No mincing words on today’s program. I responded to the first half of David Reagan’s shallow pretrib “critique” of the prewrath position. I first talked about “the lie.” The Lie is Reagan’s continued falsehood that prewrath teaches the rapture will happen “3/4th” into the “tribulation period.” I then walked through point by point refuting his article. His “critique” is basically, “take my word for it because I say so.” Of course that is fallacious and I hammered that point on the program. Here are the issues I replied to.
First, Reagan objects to the theological label “prewrath.” I explained that it is actually a very accurate and helpful label. He simply does not like the theology behind it. In his mind, if he can refute the label, he thinks he can refute the theology!
Second, I responded to his objection to the prewrath structure of the seals and trumpets. He provided no argumentation to support his empty assertion! It’s hard to reply to an argument when there is no argument to reply to. This was characteristic of his entire article.
Third, again, he furnished no evidence for his assertion of imminence. Reagan basically argued, “Imminence is true because it is true.” This fallacious circular reasoning does not sit well with thinking people. It is obvious that Reagan is not interested in meaningful interaction.
Fourth, and finally, I responded to his assertion—which he again gave no evidence—that the Antichrist’s great tribulation is the day of the Lord’s wrath. Mr. Reagan thinks that saying so makes it so. “Accept my word as Gospel because I merely utter it.” I also explained that Reagan’s theology on this point jeopardizes the faith of believers, dangerously misleads them into thinking that persecution should be construed with God’s judgment. I admonished Reagan on his bad theology on this point.
Next week, I will continue with his article in Part 2.
Links mentioned in the program: