The Cluelessness Continues

The latest question on the Phoenix Rising BLOG is:

What Is Your Position On The Rapture?

* Pre-trib
* Mid Trib
* Post Trib
* Pre-Wrath
* Amill
* Huh?

This guy can't even keep his basic categories straight. Since when is "Amill" a "position on the rapture? It's a non-sequitur. One's position on the millennium may be related to the rapture but that's not an answer the question. Most amillennialists would be see the rapture as happening after the tribulation.

Not only that but Mikey misses one key possibility - past-tribulationalism. That is the teaching that the tribulation happened in the past. Hence all rapture possibilities are future to the past (since we live in the future as compared to the past!)

The view that Jacob's Trouble happened when Jacob (Israel) was carried out to the nations by Rome in the year 70 AD has long standing. All that we are waiting for now is the any day return of Jesus Christ.

Michael's "pre-wrath" position on the rapture is nothing more than a failed attempt to rescue the pre-tribulational rapture doctrine from the proof texts which failed to prove the point to start with. The notion is that God will not allow us to see His wrath. The Biblical support for such a position is almost non-existent. The one text is misread and the verse after it which sets the context is uniformly ignored.

The "pre-wrath" position is simply based on a radical misunderstanding of the word "wrath" in the Bible and in prophetic language in particular. One such example is:

1Th 1:10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, [even] Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

and

Rev 6:16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:

Spot the fallacy? It's the fallacy of equivocation. It is a failure to recognize that words have a range of meaning. Wrath in one verse is not necessarily relating to the same event as another verse. The first verse is describing eternal punishment and the second is describing a temporal (in time) judgment. Both describe God's reaction - punishment.

I wonder if the people who assert the pre-wrath position have a problem with the doctrine of Hell - the eternal wrath of God?