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

[MA2444]

The point is that they are taken in the same breath that Jesus said "before the flood".
So ,"before the flood ,half of some group is taken, half left".
( it can not be half righteous taken or left)
That is definately Impossible!
Plus ,it is before the flood, so it is pretrib gathering of a group
but only half are gathered.
It literally destroys postrib rapture big time.
But it gets worse for them.
Because in the same breath Jesus says half the virgins are taken

Only half are gathered.
Two examples in the same breath of 50% of the righteous gathered.
Game
Set
Match.
Lol

Oh I didnt miss your point but it got me to thinking, lol. I agree!

 

[WPM]

Still trying to hide from the virgins parable?
Still without understanding that your doctrine has 50% of the planet saved, the other half heathen?

LOL. The opposite is truth. The reader can see how you are ducking the evidence I submitted above like the plague. You have nothing in that text (or any other) that supports Pretrib. You cannot even show us a tribulation following it. I wonder why? Because it does not exist. Everyone left behind is destroyed, just like in Lot and Noah's day. You have no response to that. The inspired text forbids Pretrib.

You guys are chasing your tails. You are going in circles. None of you have been able to bring anything to the table to support your claims of (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further coming of Christ.

 

[WPM]

The school bus dropped the children off at the school pre school hours.
They are already at the school when you show up hollering , " show me the busses, show me the busses. Show me the busses"
Postribber hamster wheel.
We post
You reject, deflect, modify.
Repeat
Repeat
Repeat.
Postribber hamster wheel

Yawn

I agree: you have nothing! You never will have anything. It is a false teaching. It is extra-biblical. I suspect you know.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Still trying to hide from the virgins parable?
Still without understanding that your doctrine has 50% of the planet saved, the other half heathen?

Why are you lying? Do you think lying is not a sin? He has given his understanding of Matthew 25:1-13 TWICE now. Here is the second time: The Galilean wedding is the model for the pre-trib rapture

And you are trying to say he is hiding from it when he has given his detailed understanding of it twice already? That is a blatant lie. What is wrong with you? Do you have no conscience?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

LOL. The opposite is truth. The reader can see how you are ducking the evidence I submitted above like the plague. You have nothing in that text (or any other) that supports Pretrib. You cannot even show us a tribulation following it. I wonder why? Because it does not exist. Everyone left behind is destroyed, just like in Lot and Noah's day. You have no response to that. The inspired text forbids Pretrib.

You guys are chasing your tails. You are going in circles. None of you have been able to bring anything to the table to support your claims of (1) a rapture of the Church, (2) immediately followed by a literal seven-year tribulation, (3) immediately followed by a further coming of Christ.

Remember when you said these guys aren't worth my time? They're not worth your time, either. They resort to blatant lies like saying you hide from the parable in Matthew 25:1-13 despite the fact that you gave your interpretation of it twice. If people are just going to repeatedly lie like that, then it's not worth our time to engage with them.

 

[The Light]

The reader will see that you are totally contradicting yourself in every post you write. You've nothing of evidential worth to bring to the table.

You seem to have trouble rubbing two sticks together. But have no trouble attempting to change the Greek in scripture. Must have been a bummer when you were caught.

Additionally, you have no trouble claiming the 144,000 is the Church when scripture clearly tells us who those 144,000 are.

 

[WPM]

You seem to have trouble rubbing two sticks together. But have no trouble attempting to change the Greek in scripture. Must have been a bummer when you were caught.

Additionally, you have no trouble claiming the 144,000 is the Church when scripture clearly tells us who those 144,000 are.

Jew and Gentiles are part of the Church - God's only chosen people. Everyone else is of their father the devil.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Oh, I can show it to you. But you are not interested in the truth. If you were, you would not have had to change the Word of God in an attempt to fool people into believing your false, fallen, beliefs that were birthed by unbelieving men.

Ok. I'm ready. Post a plethora of out of context scriptures............just the numbers, mind you. In an attempt to make it look you have a whim of a clue. Then quickly claim everyone is dodging your posts.

This is too funny seeing you accuse someone else of changing "the Word of God in an attempt to fool people into believing your false, fallen, beliefs" when that's exactly what you do. And you asking someone else to "Post a plethora of out of context scriptures" when that's exactly what you do on a regular basis.

 

[Randy Kluth]

But it's right there in 1 Thess 4:17
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.../KJV

Yes, I know and Catholics know it too. Many of them know it better than you and I do.

As I said, they don't wish to use an English word that has certain ramifications, connecting it to a Pretrib Rapture. They don't want to be caught agreeing with that, and so choose synonyms that don't have this problem with association.

The thing is, that phrase "caught up" is used as a direct translation for the greek word "harpazo".

G726 - harpazō - Strong's Greek Lexicon (kjv)

G726 - ἁρπάζω harpázō, har-pad'-zo; from a derivative of ; to seize (in various applications):—catch (away, up), pluck, pull, take (by force).

www.blueletterbible.org

Oh yes, I've known this for many, many years. It refers to being "seized," as opposed to how Christ "ascended." Nevertheless, I think the same word is used for the "Man Child" in Rev 12, which I believe referred to Christ's ascension. So in my view, Christ was seized by God, to deliver him from Satan and death, and he ascended to heaven after his resurrection.

In Jesus we have his ascension and his being seized by God as joined into one. But in the Church, we do not "ascend." Rather, we are seized by God and taken to heaven to be transformed into glory.

If caught up is translated from latin, they use the word rapture. So it depends on which translation you have, lol. And it talks all through scripture about He comes as a thief in the night, you dont know when He's coming (and He's been saying soon for over 2000 years!). So it is in the scriptures. That it fell out of belief so to speak to the masses doesn't mean it isn't true. It may suggest a coverup? I think the enemy might do something like that! What do you think?

As I said, Catholics believe Christ comes like a thief in the night to take unbelievers unaware in their wicked acts. He also comes on a day Christians don't know, but we're never told that it could be "at any time." That is "Imminency Doctrine," which I believe is unbiblical.

The idea of a "soon Coming" has to do with the immediacy of his judgment upon sin. We are never free from the danger of God's judgment as long as we live. For us, this judgment is always "coming soon."

But that doesn't mean judgment will come through Jesus' Return "at any time." No, it just means that we should keep ourselves ready for God's Kingdom at all times so that we are never taken by surprise, whether through a sudden death or through Jesus' Coming itself. We are always to be ready.

As for conspiracies to keep the world unprepared they are many, and we could devote an entire thread to it! We are children of the Day and are aware of the Devil's devices. But we need to keep ourselves sharp. I've had some serious setbacks in my life at a time I thought I had it all together.

So Catholics don't want to use the same Latin word that Dispensationalists use, but they do use an acceptable synonym for the same teaching in 1 Thes 4. Thanks for your conversation.

 

[WPM]

Remember when you said these guys aren't worth my time? They're not worth your time, either. They resort to blatant lies like saying you hide from the parable in Matthew 25:1-13 despite the fact that you gave your interpretation of it twice. If people are just going to repeatedly lie like that, then it's not worth our time to engage with them.

I agree. It reflects who they are. Read their posts. Anyone who disagrees with Pretrib is the focus of their hate.

All the time, they do not have one single proof text. Amazing. Talk about deception.

 

[Randy Kluth]

"Factual" would be actually reading Rev 14:14 and agreeing there is a unique rapture there that is nor 1 thes 4 nor is it Rev 19, nor is it the rapture of mat 24 " before the flood,one taken / left behind"
That is a fact.
Very factual.
Irrefutable as all postribbers have show us.
They can not go there ar all.

My point, brother, is that visions are not the same thing as a theological statement or a doctrinal statement. When Paul wrote that Jesus is the "image of the invislble God," that was a doctrinal statement. It was also a theological statement.

But when you cite a vision and then demand your particular slant on it be taken as if it is irrefutable, that's not the same thing as explicit doctrinal statements being given by the Bible. What you are *not* giving are these explicit biblical statements that I've requested.

Consequently, I cannot agree with your position. Every explicit biblical statement I read in the Bible about Jesus' Coming is exclusively postribulational. There is not a single reference to Jesus' Coming the 2nd time that is different from this.

All references to Jesus' Coming seem to refer back to the same source, which is Dan 7, where the Son of Man descends from the clouds of heaven to destroy Antichrist and to establish God's Kingdom on earth. A "secret Rapture" is non-existent and is not your idea--it is the brain child of John N. Darby. I'm sticking with the Apostle Paul and the Prophet Daniel, not to neglect Jesus' own statement on the matter that he will *not* come until he descends from heaven itself.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Where exactly in Scripture does it teach that "the Tribulation/Great Tribulation starts and that is with the signing of a 7 years peace covenant with Israel"?

Nowhere exactly. And nowhere inexactly, either.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

"Factual" would be actually reading Rev 14:14 and agreeing there is a unique rapture there that is nor 1 thes 4 nor is it Rev 19, nor is it the rapture of mat 24 " before the flood,one taken / left behind"
That is a fact.
Very factual.
Irrefutable as all postribbers have show us.
They can not go there ar all.

You think the ones "left behind" are left alive after a pre-trib rapture. Jesus very clearly indicated otherwise.

Luke 17:33 Whoever tries to keep their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life will preserve it. 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.” [36] [e] 37 “Where, Lord?” they asked. He replied, “Where there is a dead body, there the vultures will gather.”

This very clearly indicates that the ones who are not caught up to meet the Lord in the air will be killed, leaving their dead bodies for the vultures to feast on. But, go ahead and keep ignoring the scriptures like this that contradict your view if that's what you want to do. You cherry pick verses out of context while ignoring other verses.

 

[Randy Kluth]

So many don't believe because they can't pinpoint when it will happen. And yet we can see it happened in Rev 4 and 5.

That may be reasonable to some. I require actual statements that are intended to have doctrinal implications. Visions are not those unless statements made within those visions express truths we are to understand and believe as such. I don't see that in Rev 4 and 5.

For example, I can understand and believe as doctrine the biblical statement that Jesus is Lord or that Jesus is the image of the invisible God. But a vision often requires that we put things together and surmise what the implications mean. They aren't the same as doctrinal statements.

I agree. But it is totally incorrect.

First, I am not a Catholic basher. I grew up in a strong Catholic family. Then I got ahold of a Bible. The Catholics do not teach the Word of God.

I'm not a Catholic basher either--sorry if I misunderstood. There are still good Catholics around, though I do believe that Catholic tradition hurts Christians. Catholics, in my understanding, teach both the word of God and Catholic tradition. I don't know any Catholic who is totally ignorant of God's word. They tend to be moral, spiritual people, even among those who are ignorant.

I am still a post trib believer.

I'm glad you believe the Bible. We're not trying to join a group or a school. We're just trying to be honest with God and with ourselves, right?

However, I understand that the tribulation is over at the 6th seal. I also understand who is raptured at the 6th seal. Additionally, I believe there will be a pretribulation rapture. There are two raptures and none of them occur at the end of the trumpets.

I'll say it again because I don't think you understand my position on this. The 6th Seal is opened but does not indicate a chronological sequence between the opening of the 5th and 7th seals. It is only opened in time with respect to the narrative. John himself sees the 6th seal opened between the 5th and 7th seals. But his vision is not equal to the actual history being represented.

The 6th Seal is, I agree, a depiction of Christ's Coming. But it is a *prolepsis,* a vision of the 2nd Coming as if it happens in the 6th Seal. Jesus' 2nd Coming can be presented in any of the 7 seals! It doesn't mean Jesus would come 7 different times! It just means that each vision is showing different aspects of the same 2nd Coming. That's just how I see it--you don't have to agree.

But thanks for the conversation. We have the same Spirit, the same righteousness, the same Christ, the same God. And we do share the same Scriptures--we just have to work at it!

 

[Randy Kluth]

This is why I'm asking you to give the order of events in Revelation. I don't think you are understanding what you are reading.

Try to put Revelation 6 through Revelation 16 in the order of occurrence. If some events happen in the same timeframe just say so. I have yet to see anyone that understands what they are reading.

This would take some time, and I've already spent hours writing about this today. The timing of Revelation is simple. John's time and the 7 churches. Then a future in which Christ is coming to judge the whole world. The final scenario is a 3.5 year reign of Antichrist, followed by a march, a deployment, to Armageddon. Only believers will recognize it, but won't know the exact day of the bloodbath. There are some flashbacks, such as in Rev 12, and there is the common use of OT imagery, now expressing Christian truths. You have to know the Bible very well.

The book of Revelation is not an itinerary. It is a series of visions calling for us to be aware and be ready. Deceptions are all around us, but righteousness is right in front of us. Let's walk in it!

 

[Randy Kluth]

QUOTE

""Jesus said it, and we should be warned. We are *not* to accept any Pretribulational Coming of the Lord because it violates what Jesus warned about us here, which is a false eschatology that presents Christ as coming before his coming with the clouds.""
Rev 14: 14
Acts 1 " like manner"
Mat 24 "before the flood" / mat 24 " one taken"
These 4 and others ,Are not the coming on white horses.
All rapture verses..but demolish all but a pretrib rapture.
Again...we own the debate.
None of you can even begin to change our verses, making your mastery of ignoring and omitting ,tedious.

What you own are non-doctrinal statements that you stuff with your own Pretrib meaning and belief.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

My point, brother, is that visions are not the same thing as a theological statement or a doctrinal statement. When Paul wrote that Jesus is the "image of the invislble God," that was a doctrinal statement. It was also a theological statement.

But when you cite a vision and then demand your particular slant on it be taken as if it is irrefutable, that's not the same thing as explicit doctrinal statements being given by the Bible. What you are *not* giving are these explicit biblical statements that I've requested.

Consequently, I cannot agree with your position. Every explicit biblical statement I read in the Bible about Jesus' Coming is exclusively postribulational. There is not a single reference to Jesus' Coming the 2nd time that is different from this.

Yep. My belief is that the approach we should take is to establish the foundation of our doctrine on clear, straightforward scripture. And only after doing that should we try to interpret the more difficult scriptures contained in prophetic books that undeniably contain a lot of symbolism. Not that they only contain symbolism, but there's still a good amount of it.

But, the pretrib approach is just the opposite. The foundation of their doctrine is based upon interpretations of some of the most highly debatable verses and passages in all of scripture and they force what should be clear and straightforward scriptures to agree with their interpretations of those other highly debatable scriptures.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Did you just contradict yourself? I thought you said:

So which is it?

Both are true. God gives wicked people beliefs that they wish to believe in. They are lies.

But God does not direct us in life through the use of clues or bread crumbs to lead us through a cave. He is the light of the world, and we need to "shout it from the housetops."

 

[Randy Kluth]

Wow that probably the most reasonable thing that you've said in this thread. Toning it down some perhaps? Good. Thank you. I can tone it down too if you guys do.

I'm not a part of a group and do not wish to be grouped with others who share some of my opinions. I've had serious disagreements with some here who currently share my beliefs on Postrib. I do not necessarily share the same style others exhibit.

But I can be overly sharp, for sure. I *always* would like to tone it down unless I think I can shock someone into an awareness of something they appear to be asleep to.

Take care...

 

[WPM]

You think the ones "left behind" are left alive after a pre-trib rapture. Jesus very clearly indicated otherwise.

Luke 17:33 Whoever tries to keep their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life will preserve it. 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.” [36] [e] 37 “Where, Lord?” they asked. He replied, “Where there is a dead body, there the vultures will gather.”

This very clearly indicates that the ones who are not caught up to meet the Lord in the air will be killed, leaving their dead bodies for the vultures to feast on. But, go ahead and keep ignoring the scriptures like this that contradict your view if that's what you want to do. You cherry pick verses out of context while ignoring other verses.

Very well put!