Quote: """ The tense is aorist indicative active third person singular. There is no room in that for a past tense interpretation. Neither does the aorist conditional tense in this instance define precisely that a future fixed period of time is inferred. Ordinarily the aorist third person singular would denote a continuous presence. Yet it must be clear from Scripture more generally that there is a moment in time when the marriage of the Lamb takes place."""

The word, "wife" speaks to your assumption that Rev 19:7 is speaking to the marriage not yet come. If the marriage of the Lamb has not already taken place in this ref to, "has come/is come," then the Lamb would still be in the presence of His Bride, not His Wife. Specific to the Jewish wedding reference of the Bride Groom already taken the Bride to His Father's house and the marriage, the Bride and Groom already coming forth from the Bridal Chamber, consummating and confirming the completion as Husband and wife of the contract of the parents. I am the parent of me the Bride, confirming the contract of salvation with my mouth, agreeing with the Bride Groom for our marriage, I said yes to His proposal and contract. of the two becoming One. The Parent of the Groom being God the Father, the price already paid for the Bride by the Son of God, paying the price, dowry, in full on the Cross. Waiting for the Groom to come and catch me away unto the Father's House.



In Christ: Phillip

_________________
Phillip

Quote;"If one were to be examining many of the beliefs that now accompany pretribulationism and found them to be unscriptural I think it would shed some negative light on the pre-trib doctrine itself. I don't see how it couldn't. If so many things can be pointed out that seem wrong that accompany the doctrine then it would cause the original doctrine itself to be looked at again I would think."

If this is the case,why do postrib teachers omit the Pretrib verses and take mat 24 COMPLETELY out of context,omit the antichrist's power to kill ALL the saints during the tribulation,and totally misconstrue the 10 virgins,and the groom/bride thing as a whole,and fail to reconcile the "escape" verses,and ignore that the bride has become the wife in heaven?



How in the world do postrib adherents reconcile this ignoring of scripture?

I am compelled to ask your same question....."If so many things can be pointed out that seem wrong that accompany the doctrine then it would cause the original doctrine itself to be looked at again I would think."

Stop trying to act like pretrib is so far fetched and erroneous simply on your statements about it that are not even remotely true.

You cannot objectively accept the pretrib verses,which you have been shown.

Consequent to the postrib doctrine is a preoccupation,not of Jesus' return,but with "suffering",and,Cliches of "7th trump","2nd coming","1st resurrection",which in your mind,erases the pretrib verses.

It is perplexing indeed,that the same scriptures postrib uses, harmonizes with pretib perfectly,and,with continuity.

The postrib camp has not only precariously placed itself in an attitude of false suffering,but a mockery of the precious saints that are looking with joy to the promise of the groom's return for his bride.

I wrote,

"If one were to be examining many of the beliefs that now accompany pretribulationism and found them to be unscriptural I think it would shed some negative light on the pre-trib doctrine itself. I don't see how it couldn't. If so many things can be pointed out that seem wrong that accompany the doctrine then it would cause the original doctrine itself to be looked at again I would think."

You replied,

If this is the case,why do postrib teachers omit the Pretrib verses and take mat 24 COMPLETELY out of context,omit the antichrist's power to kill ALL the saints during the tribulation,and totally misconstrue the 10 virgins,and the groom/bride thing as a whole,and fail to reconcile the "escape" verses,and ignore that the bride has become the wife in heaven?

How in the world do postrib adherents reconcile this ignoring of scripture?

Me: I would think that disagreeing with the meaning of the passages you mention is not the same thing as omitting or ignoring them. I've never heard these passages ignored or omitted by those who are not pre-trib, they just don't view them as you do.

You wrote,

I am compelled to ask your same question....."If so many things can be pointed out that seem wrong that accompany the doctrine then it would cause the original doctrine itself to be looked at again I would think."

Stop trying to act like pretrib is so far fetched and erroneous simply on your statements about it that are not even remotely true.

Me: If I have done as you say, you might want to check out your opening paragraph above. None of your statements in that paragraph regarding post-trib teachers are remotely true.

You wrote,

You cannot objectively accept the pretrib verses,which you have been shown.

Me: What I think you mean is that since I disagree with your take on the verses you see me as not being able to objectively accept them. Not so!

You wrote,

Consequent to the postrib doctrine is a preoccupation,not of Jesus' return,but with "suffering",and,Cliches of "7th trump","2nd coming","1st resurrection",which in your mind,erases the pretrib verses.

Me: You seem to believe many caricatures regarding post-trib people. It's probably a condition that exists on both sides of the argument. That's why the different camps need to try and speak with each other more. I don't recognize these attitudes in the people you say it is present in. The second coming of Christ has always been the blessed hope of the Church and it is none the less than that for those who believe Christ will come again only once at His second coming. The preoccupation I have seen is that with the belief that the Church will be present until the end of the age it will also be the greatest time of soul winning perhaps in the history of the Church. If these posttrib people are preoccupied with suffering you could have fooled me. They're just aware that a Church present during this time will also suffer but it will be a prepared Church having set aside its own interests and is willing to love not its life unto death for the sake of others during this time (Rev 12:11). The harvest of souls during this time is why they believe the proper preparation is essential and begins now and should be a preoccupation. And a prepared Church who will find itself in a wilderness (Rev 12:17) can also be a understanding witness to Israel in the wilderness (Ezekiel 20:35, Rev 12:13-14). Part of the overcoming motivation of the Church during this time will be its firm assurance and blessed hope that the Savior will soon come for His Bride and take them to Himself.

Meanwhile, 7th trump, 2nd coming, and 1st resurrection are all biblical terms and phrases. What else would one use?

You wrote,

It is perplexing indeed,that the same scriptures postrib uses, harmonizes with pretib perfectly,and,with continuity.

Me: Not really. Posttrib believers realize it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Church to be in heaven seven years before the end of the age because the resurrection of the righteous OT saints of Israel at the end of the age (Daniel 12:1-2, 13, Isaiah 26:19, 25:8) coincides with the resurrection and translation of the Christian Church (see Isaiah 25:8 compared with I Cor 15:54-55). When death is swallowed up for for all time for Israel's righteous will be the same time it is swallowed up for all time for the Christian Church and saints - at the end of the age.

You wrote,

The postrib camp has not only precariously placed itself in an attitude of false suffering, but a mockery of the precious saints that are looking with joy to the promise of the groom's return for his bride.

Me: Ah, that suffering thing. You seem to have an avoidance of it or something, I'm not really sure why you speak of it the way you do. What do you mean by an attitude of false suffering? Posttrib believers have an awareness that the times at the end of the age will not be the best of times and will involve suffering for the Church. It's hardly an attitude of false suffering whatever you mean by that. I suggested before that the two sides need to sit down and talk more and your statements here reinforce that idea. You seem largely in the dark what the posttrib believers are really preoccupied with and what motivates them. Whatever they are they are not preoccupied with being gone before they suffer but rather with being prepared to accept their destiny and calling as the end of the age approaches. Your statement that they are mocking the precious saints looking with joy to the groom's return for the bride is among the largest of your misconceptions. They are among the strongest believers out there in regards to anticipating the groom's return for His Bride. It's always been the blessed hope of the Church.

_________________
David Winter

""""The word, "wife" speaks to your assumption that Rev 19:7 is speaking to the marriage not yet come. If the marriage of the Lamb has not already taken place in this ref to, "has come/is come," then the Lamb would still be in the presence of His Bride, not His Wife.""""

Great point.
Also,if one looks it up in the greek,it is all past tense
Now,if one combines this with Mat 25,(groom/virgins/chamber/door shut/fools left behind) then look at Jesus promise at the last supper("....till i drink it anew with you in my father's kingdom"

Then the promise "...I go and prepare a place for you (in heaven)""

Crystal clear.
Pretrib rapture.

docs """I would think that disagreeing with the meaning of the passages you mention is not the same thing as omitting or ignoring them. I've never heard these passages ignored or omitted by those who are not pre-trib, they just don't view them as you do. """"

Where is an example of a in depth postrib teaching on the bride/groom??...or...look at who IS teaching on it.


docs """If these posttrib people are preoccupied with suffering you could have fooled me. """"

ask yourself why would those that believe the entire church goes through the tribulation,NOT BE preoccupied with suffering?It is the table that the postrib doctrine sets.
I can not believe,that anyone would not agree that postribbers are preoccupied with suffering.It is like a six gun that is pulled on those watching and waiting.
You honestly have never,ever heard the phrase"I am just so worried about those escapist(implying those waiting on their Lord are nominal weak believers)".."They will just completely fall apart when the AC arrives and Jesus does not""...IOW they are not the suffering champions that the postribbers are.


docs """Meanwhile, 7th trump, 2nd coming, and 1st resurrection are all biblical terms and phrases. What else would one use?"""

Sorry but those phrases do not erase content and context.
Which proves my point that the postrib doctrine is clich'e centered.


docs """it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Church to be in heaven seven years before the end of the age because the resurrection of the righteous OT saints of Israel at the end of the age (Daniel 12:1-2, 13, Isaiah 26:19, 25:8) coincides with the resurrection and translation of the Christian Church (see Isaiah 25:8 compared with I Cor 15:54-55). When death is swallowed up for for all time for Israel's righteous will be the same time it is swallowed up for all time for the Christian Church and saints - at the end of the age."""

If you are going to build on catchphrases,you are going to be misled..

Here is an end of the age at the death of Jesus;

"25 nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place year by year with blood not his own;

26 else must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once at the end of the ages hath he been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

27 And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh judgment;

28 so Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time, apart from sin, to them that wait for him, unto salvation." heb 9

docs """You seem largely in the dark what the posttrib believers are really preoccupied with and what motivates them."""

They believe the church goes through the GT.Why would they not be preoccupied with the same?

This ,in fact,is their error.They are GT/suffering/catchphrase centered as opposed to Groom/bride centered.

docs """They are among the strongest believers out there in regards to anticipating the groom's return for His Bride."""

To my knowledge,I have never seen any teaching by the postrib adherents on the concept of the bride/groom,or mat 25.
You guys need to ask yourself why those teachers avoid any of this,or anything placing believers in heaven.
The postrib teaching, imo,took their position before examining the pretrib verses.
Why else would they be forced to minimise the words of Jesus?

......and yes you do seem to be genuine in your beliefs and I do respect that.

BTW,thank you for your manners in discussing this subject.
Outside of the priesthood study, end times has to be the most fascinating.

docs """ Since Daniel's body will not be resurrected until the very end of the age """

This is a rabbit trail.

You need to look at this without the spin.

"13 But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days."

Many were raised from the dead alongside Jesus when he arose.No reason to believe daniel was nnot one of them.

docs """I remain confused and somewhat bewildered by beliefs such as these that accompany the pre-trib view. """


Nope.I am pretrib and have no such view.It all happens in heaven.The raptured church,those left behind and martyered,the dead in christ resurrected,the 2 witnesses,and the 144 k are all in heaaven and all attend the marriage supper.

There are no saints on earth by about the 1/2 point of the GT.
Many,many Jews will not take the mark,be beheaded,and will also attend the MS.

The rapture is the harvest of the saints dead and alive.
The GT is the harvest of those that refuse the mark,the 144k,and the 2 witnesses.(all the aforementioned attend the MS)
The 2nd resurrection is the final harvest for those in the "book" and for the ones not in the book for the LOF.

Hi bro,

I was a little suprised by your taking up of this subject again but it's no real problem. Since you wish to discuss it more and took time to make a few more comments perhaps I can make a few points also in the spirit of give and take.

You reminded me that before I wrote,

"I would think that disagreeing with the meaning of the passages you mention is not the same thing as omitting or ignoring them. I've never heard these passages ignored or omitted by those who are not pre-trib, they just don't view them as you do."

To which you repled,

"Where is an example of a in depth postrib teaching on the bride/groom??...or...look at who IS teaching on it."

Me: I may just be for myself but since the early days of my Christian life I've received teachings on the body of Christian believers being the Bride of Christ. It's been a foundational thing that has accompanied me throughout my Christian life. Here and there and at various times and meetings etc. this spiritual reality of being the bride has been taught. I realize now that some of this teaching was from a pretrib view but if I remember correctly, the subject has usually been taught to me in connection with the second coming of Christ. Before the 1830s and the appearance of pretribulationism, it was believed that at the time Christ's second coming is when He will come for His body of believers or bride and the marriage is consumated after that at the marriage of the Lamb. Because it's always been there for me, I haven't really thought about it and therefore I guess I'm not really aware of a lack of teaching on the postrib view on the subject of the bride/groom etc. It's always been a part of my Christian life and what I have been taught. If you see a lack of teaching on the web from a posttrib view then perhaps you should look for teaching on the second coming etc. which throughout church history was commonly assumed and believed to be the time when the groom would come for His bride. Like I said, I wasn't aware of a lack of teaching on the posttrib view of the bride/groom etc. but two times now it's taken me less than 20 seconds to find teachings on the web regarding the church being the bride of Christ etc. Even on the sermonindex listings of audio sermons (under Sermon Title) there's a message by Art Katz on "A Bride Adorned for the Bridegroom." Perhaps you might give that a listen since it's so close and convenient. Meanwhile, the church people and teachers I have been around have laid a solid foundation regarding the identity of the Bride and the Bride's destiny.

I wrote,

"If these posttrib people are preoccupied with suffering you could have fooled me."

You replied in your recent post,

"Ask yourself why would those that believe the entire church goes through the tribulation, could NOT BE preoccupied with suffering? It is the table that the postrib doctrine sets."

Me: That seems a broad brushing to lump a entire set of believers together with one broad stroke as if u know exactly all of their motives. A posttrib believer would likely tell you their supposed "preoccupation with suffering" arises from a sober scriptural assessment of what things will be like for the saints during the final days of earth's present history. It's beyond doubt in my opinion that the final generation of believers will be a generation under duress and persecution and even martydom. In Revelation those underneath the altar who had been slain because of the word of God are seen crying out for vengeance - "And there was given to each of them a white robe; and they were told that they should rest for a lttle while longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brethren who were to be killed even as they had been, should be completed also." (Rev 6:11) Until the time of their vindication comes more of their brethren are to be killed and this is the time of the very ends of the age so a last generation of believers will suffer even unto martydom. We see also that "the dragon was enraged with the woman, and went off to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus" (Rev 12:17). That is a portayal of Christian believers under persecution and suffering. What's wrong with taking a sober assessment of what is described for the saints regarding the last of times? Yet vven among these descriptions we also see a startling portrayal that they will overcome " by the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of their testimony, and they did not love their life even unto death" (Rev 12:11). So what is wrong with sober and diligent prepration for what is to come? Will the last generation of believers be involved in suffering or won't they? Vigilance before hand so as to make way for sober preparation should hardly be labelled a "preoccupation with suffering." As part of the beliefs that accompany the pretrib view is the belief that much of pretribulationism advocates which is that these overcomers won't be part of the Church even though the foundation of their overcoming is based on the blood of the Lamb! Present day pretribulationism in many quarters teaches that tribulation believers won't be part of the Church even though they have a word of testimony and keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus (Rev 12:11) and have had thier robes washed white in the blood of the Lamb (Rev 7:13-14). Darby and his associates of the 1830s were the first to ever propose that tribulation believers in Christ would not be part of the Church. They faced a dilemma of sorts because even though the Church was supposedly to be gone and raptured during the tribulation Revelation and other places still vividly portrays a strong group of believers in Christ overcoming in the midst of their persecutions and martydom. So a brand new thing altogether began to be taught that said that tribulation believers in Christ are not part of the Church but part of a separate people of God. That was as serious a misstep in my opinion as any of those who are said to be preoccupied with suffering.

You wrote,

"I can not believe,that anyone would not agree that postribbers are preoccupied with suffering. It is like a six gun that is pulled on those watching and waiting."

Me: Can it be asked if pretribulationism is "preoccupied with escaping" and is focused entirely on what God is going to do for them and the blessings they are going to get? Versus being prepared to be a witness to the world and Israel during the tribulation as they love not their own lives unto the death by accepting this calling? That sort of leaves a bad taste in my mouth asking it that way. I wouldn't want to put everyone in a single category because I don't know all of the motives of pretrib advocates. Yet if it is barbed to hear it asked if pretrib advocates are "preoccupied with escaping" and what God is going to do for them because it's an unfair picture that is being painted then I can assure you that the accusation that posttrib believers are "preoccupied with suffering" is just as far from reality.

You wrote,

"You honestly have never,ever heard the phrase," I am just so worried about those escapist(implying those waiting on their Lord are nominal weak believers)".."They will just completely fall apart when the AC arrives and Jesus does not""...IOW they are not the suffering champions that the postribbers are."

Me: I suppose I have heard these types of things somewhere at some time though I couldn't pinpoint exactly when or where. I know for sertsain that posttreib believers don;t see thmselves as champions of suffering above others. Nothing could be further from the truth and it's a grief to see such false and malicious caricatures still have sway in the body of Christ. Yet, are you implying that these type of untrue and mocking statements toward others don't come from the pretrib camp also? I've heard pretrib believers mocking posttrib believers also. But they never wrongly characterize or say negative things about those who believe the Church will be here for the tribulation, rigtht? Only postrib people do this type of thing, right? What's good for the goose is good for the gander as they say.

In response to your criticism of posttrib people using so many biblical phrases I wrote,

"Meanwhile, 7th trump, 2nd coming, and 1st resurrection are all biblical terms and phrases. What else would one use?"

To which you have replied,

"Sorry but those phrases do not erase content and context.
Which proves my point that the postrib doctrine is clich'e centered."

Me: Do you use biblical phrases they way you do because you see them in a certain content and context? Would you criticize posttrib believers if they didn't use biblical phrases to describe their view? Since they are criticized for using biblical phrases and terms what type of criticism might come their way if they didn't use biblical phrases and terms? What other type of language do you suggest they might use? I see the principal of playing a joyful tune and no one dance and playing a mournful dirge and no one weeps.

I wrote,

"It is IMPOSSIBLE for the Church to be in heaven seven years before the end of the age because the resurrection of the righteous OT saints of Israel at the end of the age (Daniel 12:1-2, 13, Isaiah 26:19, 25:8) coincides with the resurrection and translation of the Christian Church (see Isaiah 25:8 compared with I Cor 15:54-55). When death is swallowed up for for all time for Israel's righteous will be the same time it is swallowed up for all time for the Christian Church and saints - at the end of the age."

You replied,

If you are going to build on catchphrases,you are going to be misled..

"Here is an end of the age at the death of Jesus;

"25 nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place year by year with blood not his own;

26 else must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once at the end of the ages hath he been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

27 And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh judgment;

28 so Christ also, having been once offered to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time, apart from sin, to them that wait for him, unto salvation." heb 9

Me: I'm stymied again I guess. I've never thought of using biblical terms and having them referred to as catchphrases. I suppose you mean the phrase "the end of the age." It's a biblical term. What else would I or others use if we are Christian believers? However, your switching of the subject to catchphrases shows me you likely missed entirely the point I made in the paragraph above. See Isaiah 25:8 and its context at the end of the final seven years and compare it with I Cor 15:54-55. That is mainly what my paragraph was about.

I wrote,

"You seem largely in the dark what the posttrib believers are really preoccupied with and what motivates them."

Your reply,

"They believe the church goes through the GT.Why would they not be preoccupied with the same?"

"This ,in fact,is their error.They are GT/suffering/catchphrase centered as opposed to Groom/bride centered."

Me: I don't necessarily believe it and wouldn't phrase it this way in all situations but if pretribulationism believes it is going to escape a final time of suffering why can't it be legitimately asked if pretrib believers are not "preoccupied with escaping" and the blessings that are going to come to them when they are raptured? Since you have taken the liberty to describe, wrongly describe, the motivations of postrib believers what does the question do when asked in reverse of pretrib believers? If it is wrong to characterize all pretrib believers as preoccupied with escaping then perhaps it is a clue that it is wrong to characterize all postrib believers as preoccupied with suffering. If the Church is indeed to suffer as the final convulsions of this age occur then accepting the clear scriptural portrayal of this suffering and preparing for it would be part of loving not one's own life even unto death. If this is to be then believing against it might be a form of loving one's own interest and life above the Church's true eschatological destiny which would really be a quarrel against God's providence and wisdom. That may not be entirely correct but it seems worth some discussion.

Your assertion of posttrib believrs being GT/suffering/ catchpharse centered as you say makes me stand by my statement that you are largely in the dark as to what motivates posttrib believers. You may think you know but you don't. Sober assessment so as to assist proper preparation for what is ahead is different than what you describe. Posttrib believers haven't come up with new and novel doctrines that the Holy Spirit is going to be taken from the earth at a pre-trib rapture and no longer fill and indwell those who believe in Christ during the tribulation. Post trib believers don't believe that those saved during the tribulation will not be part of the Church but part of a separate people of God apart from the Church. Where is the real error you speak of? Believing in the Church and Christ's body of believers as being the Bride of Christ is firmly entrenched in those who don't share in pretribulationism's view of these things. They don't come up lacking at all but simply don't ascribe to the totally brand new doctrine of these truths that only began to first be propopgated in the 1830s.

I wrote,

"They are among the strongest believers out there in regards to anticipating the groom's return for His Bride."

You replied,

"To my knowledge,I have never seen any teaching by the postrib adherents on the concept of the bride/groom,or mat 25."

Me: You obviously haven't looked hard enough is the best advice I could offer.

You said,

"You guys need to ask yourself why those teachers avoid any of this, or anything placing believers in heaven."
Me: When you make such statements it only increases my belief that you don't really know those whom you speak of.

You said,

"The postrib teaching, imo,took their position before examining the pretrib verses. Why else would they be forced to minimise the words of Jesus?"

Me: They would tell you they took their position after examining the way the verses were presented in a new and novel way in the 1830s and decided the new way wasn't biblical or in line with the church's historical understanding of the subject.

Revelation portrays,

- a large group of tribulation believers who have had their robes washed white in the blood of the Lamb (Rev 7:13-14)

- a group of believers who in the midst of persecution and martyrdom are overcoming by

the blood of the Lamb

by the word of their testimony

loving not their own lives unto death (Rev 12:11)

- a group who is persecuted because they keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus (Rev 12:17)

Yet pretribulationism today largely advocates that these type of believers portayed in Revelation are not going to be part of the Church but a separate group of redeemed people altogether and they won't have the Spirit indwelling them although they are saved. Who now is really minimizing the words of Jesus and in thereby doing minimizing large parts of the New Testament's teaching on who makes up the Church?

You wrote,
"......and yes you do seem to be genuine in your beliefs and I do respect that."

"BTW,thank you for your manners in discussing this subject.
Outside of the priesthood study, end times has to be the most fascinating."

Me: I can only say thank you for that. As usual, I have been long winded but I found some time to reply to you. And again, I have a sense I haven't done as well in that regard as I should or is possible. But thank you.

Meanwhile, I can hardly see how a caricature throwing Bride that still speaks many times blindly against other segments of the Church which it really doesn't know (all sides are guilty) can be seen as a prepared bride that could be raptured and caught away at any moment or second. As of now, if this was to happen, it seems this Bride would show up for her marriage in quite soiled garments.

In closing, here's a link that speaks to the issue of God's wisdom and suffering and the church's end time calling and why it matters how christians view these prophecies,

http://the.mysteryofisrael.org/courses/apocalyptic-evangelism-2002/-what-difference

Also, since it's a sermon titled, "A Bride Adorned for the Bridegroom" and is a short convenient click away on the home page of sermonindex, I might again recommend Art Katz's sermon on "A Bride Adorned for the Bridegroom."

Thank you.

_________________
David Winter

Greetings my friend & merry Christmas,
I read your post,and listened to the Katz sermon.

Sorry,but that sermon does indeed illustrate my point that postrib teachers have not a clue as to the bride/groom dimension.
You need to listen to it again.Katz does the proverbial uhh,uhh,when the parable shifts to the 5 rejected virgins w/ oil .

There is nothing at all to the first hour of the sermon. Katz is quoting some woman's assertions and conjecture on the "suffering bride".

Look,you are way,way off on the way you define me,as a pretrib.

There is NO ISSUE what so ever,with the suffering of the believer,and my opposition to it.
You have created a really bizarre rabbit trail here.
We ALL are PROMISED persecution.We all are in the "army".We all have an enemy.The bride suffers persecution.We suffer persecution ...Some more than others.
BIG DEAL!! It is a fact and a guarantee.

Now,go back and @ 01;08;00 you will hear Katz saying that the suffering is FROM A INTIMATE,DEDICATED commitment to Jesus.
Then you hear him say the bride is glorified IN HEAVEN,WITH JESUS.

Your doctrine prohibits the bride from heaven,remember?

How do you figure that the bride suffers persecution,as promised to any serious believer,then you produce a sermon that is confused about forcing the bride into the GT,but relinquishes the role of heaven and the bride(pretrib has this position),and somehow think you have honestly challenged my statement that the bride dimension is a postrib "uh oh"?

You really do not understand where we differ,do you?
I do not define you as "persecution/trib. centered.
You do.That is WHY you attempt to define us as "escapists that will cave and take the mark"

"""Yet pretribulationism today largely advocates that these type of believers portayed in Revelation are not going to be part of the Church but a separate group of redeemed people altogether and they won't have the Spirit indwelling them although they are saved. Who now is really minimizing the words of Jesus and in thereby doing minimizing large parts of the New Testament's teaching on who makes up the Church?"""

This is completely false.Provide the quote please.

"""They would tell you they took their position after examining the way the verses were presented in a new and novel way in the 1830s and decided the new way wasn't biblical or in line with the church's historical understanding of the subject."""

More false assertions,unproveable conjecture.You invoke your catchphrases,then without pause tell me you are perplexed at the notion that I would call you on it.


"""I know for sertsain that posttreib believers don;t see thmselves as champions of suffering above others. Nothing could be further from the truth and it's a grief to see such false and malicious caricatures still have sway in the body of Christ. Yet, are you implying that these type of untrue and mocking statements toward others don't come from the pretrib camp also? """

I have never,ever seen the debate,where it is not centered by postrib around the suffering you guys are totally prepared or preparing for,and the escapists we are.
Sorry,but You guys own that one big time.(even though you need scissors to go with the bible,as the watchers are commended)

"""Revelation portrays,

- a group of believers who in the midst of persecution and martyrdom are overcoming by

the blood of the Lamb

by the word of their testimony

loving not their own lives unto death (Rev 12:11)

- a group who is persecuted because they keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus (Rev 12:17)"""

Read it again.That group is IN HEAVEN,AND KICKS THE DEVIL OUT.Then,a few sentences later,power is given to the AC to finish off those left behind.
How can you not get that right??You are so anxious for that doctrine to work,you transpose things that are not even there.
Part of the reason you confuse this is your lack of understanding as to the purpose of the GT.
You do not even realize you are witnessing the end of the times of the gentiles,and the shift to "Jacob or Israel"

OK,lets go to school here.,(Basics first).;

earth created=purpose
Adam created= purpose
Earth destroyed by flood= purpose
Noah goes up pretrib,returns postrib=purpose
Sodom destroyed=purpose
Lot escapes pretrib=purpose
GT and the Jewish cov. pple=purpose
Rapture=purpose
Postrib inverts most of these items. and portrays the obedient watchman and his Maratha cry as deluded fools.

This really sums it up,and showcases the postrib error,and attempt to ascribe "purpose" to a beat up bride,that is not even present on the planet at the end of the GT

Sorry to be blunt,but postrib doctrine has no harmony of purpose.(nor a single supporting verse of scripture)

And,as usual,the postrib versions of the 10 virgins, continues to amaze me .

Peace