Ok so I replied mentioning the issue with the “day of the Lord” and also about Darby. He now has come back with this.
"In like manner of how the Bible doesn’t state that we’ll be taken before, it also does not in any manner imply of a post-trib rapture either. In fact, nowhere in the Bible does it directly say that the Church will go through the tribulation. Jesus did say, “Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh” (Matthew 24:44).
The only time frame I can think of when we believers would not be expecting Jesus to return would have to be before The Great Tribulation.
Furthermore, I have seen the “Day of the Lord” argument before. A number of people have attempted to refute the pre-trib rapture by trying to associate the “Day of the Lord” with a catching-up of believers at the END of the tribulation. They base their rapture views solely on the idea that the “Day of the Lord” and the rapture are either synonymous or somehow linked together. They are not.
The Achilles heel of their argument has to be the notion that the “Day of the Lord” and various other “days” of an end-time context refers to a 24 hour period that occurs at, or near the end of the tribulation.
Probably the most commonly cited verse is (as you have used) 1 Thessalonians 5:2, where Paul tells us the “Day of the Lord” will come “as a thief in the night.”
I’ve read countless articles that describe the “Day of the Lord” as Christ’s advent at Armageddon. These articles go on to say that, because Paul also tells us the Lord will come “as a thief,” we have a direct link to the same description that is applied to noted rapture verses.
It’s rather obvious that those trying to rely on the “Day of the Lord” never really bother to validate the meaning of this particular day (not saying you my friend but in general).
I’ve checked a number of commentaries on the “Day of the Lord” and many of them define this as being an all-encompassing period that begins with The Great Tribulation.
We can even examine some verses that clearly indicate that the term “day” is used to represent a broader time period.
II Peter 3:10-13 - The “Day of the Lord” Peter spoke of in second Peter, cannot be a one day event because it mentions the destruction of the earth by fire and its renovation. Rev 21:11 tells us the earth will not be renewed until after Christ’s 1000 year reign.
Joel 2:11-20 - The “Day of the Lord” Joel describes, includes the defeat of the northern army. Ezekiel 38 and 39 is a parallel passage here. Most would time the destruction of the Gog & Magog (Russia and other surrounding territories, but DEFINITLEY Russia) army as occurring before in the first half of the tribulation.
John 12:48 - In the book of John, Jesus uses the term “last day” to indicate when the lost would be judged. Rev 20 makes it clear that the unsaved will not be judged until after the millennial reign – yet another 1000 year gap.
Hebrews 10:25 - One of the best indications that most of the various “day” references are citing a general time period, can be found in Hebrews 10:25 which reads: “Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.”
Surely, Paul would not be warning us to watch for a day that would be coming at the end of the tribulation.
That type of logic would be like warning children, as they cross the road, to watch out for taillights.
This is one of the most widely circulated attacks against the pre-trib rapture. It actually began BEOFORE John Nelson Darby. The notion was that a girl named Margaret MacDonald started this theological view back in 1830. The claim is typically made that MacDonald received a demonic vision, passed it on to John Nelson Darby, who in turn popularized it. Disproving this assertion proves rather easy though.
Pre-trib scholars have discovered a host of rapture writings that predate Margaret MacDonald.
Epharaem the Syrian said, in 373 AD, “For all the saints and Elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins."
One post-trib author offered a reward to anyone who could find a quote that predated MacDonald. He had to quickly cough up the money when someone identified a scholar who wrote about the pre-trib rapture several years before MacDonald. As of late, dozens of examples have been found, and the literary surface has hardly been scratched.
With the revealing of all these pre-MacDonald writings, you would think that the post-trib argument has been debunked. Unfortunately, this is not the case (as you and I are discussing lol)."
Can anyone offer any rebuttal to his claims? Please help