The Galilean wedding is the model for the pre-trib rapture

[The Light]

I let the Bible speak for itself. I do not force all these obscure unrelated theories on it in order to make it presentable.

Please, you change the text to make your fallen doctrine appear to be correct. The fact that you do not understand scripture is no mystery.

• Hosea 9 does NOT teach that "the Church ... is gathered from heaven and the seed of the woman, the twelve tribes across the earth that is gathered from the earth."

Gee. Matthew 24 does not teach that the Gentiles have replaced Israel. Strawman.

• Hosea 9 does NOT teach that "there are two raptures"?

Oh, but it does. The fact you don't understand that is definitely no mystery.

• Hosea 9 does NOT teach a "grain harvest, barley and wheat" followed by a "fall fruit harvest."

Mark 13 does not teach that the Gentiles have replace Israel. Strawman.

You obviously have nothing to support your beliefs apart from your own speculations. You seem to make it up as you go.

Not hardly. You seem to have to change the scripture as you go. That is definitely adding.

You do not seem to understand what Paul the apostle is teaching here. You're so fixated with your doctrine that you miss the message.

The problem is my doctrine is what the scriptures say. Your doctrine is what you want it say. And if it doesn't say what you want it to say, you simply change the scripture.

Dispensationalists interpret Romans 11:25 as if the engrafting must occur after the in-coming of the Gentiles. However, the original doesn't say that. It declares, “For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, [Gr. achris hou] while wherein (or, while) the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.”

The Greek word achris literally means up to, as far as, until, or while.

I don't feel like chasing down the Greek at this time to see if you changed it.

The same sense is found in Luke 21:24 (a passage that Dispensationalists present as a proof-text for their beliefs), which says, “Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, [Gr. achris hou] while wherein (or, while) the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”

Ditto.

Palmer Robertson explains: “The phrase rendered ‘until’ (achris hou) is essentially terminative. More particularly, it indicates the terminus ad quem [ending point] … The phrase brings matters “up to” a certain point or “until” a certain goal is reached. It does not itself determine the state of affairs after the termination. The subsequent circumstances can be learned only from the context” (The Israel of God: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow).

To get a sense of the meaning of this Greek phrase achris hou, it might be good to see an example of its use in some popular passages in Scripture.

Acts 22:4: “And I persecuted this way unto [Gr. achris hou] the death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women.”

Hebrews 4:12: “For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to [Gr. achris hou] the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.”

1 Corinthians 11:26: “For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till [Gr. achris hou] he come.”

Ditto.

Just don't have time at this time to see what you have done to the scriptures to make it work for your fallen doctrine of men. I already know you are wrong without even looking.

 

[Timtofly]

Lazarus resurrection was not the resurrection to a glorified body. He died again because the Holy Spirit had not yet been given.
The Holy Spirit was not given till after Jesus was resurrected to Glory/
Glorified body like the Lords glorified body comes to those who are Born again and Spirit filled.

Wow, just wow.

The Holy Spirit was given in the OT. The power of the Holy Spirit working in individuals with the second birth was not available in the OT.

No such thing as a glorified body. Either you have Adam's dead flesh, a state of death, or God's permanent incorruptible physical body in Paradise. Being glorified is putting on the spirit.

If you had the first resurrection, you would no longer need the Holy Spirit, because you would no longer be in a state of death, period. The power of the Holy Spirit is given to your soul to overcome the dead flesh and sinful nature that goes with Adam's dead corruptible flesh.

So God can take away your eternal life and make you dead again? Really? That is messed up.

You don't get a new body when you are born again. You get your new body at the first resurrection, when you as a soul leave this current body of death. The soul is no longer naked, because that is the state of death.

 

[WPM]

Please, you change the text to make your fallen doctrine appear to be correct. The fact that you do not understand scripture is no mystery.


Gee. Matthew 24 does not teach that the Gentiles have replaced Israel. Strawman.


Oh, but it does. The fact you don't understand that is definitely no mystery.


Mark 13 does not teach that the Gentiles have replace Israel. Strawman.

Not hardly. You seem to have to change the scripture as you go. That is definitely adding.


The problem is my doctrine is what the scriptures say. Your doctrine is what you want it say. And if it doesn't say what you want it to say, you simply change the scripture.


I don't feel like chasing down the Greek at this time to see if you changed it.


Ditto.


Ditto.

Just don't have time at this time to see what you have done to the scriptures to make it work for your fallen doctrine of men. I already know you are wrong without even looking.

You have provided no biblical evidence to say that salvation will end for the Gentiles near the end so that the Jews can be saved. That is what you have been wrongly taught. Where does it say that? Why would God do that? Salvation has not stopped for the Jews in our day, in order that the Gentiles would be saved. Both can experience salvation in this final age of time. There is no preference or racial discrimination with God under the new covenant. After this age is eternity. There is no time left for your imaginary 5 future raptures.

 

[rebuilder 454]

Yes, nothing personal. However, when some who wish to argue faith and doctrine cheapen the discussion with reckless claims then they are less deserving of so-called "respect." A moment ago, you seemed to argue that "no Postrib has unpacked the 10 Virgins parable," or did I misread this?

Regardless, I appreciate your good will. Keep in mind that out of respect for my brother's learning in Hebrew language in the Scriptures I defer to him. But I don't necessarily agree with his position. And that's because WPM made a great argument that I have not yet been able to refute.

It appears that Jesus did say that in the day Noah entered the ark the Flood began. Have you explained this yet?

Matt 24.38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away.

So it appears to me that both things are true. God asked Noah to enter the ark *before* 7 more days lapsed. And only then did the Flood start. And, the day Noah entered the ark, the Flood came. How are both of these things true?

My brother simply stated that it seemed to him that the 7 days had to follow God asking Noah to enter the ark. That certainly is true. But then how can it be said that the Flood immediately followed Noah's entry into the ark? Here is the actual account...

Gen 7.11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights.
13 On that very day Noah and his sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth, together with his wife and the wives of his three sons, entered the ark.

There it is again. On the day Noah entered the ark, the "great deep burst forth," ie the Flood started. What happened to the 7 days that followed Noah's entry onto the ark? I haven't resolved this yet. I just accept what you and my brother say was true, that 7 days followed Noah's entry into the ark.

None of this proves a thing about the "Tribulation," or the future Reign of Antichrist. But I can understand why you would wish to fit this in there between Noah's entry into the ark and the devastation that followed 7 days later. Be well.

Ok
I am not moved by the 7 day thingy.
The dialogue of Jesus "before the flood" is a setting change. Jesus is saying in that change of setting is when one is taken one is left. And also in that setting there is normal life Commerce and peacetime. It is also said in that same setting watch and be ready for his coming.

 

[rebuilder 454]

Are you forgetting, engaging in dishonesty, or putting some kind of strange slant on conversation? I had this discussion a short time ago, and offered my own version of the 10 virgins parable. 10 Virgins

The whole thread was about this, and yet you say no Postribber "unpacked" the parable? Do you mean that nobody "unpacked" it in a way that you certify as legitimate? ;)

Unpacked it without changing the components.
So yes none of them unpacked it correctly.
....and can not.

That is the point.
Their DOCTRINE demands at least one component changed.

 

[rebuilder 454]

Have you done that? Or are you asking us to do something that even you haven't done, which would be quite ridiculous. Why don't you share your interpretation of the parable and then I will share mine. Or I will go first if you prefer. Doesn't matter to me. Let me know.


That is a lie. Both WPM and I have done that extensively. Just because you haven't seen it (somehow - we have covered that many times) doesn't mean it hasn't been done.


I guess you are blind then? Because we most certainly have. Many times.


LOL. That was a good one. Are you a comedian for a living?

Where did you post on the virgins parable?
Most everything I request of you is basic and simple.
Getting a straight answer? Another dimension entirely.

 

[rebuilder 454]

What does this mean?



That has never happened or ever will. I have yet to see 1 Pretrib verse in the inspired pages.

Can you show us Scripture that clearly describes (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further coming of Christ?

Again?
Just read my posts.
See this is what I mean. You can take one of the pretrib rapture verses and let's get it on.
Show me your superior interpretation.
Instead you revert to some tired dusty shot gun blast, and demand the verses a hundred times.
That is the hamster wheel of the postrib rapture.
Take our verses, throw them in the air and ....poooof! Postrib rapture doctrine magically appears by their silly default.
But Somehow you think in your mind you did something

 

[WPM]

Unpacked it without changing the components.
So yes none of them unpacked it correctly.
....and can not.

That is the point.
Their DOCTRINE demands at least one component changed.

So, anyone who disagrees with you has not addressed or unpacked the text. Do you realize how that comes across?

Why will you not respond to the detailed responses that challenge your thesis above? That is always a sign one has no rebuttal. The counterargument is watertight, from what i can see.

 

[WPM]

Again?
Just read my posts.
See this is what I mean. You can take one of the pretrib rapture verses and let's get it on.
Show me your superior interpretation.
Instead you revert to some tired dusty shot gun blast, and demand the verses a hundred times.
That is the hamster wheel of the postrib rapture.
Take our verses, throw them in the air and ....poooof! Postrib rapture doctrine magically appears by their silly default.
But Somehow you think in your mind you did something

LOL. You obviously have nothing. If you did you would give it. But you don't. You couldn't even address the passages and arguments that I presented. Pretribbers do that all the time. Avoidance and ad hominem are the 2 main tacts. When your claims are biblically challenged you simply duck around them. To address them, and accept what the inspired texts say, would cause you to immediately reject Pretrib. And no, you do not have any proof texts. If you had you would present them. Pretrib has no proof-texts! Your continual avoidance of this simple question below highlights that!

Can you show us Scripture that clearly describes (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further coming of Christ?

 

[rebuilder 454]

So, anyone who disagrees with you has not addressed or unpacked the text. Do you realize how that comes across?

Why will you not respond to the detailed responses that challenge your thesis above? That is always a sign one has no rebuttal. The counterargument is watertight, from what i can see.

So you are OK with changing the components?

 

[WPM]

Where did you post on the virgins parable?
Most everything I request of you is basic and simple.
Getting a straight answer? Another dimension entirely.

I did (he responded to me above, agreeing with what I wrote) but you dodged both.

 

[rebuilder 454]

LOL. You obviously have nothing. If you did you would give it. But you don't. You couldn't even address the passages and arguments that I presented. Pretribbers do that all the time. Avoidance and ad hominem are the 2 main tacts. When your claims are biblically challenged you simply duck around them. To address them, and accept what the inspired texts say, would cause you to immediately reject Pretrib. And no, you do not have any proof texts. If you had you would present them. Pretrib has no proof-texts! Your continual avoidance of this simple question below highlights that!

Can you show us Scripture that clearly describes (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further coming of Christ?

******The one taken /left in mat 24.*****
That is the rapture preflood as Jesus said

Show me your superior interpretation
Keep the setting ( peacetime, commerce, normal life), and the 50% taken, 50 % left behind components intact.. also keep the be ready before the flood components intact..

Go ahead,, no dodge.. no rabbit trals.
Go.

 

[rebuilder 454]

I did (he responded to me above, agreeing with what I wrote) but you dodged both.

I asked WHERE.
AHEM...
So simple...so incredibly basic.
a dodge BY YOU ?

 

[Randy Kluth]

Unpacked it without changing the components.
So yes none of them unpacked it correctly.
....and can not.

That is the point.
Their DOCTRINE demands at least one component changed.

Then don't say no Postribber "unpacked" the parable of the 10 Virgins. This is very misleading, since I made a serious effort to explain it myself. And I challenged you to show me anywhere I changed the parable, ie its component parts. And you did not respond to my challenge.

I will say it again, unless you think your disagreement disqualifies *anything* I may say? The 10 virgins used an OT analogy in which the "virgins" are like maids still under the Law. Only half of them had the oil in a permanent way, which indicates to me the adoption of a spiritual nature, as opposed to just a temporary use of God's gifts.

The coming of the Groom represents the 2nd Coming of Christ, at which time only those with an inward reborn nature will receive new glorified bodies. This enables us to be "married" to Christ, even though we already have the marriage contract certified in gold.

Not a single element of this is Pretrib, in my view. Nothing in the parable remotely suggests it from my point of view.

 

[The Light]

You have provided no biblical evidence to say that salvation will end for the Gentiles near the end so that the Jews can be saved.

If you understood the harvest, you would understand that salvation will not end for the Gentiles until the 6th seal. However, the main part of the harvest will be oven when the fullness of the Gentiles comes in. There will still be gleanings for the poor and stranger.

That is what you have been wrongly taught.

You keep saying that. Who is my teacher. Who believes that there are two raptures that I have been listening to.

The problem with two raptures is that it shoots down all the so called proof that the Church is not raptured before the great tribulation.

Where does it say that? Why would God do that? Salvation has not stopped for the Jews in our day, in order that the Gentiles would be saved. Both can experience salvation in this final age of time.

Have I said different?

There is no preference or racial discrimination with God under the new covenant. After this age is eternity. There is no time left for your imaginary 5 future raptures.

One thing is obvious is that you are in panic mode because you were caught changing the scripture to protect your fallen doctrine. I'm sure your father is both proud and disappointed.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Ok
I am not moved by the 7 day thingy.
The dialogue of Jesus "before the flood" is a setting change. Jesus is saying in that change of setting is when one is taken one is left. And also in that setting there is normal life Commerce and peacetime. It is also said in that same setting watch and be ready for his coming.

As I've said before, the people "taken" and "left" were both being judged by God and afflicted by the Roman Army. Those "left" were left to manage the fields for the Romans. Those who were "taken" were taken away into exile or killed.

None of this is about the Rapture of the Church. Rather, it is about the judgment of Israel. Even believers among the Jews suffered from this Great Tribulation, even though they were not the targets of God's wrath.

Luke 17.34 I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. 35 Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left.”
37 “Where, Lord?” they asked.
He replied, “Where there is a dead body, there the vultures will gather.”

You can plainly see that those who were "taken" and those who were "left" experienced this judgement where "the vultures gather." The Roman Army had eagle standards, which were idols that they worshiped as gods. So the imagery was unmistakable. The Romans would gather, like vultures, around Jerusalem, the eventual "corpse."

Both those "taken" and those "left" were being judged. Your fixation with the "Rapture" skews your reading and your interpretation. But I know songs and movies have made this perspective very popular in our time. Don't be fooled!

 

[WPM]

******The one taken /left in mat 24.*****
That is the rapture preflood as Jesus said

Show me your superior interpretation
Keep the setting ( peacetime, commerce, normal life), and the 50% taken, 50 % left behind components intact.. also keep the be ready before the flood components intact..

Go ahead,, no dodge.. no rabbit trals.
Go.

I already did.

They are eating, drinking and marrying as normal, then utter destruction strikes them unexpectedly. There is no space for your tribulation period and a 2nd rapture and a 3rd coming. There is no space for some future millennium. All those that are left behind are destroyed. All the wicked are dead. All the mortals are death. All the saints are glorified and the earth is glorified. We're now into the eternal state.

Jesus said in Luke 17:24-34: “For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day. But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation. And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed. In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back. Remember Lot's wife. Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it. I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord? And he said unto them, Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together.”

The days before the coming of Christ will see the wicked at ease living in pleasure, sin and carelessness. The every day occurrences of life (like eating, drinking and marriage) will continue as normal right up until Jesus comes. Christ's coming is going to catch the wicked unexpectedly. The wrath of God is sudden and totally destructive. No one survives as this passage tells us.

I Thessalonians 5:2-7 the enormity of this climactic event: “the day of the Lord will come (or appear or arrive) as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober. For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night. But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation. For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ.”

The peace and safety occurs just before Jesus comes at His one final future coming. Any way, if the day of the Lord in 1 Thessalonians 5:3 relates to a third coming of Christ, as some Pretribbers argue, and if they relate this to the event of Revelation 19, which they say is the end of a great 7 years tribulation, how can the wicked be crying “peace and safety”? Surely, according to Pretrib, this is a period of the wrath of God being poured out on all those left behind according to Pretrib theology?

1. Do you literally believe Christ is coming suddenly and unexpectedly "as a thief in the night" as the Bible says (1 Thessalonians 5:2)?
2. Do you literally believe the wicked will experience "sudden destruction" from His appearance as the Bible says (1 Thessalonians 5:3)?
3. Do you literally believe the wicked "shall not escape" as the Bible says (1 Thessalonians 5:3)?

The “wrath” of God is here linked with the “sudden destruction” that befalls those that are in the dark when Jesus comes. Significantly the whole context of this reading is the destruction of those who abide in darkness and the rescue of those who are in light. There is no third group that is half enlightened. Despite the destruction that hits all left behind the writers reassures the believer that they will escape this awful fate.

I Thessalonians 5:2-7 confirms that it isn’t just Christ’s coming that is sudden but also the destruction that accompanies. Likening Christ’s return to “a thief in the night” capably serves to impress the surprising nature of His coming for the lost. It shows that the wicked are caught abruptly in their folly at the apocalypse. The “sudden destruction” is so impactful that none escape. That is explicit in the narrative. Furthermore, we learn that the speed that the pain of childbirth hits a woman will be like the destruction of the wicked. It is not saying that 'the whole child-birth experience is like the coming of the Lord' which would be needed to allow for the Premil understanding. After all, they have to stretch the judgment out over centuries, but it is not found in this text. In doing this they diminish the sudden nature of the destruction.

The coming of Christ is here (as 2 Peter 3) likened to the appearance of “a thief in the night.” Moreover, the narrative demonstrates that the judgment that accompanies this climactic event is instantaneous and that it involves “sudden destruction.” Its focus is directed fully and entirely upon the sum-total of the wicked, not merely a percentage of them. This group that is referred to as “they” who “shall not escape” relates to the aggregate Christ-rejecting community alive at His return. They are later described as those who are “of the night” and “of darkness.” It is they alone that experience immediate and “sudden destruction” which “cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child”; and “they shall [assuredly] not escape.” This climactic event pulls down the curtain on time and concludes the affairs of this life.

 

[WPM]

If you understood the harvest, you would understand that salvation will not end for the Gentiles until the 6th seal. However, the main part of the harvest will be oven when the fullness of the Gentiles comes in. There will still be gleanings for the poor and stranger.


You keep saying that. Who is my teacher. Who believes that there are two raptures that I have been listening to.

The problem with two raptures is that it shoots down all the so called proof that the Church is not raptured before the great tribulation.



Have I said different?

One thing is obvious is that you are in panic mode because you were caught changing the scripture to protect your fallen doctrine. I'm sure your father is both proud and disappointed.

LOL. And you continue to provide nothing from God's Book. All you are alleging is your invented extra-biblical theory of 5 raptures. And because i do not see your extra-biblical theory i supposedly do not get end times. Seriously! Do you realize how ridiculous your reasoning sounds?

Come back when you are going to present hard Scripture instead of your own personal speculations.

 

[WPM]

Then don't say no Postribber "unpacked" the parable of the 10 Virgins. This is very misleading, since I made a serious effort to explain it myself. And I challenged you to show me anywhere I changed the parable, ie its component parts. And you did not respond to my challenge.

I will say it again, unless you think your disagreement disqualifies *anything* I may say? The 10 virgins used an OT analogy in which the "virgins" are like maids still under the Law. Only half of them had the oil in a permanent way, which indicates to me the adoption of a spiritual nature, as opposed to just a temporary use of God's gifts.

The coming of the Groom represents the 2nd Coming of Christ, at which time only those with an inward reborn nature will receive new glorified bodies. This enables us to be "married" to Christ, even though we already have the marriage contract certified in gold.

Not a single element of this is Pretrib, in my view. Nothing in the parable remotely suggests it from my point of view.

Spiritual Jew and myself did also. He has made no response to any. I wonder why?

 

[WPM]

I asked WHERE.
AHEM...
So simple...so incredibly basic.
a dodge BY YOU ?

649 and 650 remain unaddressed. Spiritual Jew addressed this in 694. All were avoided by you.