F. Christ’s return is said to be imminent (i.e., could come at any moment). 1 Thessalonians 5:2 and 2 Peter 3:10 both say that the day of the Lord will come like a “thief in the night.” If the Rapture were not Pre-tribulation, Christ could not come at any moment. He would have to wait for certain events to occur. (See also Matthew 24:42-44, 50, 25:113; Mark 13:32-37; Luke 12:40)
G. The millennium is to be repopulated with people who are not glorified, since there will be a rebellion at the end Rev. 20:7-8). If there is not a rapture beforehand, who is going to repopulate the earth and rebel?
Of these arguments, it seems to me that the last one, “G”, would be the strongest. Were Christ to wait to rapture the believers at His coming at the time of Armageddon, all believers dead and alive would be instantly glorified and all unbelievers would be killed, leaving no one with mortal bodies to repopulate the earth during the millennium. Next to that, argument “B” stands out to me. Even though believers often suffer trouble in this life, the Scriptures make it clear that believers do not experience God’s wrath as that has already been poured out on Christ when He died for us on the cross. If God does allow Christians to suffer for chastening purposes, this is not wrath, but correction. I also believe “C” is a strong argument in that there is no mention of the Church from Revelation 3:22 until Revelation 22:16.
Which weakness do you think is the most problematic to the position? Why?
Argument “E” above I think is weak in that it implies too much from the Scripture cited. The Holy Spirit does not need to take the Church to heaven in order to stand aside and to allow the “man of sin” to be revealed. If you consider 2 Thessalonians chapter 2, verse 3, “apostasy” may well mean (as it can in the Greek) “to stand away from” or to step aside. Taking this meaning together with 2:7 where it reads “only he (i.e., the Holy Spirit) who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way” lends support to this idea. Although there are good reasons for the pre-trib rapture, this argument doesn’t necessarily make the case for it.
2. Review the arguments for the Mid-tribulationalist view of the Rapture. Which arguments do you think were the strongest? Why? (Note: “none of them” is not a valid answer for our purposes).
A. There is great emphasis on the three and a half years (Daniel 9:27; Revelation 11:2-3; 12:6, 14; 13:5).
B. Paul clearly specifies a sign preceding the Rapture in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4.
C. John mentions midway through the tribulation, the seventh trumpet (Revelation 10:6-7; 11:15-19). This is identical to the trumpet Paul mentions in 1 Thessalonians 4:16.
D. The Church is delivered from the wrath of God which begins midway through the Tribulation (Revelation 15:1).
E. The millennium is to be repopulated with people who are not glorified, since there will be a rebellion at the end Rev. 20:7-8). If there is not a rapture beforehand, who is going to repopulate the earth and rebel?
Probably “D” would be the strongest as it is clear that the true Church (composed of genuine believers) are to be rescued “from the wrath to come” (1 Thessalonians 1:10). “E” is also a good reason which also applies to the pre-trib rapture view.
Which weakness do you think is the most problematic to the position? Why
I see argument “C” as weakest in that the seventh trumpet in Revelation 10 and 11 is not necessarily the same as the last trumpet Paul wrote about in 1 Thessalonians. Furthermore, the seventh trumpet follows a series of judgments in the previous trumpet blasts that undoubtedly describe the outpouring of God’s wrath, which the Church is supposed to be kept safe from, according to the mid-tribulation rapture position.
3. Review the arguments for the Post-tribulationalist view of the Rapture. Which arguments do you think were the strongest? Why? (Note: “none of them” is not a valid answer for our purposes).
A. This was the view of the early Church.
B. Scripturally there is only one second coming. There is no reason to see the Rapture of 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 as a “secret” rapture that precedes the second coming. One would have to have a preconceived pre-tribulational theology that forces this interpretation into this text and any other that speaks of the second coming.
C. Revelation 3:10 says that God will protect those who go through the Tribulation. This characteristic of the way God works. He did the same with the Israelites when He judged Egypt through the plagues. (See also John 17 where Christ prays, “My prayer is not that you take them out of the world, but that you protect them from the Evil One.”)
D. Matthew 24 seems to suggest that believers will go through the Tribulation. There is no hint of a rapture that “rescues” believers.
E. The Parable of the Wheat and the Tares (Matthew 13:24) suggests that believers and unbelievers will commingle until the end of the age.
That “Historic Premillenialism” was the view of the early Church would have to be the strongest argument in favor for a post-tribulation rapture. The fact that the early Church fathers were closest to the sources of the New Testament would seem to support this view.
Which weakness do you think is the most problematic to the position? Why
“E” stands out to me as the weakest argument in favor. Believers could in this sense be Tribulation Saints living on the Earth at that time.
4. Which position do you find the most persuasive? Why?
After considering the arguments in favor of the post-tribulation rapture, I remain persuaded that the pre-tribulation rapture is the correct view. Although there is no verse that explicitly confirms this, there are a number of implications found in a number of Scriptures that suggest it. In a similar way, the doctrine of the Trinity is never clearly stated but is inferred from all the Scriptures that refer to the person of God.
5. You can often find those who make one’s view of the Rapture a hallmark for orthodoxy. Some believe that the Rapture is biblical; some believe it is heretical. Do you think that one’s view of the Rapture is worth dividing over? Why or Why not?
I do not believe that various opinions concerning eschatology should be enough reason to divide over as long as those disagreeing are in agreement on the essential core doctrines of the faith. The study of Eschatology is a difficult subject and no one can be completely certain that their view is the right one. Therefore, we should be charitable to one another in this area. In discussing all this, we should be careful to emphasize an “end times” theology we can all agree on; I call this the “Imminence of Eternity” or “Do you know where you will spend eternity if you died today?” view. Discussion of all eschatological viewpoints becomes pointless to the person who dies in the present age. This would then be a good springboard for presenting the Gospel.
6. Review the different views of hell. Which do you believe to be the most biblical? Why?
A. Universalism: Everyone eventually goes to heaven.
B. Annihilationism: The lost are destroyed out of existence.
C. Second Chance View: The lost get another chance to repent in hell.
D. Purgatorial View: The Roman Catholic view that those who die with venial sins must be purged before they can enter heaven from Purgatory.
E. Metaphorical View: The torments of hell pictured in the Bible are symbolic of other things.
F. Literal View: Fire is literally fire, etc.
Although I find this view to be the most unpleasant, I believe that the literal view of hell to be the most Biblical one, due to Jesus’ teachings about it for example, where he quotes Isaiah about the worm not dying and the fire not being quenched in Matthew 9. Also in Revelation 20 the lake of fire is described as a place of eternal torment. I would also consider the metaphorical view as possible, in that the fire mentioned is symbolic; but it has been pointed out by some that the reality of something symbolized in Scripture is greater than the symbol itself.
7. Heaven was described as “the place where God resides. Eschatologically, heaven is a restoration and reconciliation of all things that God created realized on the new earth, and much more.” How does this differ from the typical view of heaven? How does this help your understanding?
When you mention the word “heaven” in a religious sense, the “average Joe” theology pictures a place in the sky where the saved sit on clouds with halos on their heads and harps in their hands. If it were not for the description of the eternal state of the saved, as a new heaven AND a new earth in Revelation, most believers would be justified in agreeing somewhat with the average Joes. Jesus told his disciples in John14:2, 3 that He was going to prepare a place for them, but He really didn’t describe it very much at that time. Now with the added details in Revelation we have a clearer picture.
8. How was your thinking challenged the most by the lesson?
I had never really challenged my eschatological view as I did during the last two lessons of this course. It’s possible I could be wrong as a pre-tribber and that the post-trib view or maybe even the mid-trib rapture could possibly be correct although I doubt it. I could also hope that the historicists, postmillennialists and amillennialists were right because as I understand it, they believe that either there is no literal Great Tribulation period of seven years or that it has already occurred long ago. I really don’t want there to be one either if it could be avoided. Nevertheless, I don’t believe these views accurately interpret the Scriptures dealing with end time events.
November 14th, 2008 at 10:53 am
1. Review the arguments for the Pre-tribulationalist view of the Rapture. Which arguments do you think were the strongest? Why? (Note: “none of them” is not a valid answer for our purposes).
For me, I think that the argument from Rev. 3:10 and also argument #6, that Christ’s return is said to be immanent are the strongest arguments. All of these arguments are in a way circumstantial, which makes being clear on doctrine regarding this issue very difficult. However, I think these arguments carry the strongest weight.
Which weakness do you think is the most problematic to the position? Why?
I think the overall lack of clarity is the biggest weakness. Each position is making an assumption regarding other events in Scripture and that particular verse or verses itself. There is no explicit timeline or verse telling us exactly what is going to happen. Jesus even warns us against trying to guess the hour as even He does not know, only the Father.
2. Review the arguments for the Mid-tribulationalist view of the Rapture. Which arguments do you think were the strongest? Why? (Note: “none of them” is not a valid answer for our purposes).
I think the emphasis on three and a half years as well as 2 Thess. 2:1-4 are good arguments for the Mid-tribulationist view. There are many passages that refer to this period of time (more so than the Millenium it would seem) so perhaps this lends it the greatest weight of argument.
Which weakness do you think is the most problematic to the position? Why?
I hate to be repetitive, but I think the overall lack of clarity is the biggest weakness. Each position is making an assumption regarding other events in Scripture and that particular verse or verses itself. There is no explicit timeline or verse telling us exactly what is going to happen. Jesus even warns us against trying to guess the hour as even He does not know, only the Father.
3. Review the arguments for the Post-tribulationalist view of the Rapture. Which arguments do you think were the strongest? Why? (Note: “none of them” is not a valid answer for our purposes).
As to the Post-tribulationist view, I think that Matt. 13:24 and Matt. 24 can be used to make an argument for the Post-tribulationist view. The idea of God rescuing believers and protecting those who go through the tribulation has some play. Although, I do not agree with it, I can understand why some people do.
Which weakness do you think is the most problematic to the position? Why?
I would again refer to my previous answers, however, I think this view of the rapture is leasy likely in my opinion. Again, we are all guessing and making assumptions in this matter, its hard to know what is exactly going to happen and when. I think with respect to this issue, God gives us the compass and not the map.
4. Which position do you find the most persuasive? Why?
I would say the Pre-tribulationist view is most persuasive to me. I have to say that there are many questions surrounding this view that cause me pause. I find it really interesting that so many people, especially seminary trained leadership I know, feel absolutely convinced without hesitation that the Pre-tribulationist view is correct. They may very well be correct, I just carry far less certainty with me on this issue.
5. You can often find those who make one’s view of the Rapture a hallmark for orthodoxy. Some believe that the Rapture is biblical; some believe it is heretical. Do you think that one’s view of the Rapture is worth dividing over? Why or Why not?
I really do not think this is the biggest issue to debate. People naturally tend to want to prove themselves and their doctrine correct and focus on the things with which we disagree. We see it in most, if not all, aspects of our lives. The results are startling on how relationships of many kinds are ruined over seemingly minor issues. I think this issue is rather far down the scale of importance. Its fun to study and think about, but I just don’t see it as something worth getting worked up over.
6. Review the different views of hell. Which do you believe to be the most biblical? Why?
I think the Literal or Metaphorical view is most likely and most Biblical. I think that hell is obviously going to be a nastly place, but I believe that it is a real place. Whether the fire is metaphorical or literal, I am not totally sure as it could be something we can not conceive of, all I know is that I’m glad I’m not going and I pity those who are.
7. Heaven was described as “the place where God resides. Eschatologically, heaven is a restoration and reconciliation of all things that God created realized on the new earth, and much more.” How does this differ from the typical view of heaven? How does this help your understanding?
It seems that heaven has a tremendous amount of folk theology associated with it. We generally do not think of heaven as being on earth or a new earth. We do not associate heaven with having literal human bodies and working and worshipping God. We tend to think of it as that time when we finally are happy and get everything WE want and not what the Bible says it will be. I know it will be wonderful and I suspect it will be more similar to our current existence than we think.
8. How was your thinking challenged the most by the lesson?
Views on the rapture have changed throughout history and been the focus of division in the evangelical world for the last century or so. I think this demonstrates the lack of clarity we are going to have on this issue. Although I think this is an issue worth studying, I do not feel that this is an issue to cause us to lose fellowship and our witness over. God will work it all out!