A question about the rapture

[Timtofly]

This is the SAME Event = the Resurrection followed by the rapture only occur at His Second Coming/Return.

You cannot find a single verse that sates 'pre-trib' rapture and/or Jesus takes raptured saints to heaven and then returns with them.

Nor can you find a single verse prior to Revelation 21 where the church comes to earth. That is 1,000 years after the Second Coming. The Second Coming does not bring the church to the earth, and you are correct on that point.

Only Jesus comes to the Mount of Olives at the Second Coming. No other humans come to the earth at that time. Jesus ascended to heaven by Himself in Acts 1. Jesus descends to the Mount of Olives by Himself just as Acts 1 declares. There is no group of people coming with Jesus at the Second Coming. There is a group of beings that do come. All the stars fall to earth. The angels come to earth at the Second Coming.

Matthew 25:31

"When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:"

Revelation 6:13

"And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind."

Matthew 13:37-39

"He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels."

The angels will be on the earth after the Second Coming reaping the final harvest.

The church is raptured prior to the final harvest, as Jesus is coming to the Mount of Olives. That is the Second Coming. The angels gather this harvest, not the church.

Just like the angels gathered the church as the Second Coming was happening, so the angels will continue to gather humans during the Trumpets and Thunders.

John wrote it down in sections, the Seals, the Trumpets, and the Thunders. Matthew even wrote it as separate events, the sheep and the tares. To claim it all happens in one instant all at the same time, means the Seals, Trumpets, and Thunders happen all in that same twinkling of an eye. That is man's interpretation, not God's Word. The vials are not a harvest. The vials are God's wrath poured out on Satan's 42 month empire, after the 2 witnesses are killed.

 

[David in NJ]

@Timtofly said: "Nor can you find a single verse prior to Revelation 21 where the church comes to earth."


SPOILER ALERT = Revelation chapter 19

Then I saw heaven standing open, and there before me was a white horse. And its rider is called Faithful and True. With righteousness He judges and wages war. 12He has eyes like blazing fire, and many royal crowns on His head. He has a name written on Him that only He Himself knows. 13He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and His name is The Word of God.

14The armies of heaven, dressed in fine linen, white and pure, follow Him on white horses.
15And from His mouth proceeds a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and He will rule them with an iron scepter.
He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty.
16And He has a name written on His robe and on His thigh:

KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

17Then I saw an angel standing in the sun, and he cried out in a loud voice to all the birds flying overhead, “Come, gather together for the great supper of God, 18so that you may eat the flesh of kings and commanders and mighty men, of horses and riders, of everyone slave and free, small and great.”

19Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth with their armies assembled to wage war against the One seated on the horse, and against His army. 20But the beast was captured along with the false prophet, who on its behalf had performed signs deceiving those who had the mark of the beast and worshiped its image. Both the beast and the false prophet were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur.
21And the rest were killed with the sword that proceeded from the mouth of the One seated on the horse.

And all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh.

 

[GRACE ambassador]

The church is raptured prior to the final harvest, as Jesus is coming to the Mount of Olives. That is the Second Coming. The angels gather this harvest, not the church.

Respectfully Disagree ( RDF = Rightly Divided From ):

( Heavenly ) GRACE/Mystery (Ends)
1) The Church, The Body Of Christ, is ( The Mystery ) raptured ( 'Gathered To Himself ) at
the close of the Dispensation Of Grace, To stand before Heavenly Bema Seat Judgment.

Rightly Divided (2 Timothy 2:15) From “Things That Differ” (online)

( earthly ) prophecy/covenants-law ( continues )
2) After 7 years Great Tribulation, is the prophesied Second Coming, the
angels 'gathering the elect of Israel' to stand before His earthly throne.

God's Great GRACE Departure RDF His Second Coming!

Amen.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The topic of this thread is going through God's wrath posters here call the GT. They claim the church is left on the earth during this time of God's wrath the GT.

You think you agree with them, because your eschatology ends before wrath begins. You are dead wrong.

You never have any idea of what you're talking about. I think I agree with them? No, I don't. I don't agree with their understanding of the timing of the wrath described in Luke 21:25-36 which has to do with the wrath that will come down on "that day" Jesus referenced, which is the day that He returns.

You sidestep their ideology, yet think you are going to see a post GT wrath of God, second coming. The battle of Armageddon is not the Second Coming. The battle of Armageddon is 42 months after the 7th Trumpet already started to sound. Do you think the 7th Trumpet will sound for 3.5 years so you can still count that as the Second Coming event? I doubt you do.

There will not be 3.5 years still left after the second coming. That is complete nonsense. You make no sense whastsoever. This is what happens when you decide that you should read the whole book in chronological order. It results in an interpretation that makes complete nonsense of the book and turns it into an incomprehensible, contradictory circus.

But the 7th Trumpet is interrupted with those 42 months. The week is split in half just like Daniel 9:27 declares. This set of 7 in Daniel 9:27 is not 7 years as many claim, and after 7 years of wrath and Tribulation the Second Coming happens. This is a normal week, of the days of the 7th Trumpet. In the midst of this week is when the 42 month extension of time is given to Satan. Satan does not get 42 months leading up to the days of the 7th Trumpet, and then the Second Coming happens. That is not a thief in the night moment. If Satan is sitting on the throne for 42 months, the thief in the night moment already happened. The Second Coming already happened. Those 42 months are not God's wrath nor Tribulation of the church. Those 42 months are God's grace and mercy and longsuffering allowing more time for many to accept salvation and reject the mark. Those beheaded are not Christians.

They are literally getting their head chopped off to avoid the mark. Anybody thinking they go all the way to Armageddon and are part of the church are deceiving themselves. Not even those beheaded are part of the church, even though you claim they just represent humanity since the Cross who are martyred for their faith. You are missing the point of Revelation 20:4-6. They are saved just enough to live on the earth for the next 1,000 years. They fare better than those currently in sheol who may be given eternal life at the GWT. They will have escaped sheol.

This is pure gibberish. There is nothing else I can say in response to this since it's impossible to make any sense out of what you said here.

I know you think Revelation 19 is the Second Coming.

It obviously is. It portrays Jesus descending from heaven. If that's not the second coming, then I don't know what is.

Along with everyone else who splits the rapture from the Second Coming.

What? Those who believe the rapture and second coming occur at the same time believe that Revelation 19 is the second coming as well.

There is no rapture in Revelation 19.

How do you know? Does every passage regarding the second coming have all the same details about it? No. So, what is the basis for you concluding that the rapture can't occur when Revelation 19 occurs? Just because it isn't specifically mentioned there? With that kind of logic, you can't ever relate any two passages directly together.

Those on white horses are not even the church. The church is in the New Jerusalem, a thousand years later. You just conveniently change up the chronological order of Revelation to make your ideal eschatology work out for you.

LOL. I recognize that it's not all in chronological order because if it was, it would contradict a lot of other scripture as your interpretations do. But, you apparently don't care about that.

So why do you think coming on white horses is the same as the New Jerusalem descending? One event is to remove Satan's corrupt empire. The other event is to completely change creation as we know it.

Again, not every passage related to the second coming has all the same details and all the same wording. If that was a requirement for two passages to be about the same event then there would never be a case of two passages being about the same event.

How can the Second Coming be without warning, when you think Satan needs to have an established and firm control of the entire world first? Certainly that would be just as unexpected, as the Second Coming. If Satan tried to prove to the whole world he is a literal being instead of some figurative dragon pulling all the strings, he would also have to deceive people into thinking there is nothing else true about God's Word, except for himself. You keep calling Satan this spiritual being as if he had no substance or physical body. Satan can appear in the physical and can be locked up in the pit just like all the other angels who followed him in rebellion. Do you think they all are on "leashes" wreaking physical havoc on the world like Satan can? Or have they been literally bound since they rebelled as Jude declares?

More pure nonsense that is not even worth responding to. You have many beliefs all to yourself. Why is that? Can you explain that to me?

 

[Davy]

Great answers, thanks!
Question is - has the "falling away" or apostacy within the body of Christ, already begun?

No, not yet.

Most Churches today are blinded about what Apostle Paul was showing in 2 Thess.2:4 about that coming "man of sin" (Antichrist for the end).

The 'falling away' idea in 2 Thess.2:3 is the Greek word 'apostasia', which means to be 'apostate' (leave what one before believed). But since that 'apostasy' is connected with that coming "man of sin" who is to exalt himself in place of God, the TYPE of apostasy that shows is 'false worship' of another in place of Christ Jesus.

That "man of sin" is the pseudochristos of Matthew 24:23-26 that Lord Jesus warned us about for the end. That Greek word pseudochristos is from 2 Greek words, pseudo, which means false, and christos, which is singular for Christ.

So that "man of sin" is about a coming pseudo-Christ, or false-Messiah, and with the power to do great signs and wonders and miracles to deceive the whole world (Matthew 24:24; Revelation 13:11-15).

 

[Davy]

Yes, thanks for that. I now see that 1 Thessalonians 4:17 says, "... shall be caught up together...", which presumably where we get the word "rapture" from. And 2 Thessalonians 2 talk about the return of Christ at Armageddon.

The actual timing of Christ's future return, which is only ONE TIME, is on the "day of the Lord" which will come "as a thief in the night". That is the last day of this present world.

In Revelation 16:15, within the 6th Vial timing, Jesus warned His Church that He comes "as a thief". Then the next verse speaks of the gathering of the enemy's armies for the battle of Armageddon, and then the destruction on the 7th final Vial. That reveals Jesus' coming on the 7th Vial. That is the same time of His coming at the end of Revelation 19 also.

1 Thessalonians 4 is where Apostle Paul gave us events about Christ's future coming to gather His Church. But the only timing Paul gave there for that was about the day of the resurrection in 1 Thess.4:16 with, "... and the dead in Christ shall rise first:". That confirms that the day of Christ's coming there to gather His Church is at the same time as the future 'resurrection' of the saints.

According to many Bible Scriptures, the future resurrection only will happen on the very last day of this world, which is the day when Jesus returns to gather His Church with those raised 'asleep' saints Jesus brings with Him.

 

[Timtofly]

It obviously is. It portrays Jesus descending from heaven. If that's not the second coming, then I don't know what is.

It is not. You obviously don't know what the Second Coming is.

 

[Timtofly]

LOL. I recognize that it's not all in chronological order because if it was, it would contradict a lot of other scripture as your interpretations do. But, you apparently don't care about that.

If I contradict Scripture, you could point out what Scripture is being contradicted. You have not been able to prove this alledged concern about my interpretation.

You do not even know who those people are on white horses. Your interpretation contradicts the point the church comes down in the New Jerusalem. These people in Revelation 19 come down on white horses.

Is the New Jerusalem symbolic of white horses? Are white horses symbolic of a city called the New Jerusalem?

I thought you have pointed out yourself that a rapture would be nonsense to do a U turn in the air, and now you include a return on white horses back to the earth? Now you put the rapture in Revelation 19, where it is not mentioned? Are you now saying the rapture is a U turn event involving white horses? In fact you claim the earth is burnt to a crisp and there is not even a battle called Armageddon, because there is literally nothing left about this earth to even have a battle on the earth. I guess the white horses in your interpretation are not literal either? Revelation 19 is all symbolic with hidden meanings that can only be dealt with in spiritual discernment? If that is the case it may not even be the Second Coming, as that is literal, and the scene in Revelation 19 is symbolic of something entirely different. Obviously if the horses are not literal then the coming to earth part is not literal either. It could just be a symbolic vision of earth being burned up prior to the Second Coming itself, no?

 

[Zao is life]

But I assumed the prophecies indicated that the anti-Christ would not be revealed until 3 and half years into the tribulation.

What is "the tribulation" in the New Testament?

If you go and read each and every New Testament verse containing the words translated into English as persecution, affliction, trouble, tribulation, you will discover that all except two of the verses are talking about the tribulation or persecution of Jesus or of apostles or of Christians, and only three times does the word megas (great) appear as an adjective of the tribulation. Twice unambiguously talking about the great tribulation experienced by Christians, and the first time is "ambiguous" only because everyone interprets the great tribulation that will be shorted for the elect's sake (Mat.24:21-22) his own way.

 

[Davy]

What is "the tribulation" in the New Testament?

If you go and read each and every New Testament verse containing the words translated into English as persecution, affliction, trouble, tribulation, you will discover that all except two of the verses are talking about the tribulation or persecution of Jesus or of apostles or of Christians, and only three times does the word megas (great) appear as an adjective of the tribulation. Twice unambiguously talking about the great tribulation experienced by Christians, and the first time is "ambiguous" only because everyone interprets the great tribulation that will be shorted for the elect's sake (Mat.24:21-22) his own way.

That does not work.

When Lord Jesus forewarned about the future "great tribulation" at the end of this world leading up to His future return, He INCLUDED a 'time definition' with it...

Matt 24:21
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
KJV

That part in red above defines just how... He meant that specific "great tribulation".

So all one need do is use a little common sense. Has there ever been a worse time of tribulation upon the Jews since the days of Lord Jesus' 1st coming? Sure, 70 A.D. when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the temple. Then later with the Holocaust of WWII. Has there been more tribulations after WWII in the world? Yes, the many wars that have gone on in Jerusalem even to the 1973 war, though it was short.

You see, Lord Jesus LINKED that "great tribulation" within the SIGNS of the very end of this world that He was giving there in Matthew 24. So no man can just try to move those SIGNS to other periods like you're trying to do.

There's another example of that time "great tribulation" given through God's prophet Daniel, which also confirms that "great tribulation" specifically being about the end of this world just prior to Christ's 2nd coming...

Dan 12:1-2
12 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
KJV

 

[Zao is life]

That does not work.

When Lord Jesus forewarned about the future "great tribulation" at the end of this world leading up to His future return, He INCLUDED a 'time definition' with it...

Matt 24:21
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
KJV

That part in red above defines just how... He meant that specific "great tribulation".

So all one need do is use a little common sense. Has there ever been a worse time of tribulation upon the Jews since the days of Lord Jesus' 1st coming? Sure, 70 A.D. when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the temple. Then later with the Holocaust of WWII. Has there been more tribulations after WWII in the world? Yes, the many wars that have gone on in Jerusalem even to the 1973 war, though it was short.

You see, Lord Jesus LINKED that "great tribulation" within the SIGNS of the very end of this world that He was giving there in Matthew 24. So no man can just try to move those SIGNS to other periods like you're trying to do.

There's another example of that time "great tribulation" given through God's prophet Daniel, which also confirms that "great tribulation" specifically being about the end of this world just prior to Christ's 2nd coming...

Dan 12:1-2
12 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
KJV

So I said, "and the first (of three) times that the tribulation is called "great" tribulation is ambiguous" only because everyone interprets the great tribulation that will be shorted for the elect's sake (Mat.24:21-22) in his own way.

It's not ambiguous to me. IMO If it was referring to the great tribulation experienced by the Jews in 70 A.D then it wouldn't be linked to the question.. "what shall be the sign of Your coming and of the end of the Age?" and to the return of Christ immediately after the tribulation being spoken of (Mat.24:29-31).

The first part of that question was, "When shall these things (the destruction of the temple) be?", and there is no hint in Acts or any of the epistles that the apostles knew when the destruction of the temple was going to happen, so IMO, and IOW, Jesus did not answer the first part of the question, at all.

I also have left off assuming that the apostles 'thought', when they asked the question, that the two events (the destruction of the temple and the return of Christ/end of the Age) were one and the same. Until recently I fell into the same trap of mind reading what the apostles thought/didn't think and believed/ didn't believe - but there's no hint in Acts or any of the epistles that any of them believed that the end of the Age would come and Jesus would return when the temple was destroyed.

I'm sure that if the apostles had believed the above, they would have said something to someone about it, given that it would have been an immensely important piece of information to pass on - but there is no record of Barnabus nor any other person mentioned in ECF history saying that the apostle had taught him that this was going to be the case.

Fact is, they knew nothing about dates for anything, and this proves (to me) that though they asked Jesus when the temple would be destroyed, He did not answer them, but He did give them the sign of His coming and of the end of the Age that they had asked for.

I'm not actually sure we disagree about Matthew 24:21-22. Your post doesn't seem like you're arguing against what I just said about it.

 

[ButterflyJones]

Jesus said this , to whom he was speaking, generation shall not pass away before they see the coming of the son of man in the clouds.

A generation is 40 years. And Jesus most assuredly knew this.
Which is why many believe what is transpiring now is the tribulation.
As occurs in God's time table. 1000 years is like unto a day, a thousand years like unto a day.

It is also thought the second coming in the clouds was the reference to his resurrection. And after 40 days of ministering still, his ascension into the clouds.

5

 

[No Pre-TB]

It is also thought the second coming in the clouds was the reference to his resurrection

Yet Paul preached about his second coming as not have happened yet.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

It is not. You obviously don't know what the Second Coming is.

So, you believe that you are the only one in the world who knows what the Second Coming is, right? You must believe that since your particular view of the Second Coming is not shared by anyone that I'm aware of.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

If I contradict Scripture, you could point out what Scripture is being contradicted. You have not been able to prove this alledged concern about my interpretation.

You do not even know who those people are on white horses. Your interpretation contradicts the point the church comes down in the New Jerusalem. These people in Revelation 19 come down on white horses.

Is the New Jerusalem symbolic of white horses? Are white horses symbolic of a city called the New Jerusalem?

I thought you have pointed out yourself that a rapture would be nonsense to do a U turn in the air, and now you include a return on white horses back to the earth?

Where did I say anything about them coming to the earth? I didn't. Are you able to comprehend anything you read? Do you realize you misunderstand almost everything you read which results in you misrepresenting almost everything that people say to you? What is the reason for that?

Now you put the rapture in Revelation 19, where it is not mentioned? Are you now saying the rapture is a U turn event involving white horses? In fact you claim the earth is burnt to a crisp and there is not even a battle called Armageddon, because there is literally nothing left about this earth to even have a battle on the earth. I guess the white horses in your interpretation are not literal either?

Of course they are not literal! Why would anyone be literally riding on a white horse coming down from heaven? Do you think there are literal white horses in heaven? Do you also think that Jesus will be slaying people with a literal sword coming out of His mouth?

Revelation 19 is all symbolic with hidden meanings that can only be dealt with in spiritual discernment?

Hidden meanings? There are no hidden meanings there in Revelation 19. There are other scriptures which speak about Jesus destroying His enemies when He returns (Matt 24:35-39, 1 Thess 5:2-3, 2 Thess 1:7-9, 2 Peter 3:10-12), so there is nothing hidden about it. It's just described in a symbolic way.

If that is the case it may not even be the Second Coming, as that is literal, and the scene in Revelation 19 is symbolic of something entirely different. Obviously if the horses are not literal then the coming to earth part is not literal either.

Where does it say they come to the earth? You're making things up.

It could just be a symbolic vision of earth being burned up prior to the Second Coming itself, no?

You clearly have no understanding of how symbolism works. Do you not understand that symbols don't have to resemble what they symbolize? For example, Satan is symbolized as a dragon with seven heads and ten horns. Does he look like a dragon with seven heads and ten horns in reality? Of course not. So, why do you insist that things that are described symbolically have to look just like what they are symbolizing in reality?

 

[ButterflyJones]

Yet Paul preached about his second coming as not have happened yet.

Paul never met the living Jesus, never heard him preach, and did not expand on anything Jesus taught.

 

[No Pre-TB]

Paul never met the living Jesus, never heard him preach, and did not expand on anything Jesus taught.

Paul never met the living Jesus?

And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. 6And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do

Sounds like he met him on the road to Damascus. and Jesus is alive at that point per Rev 1:18

I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

Paul never heard Jesus preach? Jesus taught Paul by his revelation.

Galatians 1
11But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. 12For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

 

[ButterflyJones]

Paul never met the living Jesus?

And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. 6And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do

Sounds like he met him on the road to Damascus. and Jesus is alive at that point per Rev 1:18

I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

Paul never heard Jesus preach? Jesus taught Paul by his revelation.

Galatians 1
11But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. 12For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

There are different accounts of the Damascus road encounter.
It was a bright light Saul encountered.

The living Jesus had long since ascended prior.

 

[Timtofly]

Jesus said this , to whom he was speaking, generation shall not pass away before they see the coming of the son of man in the clouds.

A generation is 40 years. And Jesus most assuredly knew this.
Which is why many believe what is transpiring now is the tribulation.
As occurs in God's time table. 1000 years is like unto a day, a thousand years like unto a day.

It is also thought the second coming in the clouds was the reference to his resurrection. And after 40 days of ministering still, his ascension into the clouds.

5

A generation is not 40 years. How many people do you know wait until 40 to get married and then have offspring? There is a new generation evey 15 to 20 years. Life expectancy in the first century was 35 years. A generation is still 70 years, because that is what Scripture states. Sometimes up to 80 years.

You do know that the 40 years in the wilderness was punishment, a year for every day the spies were in the promised land. It is not the definition of a generation. Numbers 14:32-35

"But as for you, your carcases, they shall fall in this wilderness. And your children shall wander in the wilderness forty years, and bear your whoredoms, until your carcases be wasted in the wilderness. After the number of the days in which ye searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, shall ye bear your iniquities, even forty years, and ye shall know my breach of promise. I the Lord have said, I will surely do it unto all this evil congregation, that are gathered together against me: in this wilderness they shall be consumed, and there they shall die."

I am sure some were glad they did not take 100 days to spy out the land.

 

[Timtofly]

So, you believe that you are the only one in the world who knows what the Second Coming is, right? You must believe that since your particular view of the Second Coming is not shared by anyone that I'm aware of.

Most every one knows what the Second Coming is. They just don't agree on the timing.

I am going by Scripture, so no, not my particular view.