Bill Salus and Tom Hughes have co-produced a new DVD set titled: The Pre-Tribulation Prophecies. There are several prophecies in view. They list some as seen below in the 11 sections. Here they teach an understanding to be true, which is contrary to their doctrine. I think they want these to be seen as prophecies proving a pre-Trib Rapture, but that is not what they suggests.

The Rapture itself is one of their prophetic points. Yet they have no clear scriptural evidence for the Rapture being disassociated from the Second Corning and from the Resurrection nor is it separate from these prophecies. They in fact make a case for some of these prophesied events to occur prior to the Rapture. This is not a hard thing to do, because in my blog I have made the scriptural case for them to occur prior to the Post-Tribulation Rapture. If the case can be made for these events to occur before the Rapture; then certainly the case can be made for the Rapture to occur post and not pre-Tribulational.

So the contradiction made here is big. It exists between their teachings surrounding the imminent Return of Christ taught within Dispensationalism. It is Dispensationalism which is the theological covering over the Rapture argument, having it occur pre- or before the Tribulation. This Theology feeds or makes up their eschatological or endtime position. The teaching that Christ’s coming for the church (His Bride) has always been understood as being imminent is key; and (they say) had even been understood this way by the Apostles. So this is where the contradictions begins. For in order to understand that one must see that there are no prophecies involving Christ’s coming for the church in what is known as the Rapture (which is their position); then there can be no signs pointing to the Rapture (as they have stated in their DVD). And in order to accept that imminence theory, one must further believe that the Rapture is totally unconnected from the Second Coming of Christ to the earth.

So, when I tell you that the Second Coming and Rapture are associated as one prophetic event; they will tell me that that is impossible, because Christ’s coming has always been imminent meaning that there are necessarily no signs for the Rapture. In fact they tell us that if there are signs associated with the Rapture then it would destroy imminence as a doctrine.

So (they say) one cannot be looking for the Antichrist. Instead we are told that scriptures teach us to look solely for Christ to come. Yet, here these men give us one more example of not believing their own doctrine or believing it only when they want to. For in this teaching, we are told of 11 things revealed in the pre-Trib prophecies that could occur in our lifetime. And every one of these is an Endtime prophecy associated with the second coming, and many of them could not occur without Israel being present as a nation. This fact alone destroys their theory on imminence prior to 1948.

If there are clear pre-Trib Rapture prophecies, they must either clearly separate the Rapture from any prophecy concerning the Second Coming; otherwise they will destroy imminence prior to the implementation of that prophecy.

So, please understand that this that they are now teaching proves that their teaching for the 100 years before 1948 was false; because it was taught that there could be no signs required for the Rapture, otherwise imminence is destroyed.

So what does this teaching do to this doctrine of imminent return right now — today?Obviously if the scriptures teach three still to come martyrdoms for Christians, which they list here; then there is no imminent return today. This totally destroys the argument that they use against a post-Trib Rapture. So which point are they wrong about? — is it about imminence or the coming Christian persecution requiring that Christ’s return is not imminent until the prophecies concerning His coming are fulfilled — making the post-Trib doctrine correct to have stated it this way all along?