The Bible does not favor a pre-tribulation rapture

PROLOGUE Pro is to show that the Bible favors a pre-tribulation rapture, but Pro's concluding statement was that the pre-tribulation rapture is supported. Pro must be able to say that a pre-tribulation rapture is the most likely interpretation of the scriptures (favored over other interpretations). So far, Pro has followed a fairly standard debate structure and not addressed reasons we should not believe in post-tribulation rapture. To win this debate, he should convince the voters that pre-tribulation is more likely than post-tribulation. REBUTTAL Correct me if I'm wrong, Pro, but you appear to be advancing the idea that there are two raptures: one before the tribulation and one after it just before a time of great judgment. It appears to me that it is challenging to the pre-tribulation view that there is a post-tribulation rapture. This challenge is so strong, it forces many pre-tribulation teachers to accept a two rapture hypothesis by which they do not have to reject the post-tribulation rapture outright. Of course this belief could arise from evidence, so it is reasonable to consider the evidence for and against this belief and how weighty it is. On the other hand, Christians and others who value the scriptures have reason to want to skip the tribulation. To those who are particularly fearful, it may be comforting to believe that they won't endure such an unpleasant time. This serves as a motive for some to find a reason to believe what they already want to believe. The issue may be complicated by this ulterior motive. Therefore, it is all the more important to believers who seek the truth of this matter to examine the evidence closely to determine if the evidence is based in emotion or reason. So far, Pro and I have both used two key verses in our arguments. Pro claimed that one was written for Jewish believers living among Gentile believers during the tribulation, and the other referred to the pre-tribulation rapture of the Gentiles. This assertion of fact came as an unsupported opinion. It is not clear from the text that this assertion is the case. For example, one might expect contextual clues that the verse from the Gospel of Matthew did not apply to Gentiles. In my opening arguments, I correlated several verses together, including the two used by Pro, to create a big picture argument favoring a post-tribulation interpretation. PROACTIVE REBUTTAL Pro did not advance the classic pre-tribulation arguments as I expected, so I will proactively address some of the more common ones I have come across in my personal study of the topic at hand. I will use a writing by Donovan Neufeldt as my primary source [1] and following several of his objections in section 4.3 of his writing. 1) Protection from Wrath 1 Thessalonians 5:9 and Romans 5:9 are used as scriptural evidence that believers will not endure the wrath of G-d. It is on this premise that pre-tribulation, mid-tribulation, and pre-warth eschatologies agree. It is on the identification of what parts of the tribulation are considered the wrath of G-d that they disagree. However, three verses all say that believers are sealed during the "Great Tribulation" (considered by many to be the later half of the tribulation distinguished by super-natural wrath, as opposed to natural sources of wrath, such as war and famine, in the first half) thus avoiding the effects of the wrath poured out: Rev. 7:3 [f], 9:4 [g], Ezek. 9:4-6 [h]. I like that Pro has claimed that the second rapture is for the Jewish people, because it weakens his position scripturally. Revelation 7:9-17 recalls the countless multitudes from every nation on Earth who endured the Great Tribulation [i]. There is no scripture that supports the idea of mass-conversion after the rapture, except maybe from among the Jewish people. This is pure speculation based on the events that a pre-tribulation rapture might cause. 2) Believers are not mentioned on Earth in Revelation during the tribulation "The church is mentioned in Revelation 5:8, 8:3, 8:4, 11:18, 12:17, 13:7, 13:10, 14:12, 15:3, 16:6, 17:6,18:24 (usually called saints, or the elect, who are in considered members of the church throughout the New Testament)." 3) The Scriptures discuss people being left behind on Earth in Matthew 24:40-42 [j] and Luke 17:34-36 [k] The references here actually indicate that the people taken will be those taken away to be judged, not rescued. From context, Matthew 24:37-39 says the coming of the Son of Man will be like the days of Noah where people were eating and drinking until the day Noah got on the ark. The flood that came took the unrighteous, not the righteous. The scriptures are full of admonitions to believers to live righteous lives in order to avoid judgement. The admonition in Matthew 24:42 to "keep watch" appears to be another one of these. If the people in the days of Noah had kept watch, they would have been on the boat with Noah. In the story of Noah, only the righteous were "left behind" on earth. It was the wicked who were "taken" to be judged. Luke 17:37 refers to vultures. Vultures were a sign of evil, similar to western culture. Kosher laws specifically forbid Jewish people from eating vultures, so vultures came with a certain taboo. The verse discusses how dead bodies attract vultures. Dead bodies are not usually an attractive thought (unless you're a cannibal). The imagery being used here is that of death and evil. In all other parables in the Gospels, such imagery is only used when discussing evil or evil people. This is an indication that the passage is referring to judgement of evil people, similar to the passage in Matthew. SOURCES 1) https://www.scribd.com... f) Rev. 7:3 https://www.biblegateway.com... g) Rev. 9:4 https://www.biblegateway.com... h) Ezek. 9:4-6 https://www.biblegateway.com... i) Rev. 7:9-17 https://www.biblegateway.com... j) Matthew 24:40-42 https://www.biblegateway.com... k) Luke 17:34-36 NLT https://www.biblegateway.com...