Why I believe in the rapture.

[Curtis]

I Agree that the second coming is a single second return, and my Prewrath views account for this. The pretribbers have to add multiple comings and multiple raptures/ resurrection to make their theory work, Prewrathers do not have this issue, but this is another debate. What I do separate is the day of Christ and the Day of the Lord, the Wrath of the Lamb and the Wrath of God, and am in agreement with the pretribbers on some of these distinctions. Judgment Begins at the House of God, The day of Christ is the rapture of the church, but also the separation of the wheat and tares before the rapture which is the wrath of the Lamb. These events are church specific the House of God, we are the temple. the wrath of God and day of the Lord is for the Wicked of the World, and the righteous will not witness these events. So You see we are communicating on the topic.



The reason why I brought up this diversion is because I have dealt with many who hold your views (amill. if I am correct, please confirm or deny?) and many of them rely on the higher criticism of Graf and Wellhausen to argue their points. I have been down that road before and it is the ultimate distraction to arriving at the truth of the word of God and leads to endless circles and rabbit holes which only bring confusion and Babel to the church. In fact many of them deny the concept of the day of Christ as the proper translation of 1 Thessalonians 2:2, and their error begins there. In relying on this higher criticism their faith is in the philosophy of man which is contrary to the Wisdom of God and because of this they often demean those who are Spirit taught as being naive and or irrational. But the fact is the Gospel is foolishness to the Greek which is the foundation of western Philosophy and Higher criticism, thus for myself and for you to communicate without it descending into this bickering of "eisegesis, and Exegesis, and accusation of straw men and all the Philosophical fallacies" That the Gospel is based on then it will not be worth my time and effort to debate you. For the Gospel is foolishness to the wise of this world, and the rapture is is not a logical conclusion derived from scripture, but one that is revealed by the Spirit in all its intricacies and timing to those who are being taught by the Spirit in the Wisdom of God.

I Myself am a premillenialist, and scripture is clear on when this millennium begins, at the second coming of Christ, This point has been rehashed over and over again on this post, and is itself contrary to the Word of God yet many here twist scripture to make it fit. You as a Amill. see the short season of Satan as described in revelation 12 as the same short season that comes after the millennium if I am correct? I On the other hand see these as two short separate seasons one referring to the 42 month rule of the man the first beast, and the other when Satan is loosed from being chained in the bottomless pit and all the souls of them who rejected the Gospel with him as a part of the second resurrection of damnation, when death and hell are cast into the lake of fire where the beast and the false prophet already have been for a thousand years. Sure, there are nuances and exceptions to this such as those written in the book of life and who they are, But if this is the resurrection the faithful and the saints you are waiting for, Then you are missing out on the blessed Hope of the second coming of Christ.

We definitely agree there. Scripture actually proves the mid trib, pre mark, pre wrath, premillennial rapture.

 

[MatthewG]

Must be

 

[Curtis]

Yay! I'm so happy. I will be able to do what the Lord really wants His people to do on earth. Matthew 5:4-16, John 15:27
Eternal harp practice for you, Gismys!

John 14:1-3;
The word "mansions" sends the imagination of the modern reader fluttering. Yes, the idea of a large palatial home in Heaven sounds wonderful, but that is not at all what is being promised here. In Christ's time the word "mansion" was used to mean a tent. Like the ones the Roman military would use when they were marching as they moved from place to place. A very small, easy to carry dwelling place. A tarp with a stick really. Not very grand. A "mansion" actually became a unit of measurement based on how far the army could march before they set up this tent at night.

In the time of the translation of the KJV a mansion had come to mean an apartment house. A house with many dwelling places in it. Thinking that they recognized the message being conferred here, that the Father's house has many dwelling places in it, like an apartment house, they interpretatively translated mone to mansions. But really they just butchered the text to now read as if to say "The Father's House" (an apartment house with many rooms) contains many mansions (apartment houses with many rooms).
A mansion as referring to a large palatial single family house is a fairly modern definition. This is classic example of how meanings have changed over the last 400 years. We should ignore ‘mansions’ and substitute the word 'rooms' in vs 2. Then read the rest of the chapter soberly to understand what Jesus is saying. He does a long Q & A on what was said in vs 1- 3 in the rest of the chapter. We don't have to interpret what he says, he plainly tells us the interpretation.

Those found worthy will inhabit those rooms in the new Jerusalem; AFTER the Millennium. Revelation 21:1-7

Altar, not alter!
In heaven, as stated in Revelation 19:1. They are dead people and it is only their souls, their spiritual entity, is kept in that place of honor. God does allow them to cry out at times, but it isn't until Jesus Returns that those killed during the final 42 months before the Return, will be the ones who will be brought back to life. Revelation 20:4.
The rest await the GWT Judgment, after the Millennium. Then; they will all be conferred with Eternal life.
ALL the dead are in 'soul sleep' and know nothing. Eccl 9:5-6, Isaiah 38:9-20

In 1 Corinthians 15:12-19, Paul does not say when the resurrection will happen. We get that information from Revelation 20:11-15
AFTER the Millennium!

In Luke 21, Jesus describes the great tribulation, which is the last half of the tribulation, then right afterward says:

Luk 21:36 Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

The mid trib rapture will take us out of the great trib, before the mark occurs - because the great tribulation is the time of Jacobs trouble - non believing Israel, who will have to deal with the false Messiah that they accepted as genuine.

At the rapture the age of the gentiles is over, then comes the time of Jacobs trouble.

 

[Waiting on him]

Must be

One day when they stop chasing one another’s tails Gods gonna open their eyes.

 

[Waiting on him]

Must be

Although i really wish they were correct and Jesus was returning to take them somewhere far away, where I could no longer listen to their error, it’s only wishful thinking.

 

[Curtis]

Sorry but you are confusing tribulation with wrath. Not the same thing. Read the letters to the seven churches in Revelation chapters two and three. These are church ages and the last four are the start of denominations. Thyatira is the RCC and Orthodox. The last four overlap each other and go to the second coming. When you read them you will see that some of them still need to overcome and repent. That is what the Great Tribulation is for, (if living), and also for the salvation of all Israel when their partial blindness is removed.

James 1:2-4
My brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various trials, knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience. But let patience have its perfect work, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking nothing.

The church has endured tribulation from the very beginning, so the James text doesn’t prove we are going through the great tribulation:

Joh 16:33 These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.

Act 14:22 Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.

Rom 5:3 And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience;

The great tribulation is the time of Jacobs trouble, (Israel), not for the gentile church - the age of the gentiles is over at the mid trib rapture.

The time of Jacobs trouble is for unbelieving Israel to deal with the false messiah that they’ve accepted as genuine - the Antichrist.

 

[MatthewG]

Waiting on him… lol I shouldn’t really be online. It was good to see and hear from you today though. You have a good night.

 

[Curtis]

Rapture, second coming, day of the lord


The key timelines in establishing the mid trib rapture are: the son of perdition, aka the abomination of desolation - and the Day of the Lord.


The son of perdition is revealed in the middle of the 70th week, per Daniel, (mid trib) - and then scriptures show that the second coming of Christ and the day of the Lord occur together, such as Zechariah 14:1 The day of the Lord comes, and so does Jesus with all the saints, in 14:5. (Day of the Lord, then rapture)


In Matthew 24. we have the son of perdition in verse 15, the day of the lord in verse 29, and the second coming of Jesus in verse 30. (Mid trib rapture)


In Luke 21 we have the abomination of desolation in verse 20, the Day of the Lord in verse 25, and the rapture in verse 27. (Mid trib rapture)


In 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4, Paul states that the Day of the Lord, and our being gathered together with Jesus at His coming, cannot occur until the son of perdition is revealed (mid trib)


This puts the rapture AT His second coming, AFTER the son of perdition is revealed - which happens in the middle of Daniels 70th week, per Daniel - right smack in the middle of the tribulation.

To pre-empt those who don’t accept that the Day of the Lord is simultaneous with the second coming of Christ- when we back up one chapter to 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10 under the heading THE JUDGMENT AT CHRISTS COMING - it shows unequivocally that at His coming, He comes with flaming fire, taking vengeance, and with destruction - which is what happens at the Day of the Lord.


Then there’s corroborating fact that Jesus warns us that BOTH the Day of the Lord, and His return, will come suddenly, as a thief in the night.

1 Thessalonians 5:2 ; Revelation 16:15


Therefore scripture is clear that the rapture is at His second coming, after the son of perdition is revealed, and that the Day of the Lord is simultaneous with the rapture.

 

[Naomi25]

Why do you add the words "both living"? Only the dead are mentioned in Revelation 20:11-15. Also it never claims they are resurrected. You claim a link is tenuous about the rapture, then you add to Scripture words and thoughts that are not even there. No living humans stand before the GWT, but that is a human assumption. No dead are described as resurrected, but that is a human assumption. The dead can stand before God, just as easily as souls slain for the Word of God can put on a robe of white (the 5th Seal). Many want to claim a point about the GWT, but then reject the same point about another verse.

You’re correct in saying that Revelation 20 only mentions the dead. However, that is not the only place that mentions the resurrection of the dead, or the resurrection of people already dead with those who are still alive. Let’s look at the passages that do and see what we can deduce from them:

John 5:28-29
[28] Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice [29] and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.

Daniel 12:1-3
The Time of the End
“At that time shall arise Michael, the great prince who has charge of your people. And there shall be a time of trouble, such as never has been since there was a nation till that time. But at that time your people shall be delivered, everyone whose name shall be found written in the book. [2] And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. [3] And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky above; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever.

We can see that both these passages place the resurrection of both the just AND the unjust together.

1 Thessalonians 4:15-17
For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.

1 Corinthians 15:51-52
Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed.

And in these verses we see that the dead “in Christ” will be raised at the same time that the Rapture happens…at the resurrection.
Thus, when we look at passages like Matt 25, the Final Judgment, where Jesus judges the living, and Rev 20, The Great White Throne Judgment, where the dead are judged, we can extrapolate from the verses above that these are done together, as both living and dead, just and unjust, are done at the same time.

This is not my “assumption” of these verses, but simple deduction as I lay them out. Unless you believe they say something different? Does John and Daniel NOT say the just and unjust are raised at the same time? Do 1 Thess 4 and 1 Cor 15 tell us that the living and dead are NOT resurrected at the same time?

The last verse of chapter 20 states:

15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

If there is a resurrection at the GWT, it would be given to those who are found written in the book of life. This means those dead were judged. Their name was found. But the decision was made to remove their name. We are not told if that is God's decision or each dead person's decision to remain in the book of life. There is no reasonable explanation to claim their name was never there, and the decision was made to add it to the book of life. The point is made they were never allowed the choice to reject God.

Excuse me. You point a finger at me for “adding to scripture words and thoughts that are not there”, and it appears to me that is what you have done here. ‘The decision was made to remove their name’? Really? Where do you find that? Extrapolate that?
All the text tells us is that the ‘dead were raised’ and that they were judged based on whether or not their names where written in the Lambs book of life. The only bit of extra detail we are given is that those who are judged are done so ‘according to what they had done’.
As far as “if there is a resurrection at the GWT”…well, these people are being judged, yes? If they are not found in the Lambs book of Life they are thrown into the lake of fire? Well…if we look back up at John or Daniel, that speaks of the dead being raised, the “resurrection of judgment…everlasting contempt”….sounds sort of familiar, don’t you think?
The unjust dead must receive a resurrection as well….the bible certainly speaks of it, only in terms of punishment, anguish, torment.

We have been taught that those who reject God do not get a second chance. If the dead at the GWT are judged according to the book of life it is certainly not about a second chance to be added. It would be the first chance to be removed. Adding a name would go against the doctrine of a second chance.

Universalism would teach that all should be allowed to be in the book of life, even if they rejected God and had been removed.

However since a name would still be there, even for those in sheol, the decision has to be made to remove it, or give that dead soul a resurrection. Only then can it be said, the rest of the dead lived not again until the GWT. Verse 5 is not a guarantee any will live again. It is a statement they have to wait until the GWT, if they do live again. They can only be resurrected and live again if their name is still found in the book of life. It is not added to the book of life.

15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

The point is a name was found. If a name is found, those dead would no longer be standing before the GWT, but they would be given life and resurrected. The alternative was being cast into the Lake of Fire.


The pattern was set in verse 4:

The thrones, the judgment, then life was given. Only then declared a resurrection. At the GWT, the judgment, and only then life declared. The dead are not given life to stand in judgment. The dead are given life after the judgment.

I’m sorry, it seem to me that you’ve tied a very twisty sort of knot here that makes not much sense. And once more, the whole ‘name being there, name being taken away’ seems a lot like adding to scripture or reading into scripture…which you were waggling your finger at me over.

 

[Naomi25]

Where is the doctrine of apocalyptic genre found in God's Word?

Your assumption is based on human made understanding.

Okay….we need a forehead slap emoji.
“Apocalyptic genre” is not a “doctrine”. It’s a genre. Hence…”genre”. So….if someone told you to read Psalms as a general poetry genre….would you scowl at them and tell them that “poetry is a doctrine of man and not in Gods word!”

A genre is just a style or type of literature. It helps us determine HOW to read the text before us. History, poetry, prophetic….or apocalyptic.

 

[Naomi25]

The rapture and Second Coming is the same event. No one can figure out and claim the day and hour of either. So the Second Coming is not in chapter 16 nor 19. That event is planned down to the day, and the hour.

I agree, the Rapture and the second coming are the same event.

 

[farouk]

I agree, the Rapture and the second coming are the same event.

@Naomi25 I guess the question revolves around whether in Scripture Israel and the church are really one and the same entity. (1 Corinthians 10.32).

 

[Naomi25]

I Agree that the second coming is a single second return, and my Prewrath views account for this. The pretribbers have to add multiple comings and multiple raptures/ resurrection to make their theory work, Prewrathers do not have this issue, but this is another debate. What I do separate is the day of Christ and the Day of the Lord, the Wrath of the Lamb and the Wrath of God, and am in agreement with the pretribbers on some of these distinctions. Judgment Begins at the House of God, The day of Christ is the rapture of the church, but also the separation of the wheat and tares before the rapture which is the wrath of the Lamb. These events are church specific the House of God, we are the temple. the wrath of God and day of the Lord is for the Wicked of the World, and the righteous will not witness these events. So You see we are communicating on the topic.

Prewrath is not something I’ve studied much of, I confess…but…how can you have a single return of Christ unless the wrath is poured out at the very end? Most ‘prewrathers’ I’ve come across have the wrath being poured out at differing points in the tribulation, but not right at the end…as that would just make them post-tribbers.
Again…not sure what you mean by there being a difference between the ‘day of the Lord’ and the ‘day of Christ’. Seems to me that without decent scriptural evidence, that is just a bit like Dispensationalists arguing a difference between Christ’s two comings, even thought the bible doesn’t seem to make that separation for us.
I’m happy for you to spell it out…I’ve not come across this before. Thanks.

The reason why I brought up this diversion is because I have dealt with many who hold your views (amill. if I am correct, please confirm or deny?) and many of them rely on the higher criticism of Graf and Wellhausen to argue their points. I have been down that road before and it is the ultimate distraction to arriving at the truth of the word of God and leads to endless circles and rabbit holes which only bring confusion and Babel to the church. In fact many of them deny the concept of the day of Christ as the proper translation of 1 Thessalonians 2:2, and their error begins there. In relying on this higher criticism their faith is in the philosophy of man which is contrary to the Wisdom of God and because of this they often demean those who are Spirit taught as being naive and or irrational. But the fact is the Gospel is foolishness to the Greek which is the foundation of western Philosophy and Higher criticism, thus for myself and for you to communicate without it descending into this bickering of "eisegesis, and Exegesis, and accusation of straw men and all the Philosophical fallacies" That the Gospel is based on then it will not be worth my time and effort to debate you. For the Gospel is foolishness to the wise of this world, and the rapture is is not a logical conclusion derived from scripture, but one that is revealed by the Spirit in all its intricacies and timing to those who are being taught by the Spirit in the Wisdom of God.

Yes, I am Amill…although, while I do find myself sitting in that position because I find it the best ‘system’ to explain what I see in scripture, I by no means feel it is without its flaws, or am closed to the possibilities of being led somewhere else. I argue hard for what I see as a faithful reading of scripture, but, when it comes down to it, just want the truth and care little for labels, whatever they may be.
I’ve never heard of those fellows, Graf and Wellhausen, sorry, so am not familiar with their arguments or strategies. Nor am I familiar with the issue you seem to be referring about in regards to 1 Thess 2:2.
I can tell you this: I’m not interested in learning about how Greek philosophers might have considered or even contributed to biblical thought. I’m more interested in learning how the people to whom it was initially written thought and saw things. Their world view and way of thinking would have much more of an impact upon the authors intent and tone, I believe.

. I Myself am a premillenialist, and scripture is clear on when this millennium begins, at the second coming of Christ, This point has been rehashed over and over again on this post, and is itself contrary to the Word of God yet many here twist scripture to make it fit. You as a Amill. see the short season of Satan as described in revelation 12 as the same short season that comes after the millennium if I am correct? I On the other hand see these as two short separate seasons one referring to the 42 month rule of the man the first beast, and the other when Satan is loosed from being chained in the bottomless pit and all the souls of them who rejected the Gospel with him as a part of the second resurrection of damnation, when death and hell are cast into the lake of fire where the beast and the false prophet already have been for a thousand years. Sure, there are nuances and exceptions to this such as those written in the book of life and who they are, But if this is the resurrection the faithful and the saints you are waiting for, Then you are missing out on the blessed Hope of the second coming of Christ.

I believe there is plenty of biblical evidence and arguments to make for a non-literal millennium. One that could be know. Which I could get into, should you wish me to. It’s time consuming, so I won’t unless the conversation compels it.
However, I should say….while I feel that there is plenty to support it, I’m not dogmatic on it. I mean…really? Why should I be? If I’m right, when Christ returns, he’ll usher in eternity. Awesome. If I’m wrong, when he returns he’ll set up an earthly kingdom where things will be…perhaps not perfect, but pretty darn. So, in my mind, it’s sort of a win/win. So, I don’t really get worked up about it all that much.

 

[Jay Ross]

Go for it if you can. I have observed, over time, many of the fallacies that you have published believing them to be also true. You can start wherever you please, but please quote scripture and not just your opinion. Then we will have a solid foundation to have a conversation with.

FALLACY #1: COMBINING THE RAPTURE AND THE SECOND COMING

The Resurrection/Rapture is strictly for the saints where Christ comes in "the air" and returns with all the saints in their resurrected and/or transformed glorified bodies. The Second Coming and the judgment of the unsaved and ungodly are two different events AFTER the Resurrection/Rapture. So you have made a mishmash of four different things.

FALLACY #2. THE SAINTS ARE DEAD AFTER THE RESURRECTION/RAPTURE

How in the world will anyone be dead after the Resurrection/Rapture, since all the saints will be in Heaven?

FALLACY #3. THE RESURRECTION/RAPTURE IS NOT ONE EVENT

The dead in Christ are the souls and spirits of the saints who died in Christ and are now in Heaven. Jesus will bring them to earth in order to take up their resurrected bodies and return to Heaven. Within nanoseconds the saints who are alive at that time will be transformed, perfected, and receive their glorious bodies to dwell in Heaven. All of this is one event at the Resurrection/Rapture when they are all "caught up together" to meet the Lord in the air.

This will be at the Millennium, and later on after the New Heavens and the New Earth have been established. In between there will be the battle of Gog and Magog, the final doom of Satan, the Great White Throne Judgment, the supernatural burning up of the earth and its atmosphere. Only then will the eternal Kingdom of God be literally established on earth. So the Millennium is a preview.

Enoch111, you have presented your opinions and have not presented any scriptural justifications for you opinions.

I await your expansion on your opinions by providing the confirming scriptures.

Shalom

 

[Enoch111]

Enoch111, you have presented your opinions and have not presented any scriptural justifications for you opinions.

Those who know their Bibles will not see that as "opinions". Everything is based upon Bible facts. No need for lengthy quotations.

 

[Naomi25]

@Naomi25 I guess the question revolves around whether in Scripture Israel and the church are really one and the same entity. (1 Corinthians 10.32).

And I think that also depends on how you define it all.
Are you talking about National Israel? Or Jews who come to Christ? Because I think, without a doubt, that the NT tells us that anyone, Jew or Gentile, who comes to Christ…IS part of the Church.
But…I do believe that Paul still speaks of National Israel as apart from the Church…and…even apart from the unsaved Gentiles.
However…I’m not convinced that this body of Jews calls for the Church to be Raptured. I see no evidence of that. Only God’s faithfulness to save them. But that very promise is given by ‘grafting them’ back onto the same tree that Paul has been using to explain the elect….the church….the saved Jews and Gentiles. Therefore, rather than the Church being Raptured out, it seems Paul is telling us that as God redeems National Israel at the end, that “tree” will swell as the natural branches are grafted back on.

 

[Jay Ross]

Those who know their Bibles will not see that as "opinions". Everything is based upon Bible facts. No need for lengthy quotations.

So you are not prepared to back up your opinions with the scriptural references that support your opinions. As such I can only assume that you have no earthly understanding on the things of God and what He has said will happen in the days to come.

The ball is really in your court to support your opinions with scripture, without ducking for cover with your feeble excuse that those who know their bible will not see it as "opinions."

I would counter your above statement, with: - "That those who know their Bibles will see that your expressed opinions are flawed as they are not based upon the Scriptures, but on the hoped for escape that is promised in the Pre-trib fallacy."

Shalom.

 

[Truth7t7]

It would seem that the context of Matthew 24 would be after the church has gone.

Church Gone, How?

 

[Curtis]

Okay….we need a forehead slap emoji.
“Apocalyptic genre” is not a “doctrine”. It’s a genre. Hence…”genre”. So….if someone told you to read Psalms as a general poetry genre….would you scowl at them and tell them that “poetry is a doctrine of man and not in Gods word!”

A genre is just a style or type of literature. It helps us determine HOW to read the text before us. History, poetry, prophetic….or apocalyptic.

Not to mention that unlike what most people think, apocalypse does not mean cataclysmic disaster or war, it means a REVELATION, a revealing.

So in reality the movie Apocalypse Now really means Revelation Now.

 

[Timtofly]

Okay….we need a forehead slap emoji.
“Apocalyptic genre” is not a “doctrine”. It’s a genre. Hence…”genre”. So….if someone told you to read Psalms as a general poetry genre….would you scowl at them and tell them that “poetry is a doctrine of man and not in Gods word!”

A genre is just a style or type of literature. It helps us determine HOW to read the text before us. History, poetry, prophetic….or apocalyptic.

I know what genre is. Your explanation turned it into a doctrine that one cannot take Revelation as literal. It is literal at times. If you claim that it cannot be, that is a doctrine of forced interpretation.