A question about the rapture

[Timtofly]

LOL! :) Yes, I disagree that the battles described in Revelation 19:16-21 and Revelation 20:7-10 are different battles in different places in different times. Look at the result of the battle in both places, Timtofly. In Revelation 19, they were captured and thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with sulfur, and in Revelation 20, fire came down from heaven and consumed them and they were thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur. Very similar, no? Yes, so much as to be the same result. I say you make a false dichotomy between the devil (or dragon) and the beast and the false prophet, Timtofly. You will not accept that; so be it.

The humans were not cast alive into the LOF at Armageddon. Only the beast and FP were. Satan was bound in the pit for a thousand years. That was the result of Armageddon. The humans at Armageddon were not consumed by fire.

"And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God; That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great."

The fowls gorged on the flesh of the dead. Consumed by fire is just that, consumed.

Those at the end of Revelation 20 were not cast into the LOF alive. Their souls stood as the dead before the GWT, but their flesh was consumed.

Consume: (especially of a fire) completely destroy.

Nothing left but ashes. Birds don't eat ashes. Revelation 19, has Satan and company defending Israel, and Jesus comes from heaven to take back the throne.

At the end of Revelation 20, Satan's army marches against Jesus on the throne in Jerusalem. God sends fire from heaven. The defensive and offensive positions are polar opposite. The 2 WW's had more in common than the 2 accounts in Revelation 19 and 20. The only thing they have in common is humans who listen to Satan are destroyed in two totally different ways.

 

[Timtofly]

Okay, well, we disagree on that, too, then… :)


Well, you are, but obviously unintentionally. Or, at the very least, applying your own context, with regard to at least sequence of events, to what I am saying, and that really can’t be done without making what I am saying something very different than what it is.


Hmm, well, no, actually. I cited (twice, at least, in this thread alone, a passage in Matthew 12, not 24 (among others elsewhere ~ John 12, Colossians 2, Revelation 12), namely:

• "But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, 'It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this man casts out demons.' Knowing their thoughts, He said to them, 'Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand. And if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand? And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they will be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can someone enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man?'" Matthew 12:24-29; emphasis mine

I did reference Matthew 24 in another post above, but that was in response to something someone else said about Jesus’s ten virgins parable.


I do say (repeating myself yet again) that Satan was bound at Jesus’s first coming ~ restricted in his ability to deceive the nations… to prevent the spread of the Gospel… If that’s what you mean, then… okay. With regard to Matthew 12, Jesus is presently “plundering the strong man’s (Satan’s) house,” so, necessarily, the “strong man” (Satan) has been bound, else this would not be possible. Just as Jesus said.

As I said to David, Timtofly, so I would say to you also: At the very least, we should be able to agree that none of what we are talking about here is salvific… no “side” of this makes any of us somehow not (or less) saved, not (or less) in Christ, not (or less) having the Holy Spirit, not (or less) Christian, than anyone else. On the millennium and most other matters regarding John’s Revelation, we can agree to disagree, and that’s… okay. :)

Grace and peace to you.

Then obviously if you put Matthew 12 and 24 side by side, it would not work for you, because the Second Coming would not be when you see Satan bound. Matthew 12 is about casting out demons. Matthew 24 is about the Second Coming and casting Satan into the pit, after Jesus cleans up the house.

"Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house."


"Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come. But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up."

There is a reason why every time Jesus is physically on earth Satan is limited in what he can do. But Revelation 20 is more than just being limited. Satan is removed from earth altogether. Your verse does not claim Satan is removed from the earth, just limited. Your version seems to just place Satan under house arrest.

Revelation 20 is not even symbolizing this strongman bound relationship. Jesus is now the strongman of the earth. All kingdoms now belong to Jesus. So casting Satan into the pit is not even the same symbolic notion as Satan is still the one said to have charge over earthly affairs in these two verses. Revelation 20 can only be after the strongman/goodman position has changed hands between Jesus and Satan. Jesus did use symbolism to make a point. There is no symbolism in saying an angel bound Satan in the bottomless pit. We know an angel is real. We know Satan is real. We know the pit is sheol, the place prepared for Satan and his angels. We know the pit was opened in the 5th Trumpet, and still not closed until Revelation 20:3

"And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up."

The reversal of:

"And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit. And he opened the bottomless pit."

So this is two events, witnessed by John, where the pit was opened and then closed. So how was the pit closed 2,000 years before it was even opened? You claimed I was absurd pointing out how in Revelation 12:1-5

"And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born. And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne."

You have this dragon bound before the man child was born or at the least, caught up to heaven. Because that man child was the one entering that Dragons house and binding it.

Yet the dragon represents the kingdoms of earth. Having 7 heads, and it was still only the 4th kingdom at the time of Christ, binding the dragon then was premature. Satan nor the dragon would be bound, until all the kingdoms had run their course. The symbolism of the dragon ends at the end of that last kingdom. Then the dragon is bound, as Satan, as the course of the "house" has left human government, and under full authority of the Lord.

 

[PinSeeker]

You better SEE what the LORD Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit has to say...

LOL! :) Right back atcha... :) But, if you and I never see eye to eye on the particular thing, then... like I said, it's not salvific. It's certainly worth discussing ~ but not arguing about, which it seems some here are wont to do ~ and getting right, for sure, but our salvation does not depend on it.

Revelation 20:1-6 has NOT occurred as yet.

Not... completely... :) But at some point, it will be complete. Then... :)

@PinSeeker believes Revelation 20:1-6 has occurred per erroneous Amil doctrine.

Well, no, not entirely; see above. I suspected that you were not understanding Amillennialism correctly or mischaracterizing it (either purposefully or unintentionally), and it seems I was right about that, too. :)

Nothing May Be Added or Removed

Sure. Agreed. Absolutely.

Grace and peace to you, David.

 

[PinSeeker]

I think you're playing games, and that you well understand what he said. I certainly understood what he said about Rev.20.

I do understand what he said about Revelation 20. So, I was asking him in a pointed way to clarify what he thought I believed. And then he actually clarified later in that post that I responded to what he thought I believed; I just hadn't gotten to that point yet. I don't play games, Davy.

The Rev.20 chapter, for it to have already be fulfilled, then it would mean Satan is no more, and already having been cast into the future "lake of fire". It would also mean that his time of being literally locked in his pit prison during that "thousand years" by Christ and His elect, would be past history also.

Sure.

However, ANY idea that ANY PART of Rev.20 has already happened is ludicrous.

I agree. But to believe that no part of Revelation 20 has occurred and is not ongoing... Well, I wouldn't call it "ludicrous," but that would be... in error. But there is no need to argue about it or get all bent out of shape ~ even to the point of belittling or taking any kind of superior and/or self-righteous or prideful posture toward/over those whom we disagree with ~ over disagreement on it.

To that point, God, through the various writers of the Bible, exhorts and commands us over and over and over again not to do that, at least in my reading. :) I'm sure you will remember Micah 6:8, that God has told us what is good and requires of us, to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with our God. And as Paul writes in Galatians 5:19-23, the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these, and such things will not inherit the kingdom of God, but the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law, and those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires, so, let us not become conceited, provoking one another, envying one another. Now, I added some emphasis, but I surely don't mean to say that any part of the above is more important than another.

You insult your own... intelligence with a silly statement like that about Rev.20.

Hm, you don't see any difference between Satan's ability ~ in the past ~ to "deceive the nations," which is exactly what Revelation 20:3 says, "so that he might not deceive the nations any longer," and Satan's influence regarding individuals, either. Well, okay. Despite what you may think at this point, I'm not "looking down" on you or anyone else here, but... I mean, yeah, okay.

No, I'm not insulting anybody's intelligence, and surely not my own, unless you think me to be some kind of masochist, I guess... I mean, like Paul said in Ephesians 5, no one ever hated his own flesh... :) Ah, I guess it's kind of like beauty at least to an extent ~ in the eye of the beholder, as it were, but that's neither here nor there... :)

The Scripture is very clear...

Agreed.

The devil will NOT be able to deceive anyone during that whole "thousand years" period. That is what that above Scripture is declaring.

Disagree. We both think it is clear. But, we disagree on what Satan is not able to do, what he is bound from doing... and when that "thousand years" is, and how long it actually is. I mean, that's all okay, really. Our salvation doesn't depend on it. And, we shouldn't get so personally invested in it as to be all bent out of shape when someone doesn't agree with us on the exact details and implications of it. But this topic certainly does that to people, unfortunately. Not that God meant it to do that, of course, but it does.

Now if you don't really believe God's Word as written there...

Yeah, stop right there, because such a supposition is quite ridiculous. I merely say (again) that what you and some others here think is correct regarding what God, through John, is revealing there is to a significant degree incorrect. And that really shouldn't offend you or the others. I mean, just accept that there is disagreement; why is that so hard? Why is it such a personal affront? Well, I think I know the answer to that... :) As I said, this topic certainly does that to people, unfortunately.

Grace and peace to you, Davy. Really (as if I should have to say that). Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

Just a couple of things and... it is enough. Wow.

The fowls gorged on the flesh of the dead. Consumed by fire is just that, consumed.

Revelation is not a documentary. :) And, related, I guess, Revelation, while certainly relating to a large degree, history, is apocalyptic literature, not a history textbook, and should be read according to the former rather than the latter.

Those at the end of Revelation 20 were not cast into the LOF alive. Their souls stood as the dead before the GWT, but their flesh was consumed.

Consume: (especially of a fire) completely destroy.

Nothing left but ashes. Birds don't eat ashes. Revelation 19, has Satan and company defending Israel, and Jesus comes from heaven to take back the throne.

At the end of Revelation 20, Satan's army marches against Jesus on the throne in Jerusalem. God sends fire from heaven. The defensive and offensive positions are polar opposite. The 2 WW's had more in common than the 2 accounts in Revelation 19 and 20. The only thing they have in common is humans who listen to Satan are destroyed in two totally different ways.

I don't disagree, just... not in the way you want me to agree, Timtofly. And regarding 'consume' and 'completely destroy,' so you're an annihilationist.... Hm.

Then obviously if you put Matthew 12 and 24 side by side, it would not work for you, because the Second Coming would not be when you see Satan bound. Matthew 12 is about casting out demons. Matthew 24 is about the Second Coming and casting Satan into the pit, after Jesus cleans up the house.

"Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house."


"Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come. But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up."

There is a reason why every time Jesus is physically on earth Satan is limited in what he can do. But Revelation 20 is more than just being limited. Satan is removed from earth altogether. Your verse does not claim Satan is removed from the earth, just limited. Your version seems to just place Satan under house arrest.

Revelation 20 is not even symbolizing this strongman bound relationship. Jesus is now the strongman of the earth. All kingdoms now belong to Jesus. So casting Satan into the pit is not even the same symbolic notion as Satan is still the one said to have charge over earthly affairs in these two verses. Revelation 20 can only be after the strongman/goodman position has changed hands between Jesus and Satan. Jesus did use symbolism to make a point. There is no symbolism in saying an angel bound Satan in the bottomless pit. We know an angel is real. We know Satan is real. We know the pit is sheol, the place prepared for Satan and his angels. We know the pit was opened in the 5th Trumpet, and still not closed until Revelation 20:3

"And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up."

The reversal of:

"And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit. And he opened the bottomless pit."

So this is two events, witnessed by John, where the pit was opened and then closed. So how was the pit closed 2,000 years before it was even opened? You claimed I was absurd pointing out how in Revelation 12:1-5

"And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born. And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne."

You have this dragon bound before the man child was born or at the least, caught up to heaven. Because that man child was the one entering that Dragons house and binding it.

Yet the dragon represents the kingdoms of earth. Having 7 heads, and it was still only the 4th kingdom at the time of Christ, binding the dragon then was premature. Satan nor the dragon would be bound, until all the kingdoms had run their course. The symbolism of the dragon ends at the end of that last kingdom. Then the dragon is bound, as Satan, as the course of the "house" has left human government, and under full authority of the Lord.

Ugh. There is much here to take issue with and/or correct, but... I'll refrain. I'll just say you obviously didn't pay any attention, for whatever reason matters not ~ to what I have said about the structure of Revelation and its cycles of judgments. Purposefully, I think. That's fine... I understand your thoughts. :)

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Ronald D Milam]

If you were wrong to begin with almost 40 years ago and you never changed your views then it just means you've been wrong for almost 40 years. There are "preachers of nigh 40 years" who disagree with you, so, apparently, the number of years you preach doesn't determine how much discernment you have.

IF................a rabbit bust his behind every time he jumps.........Your very name shows you know nothing about bible eschatology.

 

[Davy]

Just a couple of things and... it is enough. Wow.


Revelation is not a documentary. :) And, related, I guess, Revelation, while certainly relating to a large degree, history, is apocalyptic literature, not a history textbook, and should be read according to the former rather than the latter.

Those who use terms like "apocalyptic literature" often apply to those who just treat God's written Word like ink on paper, no different than man's literature.

That kind of thinking has never applied to God's written Word, because God's Holy Writ is unlike any other... type of known literature, simply because it was given by God to men via The Holy Spirit. University religious philosophers have tried... to categorize it among men's literature, but that only reveals how God has NOT given those who think that His Holy Spirit to be able to understand it.

This is why any of Christ's uneducated Apostles with their understanding in God's Word could immediately dispel the whims of the university educated who think they know, but really do not.

 

[PinSeeker]

Those who use terms like "apocalyptic literature" often apply to those who just treat God's written Word like ink on paper, no different than man's literature.

No... but it is what it is. The bible has several different genres within it, and apocalyptic literature is one of them. As opposed to history, poetry, and wisdom literature, which we see in various places in Scripture also. It is what it is, and reading it as a Dick and Jane first grade primer is... well, I wouldn't recommend it. :) Not to make it sound like it's harder to understand than other parts of Scripture, it should just be read much differently... with a much different sort of focus ~ because, Davy, that was obviously the manner in which it was written, the manner in which it was conveyed by the Holy Spirit through, in the case of Daniel and Revelation, Daniel and John, respectively.

...only reveals how God has NOT given those who think that His Holy Spirit to be able to understand it.

I wouldn't be so quick to judge the heart, Davy. We don't see the heart as God does. But hey, you're your own man. It bothers me not; my identity is in Christ.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[rebuilder 454]

Not in the sense that the church is "removed" from anything. The parable illustrates the suddenness of the end, for sure. As in the days of Noah and the suddenness of the flood that came upon the earth, which Jesus states late in Matthew 24, just a few sentences before His telling of the parable of the ten virgins.


Well, if whoever you were talking to here means to say ethnic Jews only, then I would agree with you. But it is, actually, a Jewish only dynamic, in the sense of who God's Israel is, and who are the true Jews. Paul expounds on this in various places in many of his letters, but never more clearly than in the latter part of Romans 2 and then Romans 9-11. God's Israel includes both ethnic Jew and Gentile... people whom He calls, an innumerable multitude, from every tongue, tribe, and nation. These are Jews inwardly (rather than outwardly) ~ circumcision being a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter ~ whose praise is not from man but from God (Romans 2:28-29). Not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring (Romans 9:6-9). And finally, a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in... and in this way all Israel will be saved (Romans 11:25-26).

Grace and peace to you.

Not in the sense that the church is "removed" from anything. The parable illustrates the suddenness of the end, for sure. As in the days of Noah and the suddenness of the flood that came upon the earth, which Jesus states late in Matthew 24, just a few sentences before His telling of the parable of the ten virgins.

Noah and family gather into the ark. You ae missing something. "going into" is waht the rapture is. And "before the flood" is NOT POSTRIB, by even the cleverest postriiber. Not to mention,when Noah returned postrib, he returned from being TAKEN UP over a mile into the clouds.

Not convinced?
"Ark" is a type of heaven. Noah IN THE ARK for the duration of the great tribulation, or wrath of God.
39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.
43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.
44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.
Whew, that is a LOT to ignore. pun intended.
Speaking of which, Jesus gives you such a no brainer with Lot, it is crazy how you guys miss the obvious.

Well, if whoever you were talking to here means to say ethnic Jews only, then I would agree with you. But it is, actually, a Jewish only dynamic, in the sense of who God's Israel is, and who are the true Jews. Paul expounds on this in various places in many of his letters, but never more clearly than in the latter part of Romans 2 and then Romans 9-11. God's Israel includes both ethnic Jew and Gentile... people whom He calls, an innumerable multitude, from every tongue, tribe, and nation. These are Jews inwardly (rather than outwardly) ~ circumcision being a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter ~ whose praise is not from man but from God (Romans 2:28-29). Not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring (Romans 9:6-9). And finally, a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in... and in this way all Israel will be saved (Romans 11:25-26).

the gathering of the bride is the rapture.
By you making it a Jewish only event, you omit the obvious and go with a vague whitewashing.

 

[PinSeeker]

Noah and family gather into the ark. You ae missing something. "going into" is waht the rapture is. And "before the flood" is NOT POSTRIB, by even the cleverest postriiber. Not to mention,when Noah returned postrib, he returned from being TAKEN UP over a mile into the clouds.

Not convinced?

Of what you say? No... :)

"Ark" is a type of heaven.

Ah, no, the Noah's ark, Rebuilder, is a type/shadow of Christ. Yes, the Old Testament is filled with types and shadows of Christ, and sometimes these types/shadows are inanimate objects (the ark, the rock Moses struck with his staff, the bronze serpent in the wilderness), sometimes these types/shadows are food (manna from heaven in the desert), and sometimes even animals (the lamb without blemish). And yes, very often, these types/shadows are people (e.g., Joseph in Egypt, Boaz, and many others). Jesus is our Ark, Who carries us through the waters/storm. God never promises to remove us from trouble, but to walk with us through it, as in Psalm 23:

"The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want. He makes me lie down in green pastures. He leads me beside still waters. He restores my soul. He leads me in paths of righteousness for His name’s sake.​

​

Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me. You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies; you anoint my head with oil; my cup overflows.​

​

Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the house of the LORD forever."​

the gathering of the bride is the rapture.

It will certainly be a rapturous ~ a sudden seizing moment ~ for sure, as I have said, which, and Noah's flood and what is described in the parable of the ten virgins certainly portray this. But, no "rapture" in the sense that many understand it to be.

By you making it a Jewish only event, you omit the obvious...

Well, if you're implying the ethnic Jews only, then what you're saying I do not do in any sense. I "omit" nothing.

...and go with a vague whitewashing.

LOL! Yyyyyyeah. Don't want to do that, do we? <chuckles>

Grace and peace to you, Rebuilder.

 

[rebuilder 454]

Of what you say? No... :)


Ah, no, the Noah's ark, Rebuilder, is a type/shadow of Christ. Yes, the Old Testament is filled with types and shadows of Christ, and sometimes these types/shadows are inanimate objects (the ark, the rock Moses struck with his staff, the bronze serpent in the wilderness), sometimes these types/shadows are food (manna from heaven in the desert), and sometimes even animals (the lamb without blemish). And yes, very often, these types/shadows are people (e.g., Joseph in Egypt, Boaz, and many others). Jesus is our Ark, Who carries us through the waters/storm. God never promises to remove us from trouble, but to walk with us through it, as in Psalm 23:

"The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want. He makes me lie down in green pastures. He leads me beside still waters. He restores my soul. He leads me in paths of righteousness for His name’s sake.​

​

Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me. You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies; you anoint my head with oil; my cup overflows.​

​

Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the house of the LORD forever."​

It will certainly be a rapturous ~ a sudden seizing moment ~ for sure, as I have said, which, and Noah's flood and what is described in the parable of the ten virgins certainly portray this. But, no "rapture" in the sense that many understand it to be.


Well, if you're implying the ethnic Jews only, then what you're saying I do not do in any sense. I "omit" nothing.


LOL! Yyyyyyeah. Don't want to do that, do we? <chuckles>

Grace and peace to you, Rebuilder.

You never did unpack it.
You voided it as some Jewish only gathering.
It has components.
One of which is a 50/50 gathering.
Half are left behind.
The one taken dynamic is the same ratio, same dynamic of half left.
mat 25 is not a Jewish gathering.
You have to understand first fruits as part of the equation.
The Gentile bride first fruits is Jesus and those resurrected alongside to heaven at HIS resurrection 2000 yrs ago.
The bride is the main harvest following firstfruits. (harvest beng 3 or 4 parts.)

The 144k are declared as first fruit JEWS
The Jewish harvest is the 144k, followed by the messianic Jews Main harvest of rev 14, gathered right after first fruits.
So the 10 virgin story has nothing to do with the Jewish gathering.
Anyway, you ignore the vivid obvious of the parable depicting the rapture
SMH