I would strongly recommend not getting overheated as I relay a Postrib view of the Rapture. I was asked, by someone who disagreed with me, to read a book on the suject, which I did. Here is a quick critique....
My critique of Craig Blaising, and the book , "The Rapture, Pretribulation, Prewrath, or Postribulation."
Blaise's Pretrib view begins with a false premise, that the "Tribulation" is defined as the Reign of Antichrist, and that all positions, Pre, Pre-Wrath, and Post all are concerned with that definition in mind. That may be true of some but it is not true with me nor with some historical and early definitions of the "Tribulation."
In the Early Church, I believe only Irenaeus and Hippolytus, and perhaps one or two others, among the Church Fathers, held to a future view of Daniel 9, the 70th Week, the Abomination of Desolation, and the Tribulation. And much of what Blaising says assumes this future view of the "70th Week" and a future "Tribulation" consisting of the Antichrist's Reign of Terror.
If this is true, then Pre, Mid, and Post views are inaccurately named. I would refer to myself as post-Reign of Antichrist, and Pretribbers should be called pre-Reign of Antichrist. Since what is popular today was almost non-existent in earlier times, we need not default to a modern popular position.
Blaising also relies upon a false definition of the "Day of the Lord," indicating that the events of the Reign of Antichrist are also part of Christ's actual Coming. Since this is never stated as such in the Scriptures, I call it "faulty."
Blaising also defines the entire period of the Reign of Antichrist as "God's Wrath," assuming the Church must be absent this time period in order to avoid "God's Wrath." But the entire period is not called "God's Wrath" in the Scriptures. And it is not necessary to leave the earth in order to escape God's Wrath in the form of eternal punishment. We can simply "get Saved" to escape God's eternal wrath!
This is just a short review of some of the points Blaise makes that I view as "false." But it is based on my interpretations, and I wish no evil for those who take a contrary view. This is premarily for those who are open to other input.
My critique of Craig Blaising, and the book , "The Rapture, Pretribulation, Prewrath, or Postribulation."
Blaise's Pretrib view begins with a false premise, that the "Tribulation" is defined as the Reign of Antichrist, and that all positions, Pre, Pre-Wrath, and Post all are concerned with that definition in mind. That may be true of some but it is not true with me nor with some historical and early definitions of the "Tribulation."
In the Early Church, I believe only Irenaeus and Hippolytus, and perhaps one or two others, among the Church Fathers, held to a future view of Daniel 9, the 70th Week, the Abomination of Desolation, and the Tribulation. And much of what Blaising says assumes this future view of the "70th Week" and a future "Tribulation" consisting of the Antichrist's Reign of Terror.
If this is true, then Pre, Mid, and Post views are inaccurately named. I would refer to myself as post-Reign of Antichrist, and Pretribbers should be called pre-Reign of Antichrist. Since what is popular today was almost non-existent in earlier times, we need not default to a modern popular position.
Blaising also relies upon a false definition of the "Day of the Lord," indicating that the events of the Reign of Antichrist are also part of Christ's actual Coming. Since this is never stated as such in the Scriptures, I call it "faulty."
Blaising also defines the entire period of the Reign of Antichrist as "God's Wrath," assuming the Church must be absent this time period in order to avoid "God's Wrath." But the entire period is not called "God's Wrath" in the Scriptures. And it is not necessary to leave the earth in order to escape God's Wrath in the form of eternal punishment. We can simply "get Saved" to escape God's eternal wrath!
This is just a short review of some of the points Blaise makes that I view as "false." But it is based on my interpretations, and I wish no evil for those who take a contrary view. This is premarily for those who are open to other input.