Before the flood is actually "after"

[Randy Kluth]

Nope
I am saying what is written.
It says the AC is revealed before the rapture.
That is what it says.
I am saying the exact same thing.
So you hit all around that fact but miss.

If that's all you're saying, we agree. The Antichrist is revealed, but is also *destroyed* at the Coming of Christ. You skip over the "destroyed" part!

QUOTE
""You confuse symbolic scenes with real history. You confuse one example with another example, and miss the entire point.""

JESUS used them side by side.
Nobody is saying they are not 2 different stories.
But play it out
Which one of the "before judgement" analogies DO we not watch and be ready for what is written???
Hello..it is written AT HIS COMING ( show me your method for changing what is written).

As I told you, they are different stories. The analogy of the Flood and Sodom's destruction are being confused with Christ's Coming by you. Obviously, they are different stories and cannot be compared in their historical details. But the point of the comparison is explicity to show the bad moral condition of the world prior to major judgment and to the need for the saints to continue living in righteousness in order to be distinguished from the objects of this judgment.

Instead of seeing this point of the comparison you compare details that are relevant only to the historical context of each story. In trying to make them compare you misuse the proper comparison to extend well beyond the intended purpose of the comparison.

As I said, the gathering of Lot's family and the gathering of Noah's family prior to judgment is relative to their own stories, and each group was distinguished from the judgment against the wicked in different ways. Lot's family was called out of the city before judgment fell. Noah's family was called in the ark before the rain came down.

But in the example of Christ's Coming, the saints are gathered *at* the Coming of Christ. The object was not to find unity in the precise *circumstances* of how each group was delivered, but rather, to show that in each context, the righteous were distinguished from the wicked and excluded as objects of judgment. But you make it all about the time and circumstance of each story, which was not the obvious purpose of the comparison.

Even though it says prejudgement coming, and NEITHER ARE Gathered post judgement, you insist Noah and lot are POSTJUDGEMENT dynamics.
It is a fact, that you are REFRAMING both into postjudgement dynamics.
....as opposed to the bible.

Christ gathers the saints *at* his Coming. The Olivet Discourse says this, and 2 Thes 2 says this, in the most explicit fashion. Therefore, the comparison made with the Flood and with Sodom's destruction only concerned the fact that the saints will be distinguished and delivered from judgment. That is the point of comparison. Being delivered *at* the Coming of Christ is, in fact, Postrib!

 

[Randy Kluth]

"But the biggest problem is you ignore the explicit Postrib teaching in 2 Thes 1-2. And you ignore its connection to Dan 7 where Daniel pictures the Son of Man coming from heaven to deliver his saints from the Antichrist and to establish his Kingdom."
I have stated over and over.
The AC is revealed, as the bible says , then the rapture.
Both are pretrib.
We AGREE he is revealed then the rapture.
You are saying Obama was revealed as a snake years after he took power.

You need that word " revealed" changed.
That is your problem.

Not a problem. You are ignoring the explicit connection Paul makes, in 2 Thes 2, between the *revelation* of the Antichrist and the *destruction* of the Antichrist. Paul is saying that *both* must take place at the Coming of Christ. Otherwise, Christ cannot be considered to have come yet.

 

[rebuilder 454]

Not a problem. You are ignoring the explicit connection Paul makes, in 2 Thes 2, between the *revelation* of the Antichrist and the *destruction* of the Antichrist. Paul is saying that *both* must take place at the Coming of Christ. Otherwise, Christ cannot be considered to have come yet.

The AC in your opinion is revealed at the white horses coming of rev19?

 

[rebuilder 454]

If that's all you're saying, we agree. The Antichrist is revealed, but is also *destroyed* at the Coming of Christ. You skip over the "destroyed" part!

As I told you, they are different stories. The analogy of the Flood and Sodom's destruction are being confused with Christ's Coming by you. Obviously, they are different stories and cannot be compared in their historical details. But the point of the comparison is explicity to show the bad moral condition of the world prior to major judgment and to the need for the saints to continue living in righteousness in order to be distinguished from the objects of this judgment.

Instead of seeing this point of the comparison you compare details that are relevant only to the historical context of each story. In trying to make them compare you misuse the proper comparison to extend well beyond the intended purpose of the comparison.

As I said, the gathering of Lot's family and the gathering of Noah's family prior to judgment is relative to their own stories, and each group was distinguished from the judgment against the wicked in different ways. Lot's family was called out of the city before judgment fell. Noah's family was called in the ark before the rain came down.

But in the example of Christ's Coming, the saints are gathered *at* the Coming of Christ. The object was not to find unity in the precise *circumstances* of how each group was delivered, but rather, to show that in each context, the righteous were distinguished from the wicked and excluded as objects of judgment. But you make it all about the time and circumstance of each story, which was not the obvious purpose of the comparison.

Christ gathers the saints *at* his Coming. The Olivet Discourse says this, and 2 Thes 2 says this, in the most explicit fashion. Therefore, the comparison made with the Flood and with Sodom's destruction only concerned the fact that the saints will be distinguished and delivered from judgment. That is the point of comparison. Being delivered *at* the Coming of Christ is, in fact, Postrib!

You have in your opinion, one coming.
What is rev 14:14
Mat 24:38
The one taken one left before the flood?

 

[rebuilder 454]

If that's all you're saying, we agree. The Antichrist is revealed, but is also *destroyed* at the Coming of Christ. You skip over the "destroyed" part!

As I told you, they are different stories. The analogy of the Flood and Sodom's destruction are being confused with Christ's Coming by you. Obviously, they are different stories and cannot be compared in their historical details. But the point of the comparison is explicity to show the bad moral condition of the world prior to major judgment and to the need for the saints to continue living in righteousness in order to be distinguished from the objects of this judgment.

Instead of seeing this point of the comparison you compare details that are relevant only to the historical context of each story. In trying to make them compare you misuse the proper comparison to extend well beyond the intended purpose of the comparison.

As I said, the gathering of Lot's family and the gathering of Noah's family prior to judgment is relative to their own stories, and each group was distinguished from the judgment against the wicked in different ways. Lot's family was called out of the city before judgment fell. Noah's family was called in the ark before the rain came down.

But in the example of Christ's Coming, the saints are gathered *at* the Coming of Christ. The object was not to find unity in the precise *circumstances* of how each group was delivered, but rather, to show that in each context, the righteous were distinguished from the wicked and excluded as objects of judgment. But you make it all about the time and circumstance of each story, which was not the obvious purpose of the comparison.

Christ gathers the saints *at* his Coming. The Olivet Discourse says this, and 2 Thes 2 says this, in the most explicit fashion. Therefore, the comparison made with the Flood and with Sodom's destruction only concerned the fact that the saints will be distinguished and delivered from judgment. That is the point of comparison. Being delivered *at* the Coming of Christ is, in fact, Postrib!

""If that's all you're saying, we agree. The Antichrist is revealed, but is also *destroyed* at the Coming of Christ. You skip over the "destroyed" part!"""

Yes he is revealed pretrib before he takes power then the rapture.
Yes that wicked one who will be destroyed at the second coming on white horses, will be destroyed years later, after the pretrib rapture.
*******The before the flood coming.*******
You have yet to come up with a "after sodom/after flood," gathering, or anyone judged or killed , or gathered post flood/ Sodom burned.
It is just too much to overcome.
All you can do is point to the judgement out of context.
You can not possibly incorporate the other components.

 

[Randy Kluth]

""If that's all you're saying, we agree. The Antichrist is revealed, but is also *destroyed* at the Coming of Christ. You skip over the "destroyed" part!"""

Yes he is revealed pretrib before he takes power then the rapture.
Yes that wicked one who will be destroyed at the second coming on white horses, will be destroyed years later, after the pretrib rapture.
*******The before the flood coming.*******
You have yet to come up with a "after sodom/after flood," gathering, or anyone judged or killed , or gathered post flood/ Sodom burned.
It is just too much to overcome.
All you can do is point to the judgement out of context.
You can not possibly incorporate the other components.

I can't yet determine whether you're deliberately being obtuse or I'm just not being clear enough? My argument was not that the gathering of Christians takes place *after* Christ's Coming, but rather, *at* Christ's Coming. That is what I referred to with respect to Dan 7 and 2 Thes 2. Christ comes to gather his people--not *after* but *at!* Why do you keep harping on the false claim that I believe the gathering of the Church takes place *after* Christ comes?

Again, we agree that Antichrist must be revealed *before* Christ comes, but you ignore the main point I was making. Antichrist not only is "revealed" before Christ's Coming, but he is destroyed *at* Christ's Coming.

Both those things are what Paul identifies as happening before Christ can come. Nobody can identify Christ as having come until those two things happen: 1) Antichrist is revealed, and 2) Antichrist is destroyed. Notice how they are *both* pinned as necessarily happening before anybody can say Christ has come:

2 Thes 2.1 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him... 3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction... 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming.

You see, people were saying Christ or his Kingdom had already arrived on earth. People have been saying that in history, that in some way Christ's Kingdom is presently being realized. But Paul said that no Christian should say that until *both* of these 2 things happen: 1) Antichrist is revealed, and 2) Antichrist is destroyed. I don't care if you agree with how I see this--just acknowledge that this is what I believe Paul was saying?

 

[Randy Kluth]

You have in your opinion, one coming.
What is rev 14:14
Mat 24:38
The one taken one left before the flood?

Rev 14.14 I looked, and there before me was a white cloud, and seated on the cloud was one like a son of man with a crown of gold on his head and a sharp sickle in his hand.

Mat 24.38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.

The one taken and the one left are often misunderstood, I believe. Jesus was referring in this Discourse to the coming Roman desolation of Jerusalem, which took place in 70 AD. Since Jesus was also asked about his Coming, he tied the coming event with his Coming to show their relationship.

The Jews who were "taken" were taken into exile when the Romans came. The Jews who were "left" were left to till the fields for the Romans. This pattern had already happened before, during the Babylonian Captivity. It was the same thing happening all over again. You can read it in Jeremiah and Ezekiel.

The destruction of Jerusalem would take place through the Roman Abomination of Desolation, which was an Army, and would lead to an entire age of Jewish Diaspora, or punishment. It would end with the coming of the Son of Man to deliver his people, to bring about an age of Christianity for all peoples, including Israel.

Prior to his Coming, the world would continue to resist God's Kingdom and oppress His people, rising to a crescendo in the time before his Coming. Just as the wickedness of the world previewed the coming Flood, so the wickedness of the world prior to Christ's Coming would preview world judgment.

The mini-vision of the Coming of the Son of Man in Rev 14 is precisely that--a vision of Christ's Coming to bring judgment to the world.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The AC in your opinion is revealed at the white horses coming of rev19?

No, Paul said that before anyone can say Christ has come to earth, the Antichrist must 1st be revealed. And he must also be destroyed, since Christ's Coming is for that very purpose, to *destroy the Antichrist* in order to set up his Kingdom on earth.

 

[rebuilder 454]

I can't yet determine whether you're deliberately being obtuse or I'm just not being clear enough? My argument was not that the gathering of Christians takes place *after* Christ's Coming, but rather, *at* Christ's Coming. That is what I referred to with respect to Dan 7 and 2 Thes 2. Christ comes to gather his people--not *after* but *at!* Why do you keep harping on the false claim that I believe the gathering of the Church takes place *after* Christ comes?

Again, we agree that Antichrist must be revealed *before* Christ comes, but you ignore the main point I was making. Antichrist not only is "revealed" before Christ's Coming, but he is destroyed *at* Christ's Coming.

Both those things are what Paul identifies as happening before Christ can come. Nobody can identify Christ as having come until those two things happen: 1) Antichrist is revealed, and 2) Antichrist is destroyed. Notice how they are *both* pinned as necessarily happening before anybody can say Christ has come:

2 Thes 2.1 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him... 3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction... 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming.

You see, people were saying Christ or his Kingdom had already arrived on earth. People have been saying that in history, that in some way Christ's Kingdom is presently being realized. But Paul said that no Christian should say that until *both* of these 2 things happen: 1) Antichrist is revealed, and 2) Antichrist is destroyed. I don't care if you agree with how I see this--just acknowledge that this is what I believe Paul was saying?

Wow thanks for that!
That is yet another pretrib rapture component!
******at his coming*******
rev 14:14
Jesus SITTING ON A CLOUD HOLDING A SICKLE.
gathering the elect during the trib.( a gathering at his coming)

Mat 24: 38... Jesus COMING..YES AT HIS COMING before the flood one taken, one left.
" watch and be ready."

Now the second coming in horses AFTER the trib;
Rev 19 Jesus coming with millions of white horses to do war...and BTW that gathering is FROM HEAVEN BY ANGELS ***BEFORE ****He descends on white horses WITH the saints already in heaven.
So only 2 of the 3 gatherings are AT his coming, one is immediately before, to assemble on white horses

Thank you...i just now realized postribbers have yet another hurdle.

 

[rebuilder 454]

No, Paul said that before anyone can say Christ has come to earth, the Antichrist must 1st be revealed. And he must also be destroyed, since Christ's Coming is for that very purpose, to *destroy the Antichrist* in order to set up his Kingdom on earth.

then rev 14:14 is a lie.
Jesus comes and is not destroying anything, and that coming is vividly described, and 100% against your theory

 

[rebuilder 454]

Rev 14.14 I looked, and there before me was a white cloud, and seated on the cloud was one like a son of man with a crown of gold on his head and a sharp sickle in his hand.

Mat 24.38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.

The one taken and the one left are often misunderstood, I believe. Jesus was referring in this Discourse to the coming Roman desolation of Jerusalem, which took place in 70 AD. Since Jesus was also asked about his Coming, he tied the coming event with his Coming to show their relationship.

The Jews who were "taken" were taken into exile when the Romans came. The Jews who were "left" were left to till the fields for the Romans. This pattern had already happened before, during the Babylonian Captivity. It was the same thing happening all over again. You can read it in Jeremiah and Ezekiel.

The destruction of Jerusalem would take place through the Roman Abomination of Desolation, which was an Army, and would lead to an entire age of Jewish Diaspora, or punishment. It would end with the coming of the Son of Man to deliver his people, to bring about an age of Christianity for all peoples, including Israel.

Prior to his Coming, the world would continue to resist God's Kingdom and oppress His people, rising to a crescendo in the time before his Coming. Just as the wickedness of the world previewed the coming Flood, so the wickedness of the world prior to Christ's Coming would preview world judgment.

The mini-vision of the Coming of the Son of Man in Rev 14 is precisely that--a vision of Christ's Coming to bring judgment to the world.

Nope
Re read it
Ahem..sitting on a cloud.
Holding a sickle.
Then you try to fit a coming/gathering with the setting of normal life and commerce and peacetime into a coming in a war zone.
What you propose is utterly impossible.
Does not come close to fitting.
You really think all 3 of those comings are 1????

 

[rebuilder 454]

No, Paul said that before anyone can say Christ has come to earth, the Antichrist must 1st be revealed. And he must also be destroyed, since Christ's Coming is for that very purpose, to *destroy the Antichrist* in order to set up his Kingdom on earth.

I do not get what you are proposing here.
Are you saying He is revealed and destroyed at the same time or not???

IOW...are you saying the elect, the church, will have no clue who he really is ???
Not revealed until Jesus returns???

 

[rebuilder 454]

If that's all you're saying, we agree. The Antichrist is revealed, but is also *destroyed* at the Coming of Christ. You skip over the "destroyed" part!

As I told you, they are different stories. The analogy of the Flood and Sodom's destruction are being confused with Christ's Coming by you. Obviously, they are different stories and cannot be compared in their historical details. But the point of the comparison is explicity to show the bad moral condition of the world prior to major judgment and to the need for the saints to continue living in righteousness in order to be distinguished from the objects of this judgment.

Instead of seeing this point of the comparison you compare details that are relevant only to the historical context of each story. In trying to make them compare you misuse the proper comparison to extend well beyond the intended purpose of the comparison.

As I said, the gathering of Lot's family and the gathering of Noah's family prior to judgment is relative to their own stories, and each group was distinguished from the judgment against the wicked in different ways. Lot's family was called out of the city before judgment fell. Noah's family was called in the ark before the rain came down.

But in the example of Christ's Coming, the saints are gathered *at* the Coming of Christ. The object was not to find unity in the precise *circumstances* of how each group was delivered, but rather, to show that in each context, the righteous were distinguished from the wicked and excluded as objects of judgment. But you make it all about the time and circumstance of each story, which was not the obvious purpose of the comparison.

Christ gathers the saints *at* his Coming. The Olivet Discourse says this, and 2 Thes 2 says this, in the most explicit fashion. Therefore, the comparison made with the Flood and with Sodom's destruction only concerned the fact that the saints will be distinguished and delivered from judgment. That is the point of comparison. Being delivered *at* the Coming of Christ is, in fact, Postrib!

The coming postrib is not the coming of rev 14:14.
Unless you want to change rev 19.
No matter what you try to change , those facts remain

 

[rebuilder 454]

Not a problem. You are ignoring the explicit connection Paul makes, in 2 Thes 2, between the *revelation* of the Antichrist and the *destruction* of the Antichrist. Paul is saying that *both* must take place at the Coming of Christ. Otherwise, Christ cannot be considered to have come yet.

here it appears you are saying the church will be oblivious to who he is until the white horses

 

[rebuilder 454]

I can't yet determine whether you're deliberately being obtuse or I'm just not being clear enough? My argument was not that the gathering of Christians takes place *after* Christ's Coming, but rather, *at* Christ's Coming. That is what I referred to with respect to Dan 7 and 2 Thes 2. Christ comes to gather his people--not *after* but *at!* Why do you keep harping on the false claim that I believe the gathering of the Church takes place *after* Christ comes?

Again, we agree that Antichrist must be revealed *before* Christ comes, but you ignore the main point I was making. Antichrist not only is "revealed" before Christ's Coming, but he is destroyed *at* Christ's Coming.

Both those things are what Paul identifies as happening before Christ can come. Nobody can identify Christ as having come until those two things happen: 1) Antichrist is revealed, and 2) Antichrist is destroyed. Notice how they are *both* pinned as necessarily happening before anybody can say Christ has come:

2 Thes 2.1 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him... 3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction... 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming.

You see, people were saying Christ or his Kingdom had already arrived on earth. People have been saying that in history, that in some way Christ's Kingdom is presently being realized. But Paul said that no Christian should say that until *both* of these 2 things happen: 1) Antichrist is revealed, and 2) Antichrist is destroyed. I don't care if you agree with how I see this--just acknowledge that this is what I believe Paul was saying?

Jesus comes after the trib
Jesus comes before the trib.
The bible says so.
We all believe he gatherers after the trib.
We all believe that.
The bible says he also gathers before the trib
...and rev 14:14 during the trib.

 

[rebuilder 454]

No, Paul said that before anyone can say Christ has come to earth, the Antichrist must 1st be revealed. And he must also be destroyed, since Christ's Coming is for that very purpose, to *destroy the Antichrist* in order to set up his Kingdom on earth.

.it actually says he Is revealed before the gathering.
It says concerning the AC whom he WILL destroy ( several years later.)
You are trying unsuccessfully to make it revealed and destroyed at the end of the trib.
I 100% believe that the Antichrist will be revealed and we will know who he is and then a day a week a month later or 3 months later the Rapture happens.
I also think that Christians will be rounded up prior to the tribulation and they'll be placed in huge open air facilities and it is from those facilities that the Rapture will happen ,but it is still pre-tribulation. I also believe that he is destroyed at the second coming. So you basically have no traction whatsoever in any of that

 

[Randy Kluth]

Nope
Re read it
Ahem..sitting on a cloud.
Holding a sickle.
Then you try to fit a coming/gathering with the setting of normal life and commerce and peacetime into a coming in a war zone.
What you propose is utterly impossible.
Does not come close to fitting.
You really think all 3 of those comings are 1????

This is so typical of those with an agenda to produce a new "prophecy map." I hope you're not trying to do that? You take symbolic language and then try to over-literalize it until it fits your own plan. "Sitting on a cloud" is symbolic language, brother! Revelation is literally strewn with mini-visions that confirm all aspects of Christ's Coming, which relates back to Dan 7 where the Son of Man comes with the clouds of heaven. The full context is right there. Antichrist is destroyed and the Kingdom of God is established on earth. God's People are delivered.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Jesus comes after the trib
Jesus comes before the trib.
The bible says so.
We all believe he gatherers after the trib.
We all believe that.
The bible says he also gathers before the trib
...and rev 14:14 during the trib.

This, for me, is word confusion. Yes, Christ comes after the Tribulation of the present age, which is defined by Jesus as Jewish Punishment and suffering for Christians. But he comes to *end the Tribulation.* This is all originating from Dan 7, where the Son of Man comes to end the suffering of the Jews and of the People of God. And he does so putting an end to the Antichrist.

 

[Randy Kluth]

here it appears you are saying the church will be oblivious to who he is until the white horses

No, you're obscuring the point, consciously or unconsciously. I said that Paul proves that Christ has not come yet, with his Kingdom, because the Man of Sin has not yet appeared. Paul is saying, explicitly, that the very purpose of Christ's Coming is to destroy the Antichrist.

Therefore, Christ's Coming cannot precede the reign of Antichrist, ending with his destruction *at the Coming of Christ.* This is evident in Dan 7 where the Son of Man descends from the clouds of heaven to establish God's reign on earth and to end the persecution of the saints by the Little Horn. Any purported Coming of Christ before Antichrist's destruction is therefore false!

 

[Randy Kluth]

The coming postrib is not the coming of rev 14:14.
Unless you want to change rev 19.
No matter what you try to change , those facts remain

You have not made any argument at all against Rev 14.14 being the Postrib Coming of Christ! You want me to take your word for it? You want to base your claims to Scriptural authority on no Scriptural proof at all, on pure assertions by you?

You see, I think you read Revelation like a chronology of events, like a chronological sequence of events depicted by visions placed in order to predct the future?

But I don't think that's the purpose of biblical prophecy. It is not about predicting "times and seasons." It is not a cheap Nostradamus. Rather, it is an encouragement for Christians to stay fine-tuned, spiritually, at all times, and so be ready at all times for judgment, whether we live or die. It ha nothing about timing the "Rapture!"

All of these visions in Revelation are glimpses into truths about Christ's Coming, and are disinterested in providing a chronology of events. They simply depict Jesus as the Judge over human behavior. It is an encouragement to Christians to endure the antichrists of the present age until our reward comes.