Luke 21:36 is Not a Rapture Passage

[marks]

The part that is important is the captivity which isn't being freed from captivity. Present captivity! That remains to this day.





You said, "Are you familiar with the Hebrew idiom "bring again your captivity" or "return your captivity"? This doesn't mean going into captivity, it means coming out of it, back to their homeland."

Only the homeland part matches. You said captivity means not going into captivity but it doesn't mean that and Gill does not agree with you on that.

We are off topic so let's get back to Matthew 25 and Rev 20 etc.

This is part of the topic actually, showing Joel and Matthew to have these parallel passages.

but this designs the present captivity of the Jews, and the restoration of them to their own land; of which see Isa_52:8.

This part in red, you saw that, right?

To return their captivity is to restore them to their homeland. This is in complete agreement with the usage. These are just a few examples.


Deuteronomy 30:2-3 KJV
2) And shalt return unto the LORD thy God, and shalt obey his voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thine heart, and with all thy soul;
3) That then the LORD thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath scattered thee.

Psalms 14:7 KJV
7) Oh that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion! when the LORD bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.

Psalms 85:1-2 KJV
1) To the chief Musician, A Psalm for the sons of Korah. LORD, thou hast been favourable unto thy land: thou hast brought back the captivity of Jacob.
2) Thou hast forgiven the iniquity of thy people, thou hast covered all their sin. Selah.

Jeremiah 29:14 KJV
14) And I will be found of you, saith the LORD: and I will turn away your captivity, and I will gather you from all the nations, and from all the places whither I have driven you, saith the LORD; and I will bring you again into the place whence I caused you to be carried away captive.

Jeremiah 30:3 KJV
3) For, lo, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will bring again the captivity of my people Israel and Judah, saith the LORD: and I will cause them to return to the land that I gave to their fathers, and they shall possess it.

Jeremiah 32:44 KJV
44) Men shall buy fields for money, and subscribe evidences, and seal them, and take witnesses in the land of Benjamin, and in the places about Jerusalem, and in the cities of Judah, and in the cities of the mountains, and in the cities of the valley, and in the cities of the south: for I will cause their captivity to return, saith the LORD.

Joel 3:1-2 KJV
1) For, behold, in those days, and in that time, when I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem,
2) I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land.

There are many more examples, and I think the best way to learn how terms are used in the Bible is to look at every place they are used. You have to want to do it though.

Much love!

 

[marks]

The prophetic parallels between the Jewish Wedding and the Church’s Biblical Wedding are simply amazing!

Do you have any historical sources that describe the ancient Jewish wedding? I'm familiar with the contemporary sources, but is there something actually historical?

Much love!

 

[Ronald D Milam]

Do you have any historical sources that describe the ancient Jewish wedding? I'm familiar with the contemporary sources, but is there something actually historical?

Israel were as Dead Men's Bones for nigh 2000 years and most of their documents were burned, the Dead Sea Scrolls (Satan's plan was to wipe them out of the history books) were hidden for a reason. Alas, we can dig this out of the bible, which we all consider a true "Historical Document". It can be seen throughout the Old Testament in varied places, and of course Jesus taught on it by juxtaposing the Jewish Wedding Pattern with him and his bride (church).

We can also see this with Jacob and Rachel, he had to pay a price for the bride (mohar). He was forced to take Leah as a bride, the Church was a forced bride because Israel played the harlot. We can also see God's intention with his bride (Israel) via Hosea being told by God to go marry the prostitute Gomer, then she cheated on him over and over, and when she got old, and no one wanted her anymore, Hosea was told to take her back and love her, that is a picture of Father God and Israel his bride.

Mohar as Purchase and Gift​

The mohar was originally the purchase price of the bride, and it is therefore understandable why it was paid by the father of the groom to the father of the bride. In ancient days, marriage was not an agreement between two individuals, but between two families.

The newly married man usually did not found a new home for himself, but occupied a nook in his father’s house. The family of the groom gained, and the family of the bride lost, a valuable member who helped with all household tasks. It was reasonable, therefore, that the father of the groom should pay the father of the bride the equivalent of her value as a useful member of the family.

Yet in the course of time the mohar lost its original meaning as a purchase price paid to the father for his daughter and assumed the significance of a gift to the near relatives of the bride. As far back as in early biblical times, it was customary for a good father to give the whole of the mohar or at least a large part of it to his daughter. A father who appropriated the whole mohar for himself was considered unkind and harsh.

An Ancient Marriage Record​

At the beginning of the 20th century, an actual Jewish marriage record during the period of the return from the Babylonian exile was discovered — the oldest marriage contract in Jewish history. The marriage did not take place in Palestine or among the exiles in Babylon, but among the Jews of Elephantine and Aswan, at the southern border of Egypt.

The marriage contract of Mibtachiah [the bride] and As-Hor [the groom] began with a declaration of marriage by As-Hor to Mibtachiah’s father. “I came to thy house for thee to give me thy daughter, Mibtachiah, to wife; she is my wife and I am her husband from this day and forever.”

Following this declaration of betrothal, all terms of the marriage contract were written in detail. As-Hor paid Machseiah, the father, five shekels, Persian standard, as a mohar for his daughter. Besides, Mibtachiah received a gift of 65 1/2 shekels from As-Hor. From this we gather that the mohar that fathers received for their daughters was then merely a nominal payment, the formality of an older custom.

According to the marriage contract, Mibtachiah had equal rights with her husband. She had her own property which she could bequeath as she pleased, and she had the right to pronounce a sentence of divorce against As-Hor, even as he had the right to pronounce it against her. All she had to do was to appear before the court of the community and declare that she had developed an aversion to As-Hor. We do not know to what degree the equality of rights enjoyed by Jewish women of Elephantine was due to Jewish or to Persian-Babylonian law.

But we know there were two brides, Rachel the preferred and Leah the forced bride.

 

[GRACE ambassador]

we have to cross check everything

Amen! And, Rightly Divide everything:

God's Great GRACE Departure!

Amen.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Would you like me to post the Scriptures which teach each of those things I've stated?

By all means, please use scripture to back up your claims. Please do that more often.

This passage is a wonderful passage showing marriage to again be a simile for our relationship to Christ, which is closer still, as we are bone of His bone and flesh of His flesh.

What He clearly says is that we are His body. "Baptized into Christ" doesn't have an human counterpart, however, marriage is given as a simile.

It very clearly indicates that we are the bride and He is our husband. As I said, you are trying to deny the obvious.

He will wed the people He promised, the people to whom Hosea prophesied.

That is us (the church). Only those who belong to Him are His bride, which should be obvious. Why would Jesus have anyone but those He has a personal relationship with as His bride? You are not thinking this through nearly carefully enough.

I've never said this, nor do I think this. It is your straw man.

What you believe implies it whether you acknowledge that or not.

I'm telling you what the Bible says about these things. Either it says it or it doesn't. And in reality, I'm pointing to what it says.

You are not just telling me what the text says (I don't need you to do that, I have access to the Bible), but you are also trying to tell me what you THINK the Bible says about these things. I don't need you to interpret what it says for me.

 

[Timtofly]

If we are personally attached to a misguided belief, and then that belief is challenged/exposed then we feel as if we are being personally judged.

If you can separate your personal feelings from having the dominion over Truth then the Truth will not hurt you as a "son of God."

EXAMPLE: JESUS hurt many peoples feelings = all the time when HE walked this earth and spoke Truth.
However, those who persevered thru the 'hurt feelings' continued on to Understanding that soothed over their emotions unto Salvation.

Do you think Peter's emotions were hurt when the LORD corrected him and said: "get behind me Satan for you care not about the things of God".

Do you understand WHY Paul rebuked Peter?
Can you see how it applies to "Jesus was sent to the Jews and not to the church"?

Can you rejoice in this = "Rebuke a wise man and he will be become wiser." - Proverbs 9:9
You are a wise Brother in Christ whom i respect and love = let your wisdom increase.

So you were rebuking the personal character of the other poster? Why not just admit it then?

How is it the other person's fault you are rebuking them, when they clearly asked you to stick to the points, and not worry about their mental state?

Should we keep pointing out that you have so many wrong beliefs, that only the Second Coming will straighten them all out?

Since we don't really have to address those beliefs, just accept the fact you are wrong and move on. You already proved from Scripture we can do that.

The point is you were not addressing the points. You just declared you could rebuke him personally, because that is Scripture.

 

[Timtofly]

What you (and @marks) seem to be saying is that "the same day" in Genesis 7:13 is referring to the day God told Noah that he would bring rain upon the earth in seven days, and if so, that is obviously in error. God used the time between the day He gave Noah His "orders" (and told him what would happen in seven days) and the day the rains came (seven days later) to bring the animals to Noah. And then, yes, on that seventh day, they all got on the Ark, and God shut the door behind them.

If the animals only took one day to enter, did they all just stand outside for 6 days and then entered on the 7th?

The point being made is they entered in on the first day, and then waited in the ark for 5 days and then on the 7th it started to rain.

The type is not about how literal one can get. Nothing happened during the intervening 5 days. Nothing zilch nada.

Either they were in the ark those 5 days, or just waiting outside for 5 days procrastinating in disobedience to God who told them to enter 7 days before the rain started.

For Amil who preach that Revelation is a series of repetitive angles of the same event, that point seems lost when interpreting Genesis 7. It seems God repeats this 7 day period at least 3 times in that chapter.

Should we point out God likes the number 3 as much as 7? There does not seem to be a single verse that indicates it took 6 days to enter the ark.

It also took about a hundred years to build the ark. God never said the Flood would happen in 100 years. God waited until the ark was finished and then gave a time frame of 7 days.

Why would the animals not have already been gathering and being prepared during those 100 years? Still not seeing any verses saying all the animals showed up at the last minute.

The 7 day countdown did not mean it took that long to enter. We don't even know when the ark was totally finished or if some animals were already on the Ark which would be as plausible as showing up at the last minute. Remember that in chapter 6, a hundred years prior, God already told Noah to prepare both an ark and the animals.

There was no separate command to build the ark and then after the ark was done to prepare the animals. It was a total 100% package, the ark and the animals. The point of chapter 7 was just getting into the ark 7 days before the rain started. Seems some claim it is a type, why argue against types placed in the Bible?

Post trib people may have been able to procraste and get on the Ark seconds before the door was shut.

But they won't be able to procrastinate at the Second Coming. Either they will leave with the church, or remain on the earth with Jesus and the angels during the final harvest. Some even claiming they can procrastinate all the way up until the 7 vials and the battle of Armageddon.

Now I don't see a 7 year nor a 7 day warning mentioned about the Second Coming in Scripture. I do see there is a 42 month warning that judgment comes at the end of those 42 months. But in Noah's day it was 8 people in a sea of billions. They had over 100 years to change their ways.

The ratio is different today. I don't see a 7 year period unless there were only 8 righteous people on the earth, and perhaps a hundred year warning. So not 7 days nor 7 years after the church is "on the ark" or in Paradise. But most miss the point that Jesus is on the earth with His angels during that period beteen getting on the Ark and the final judgment. We are not saving animals. We are saving souls. Jesus is still gathering His firstfruits for the Millennium. Those not destroyed at the end. But also not in the ark. Something we miss when we see people could have walked up during those 5 days. The loading of the animsls would not have prevented that. The animals and those 8 souls were already on that first Day. The other 5 days were for lost souls about to die.

 

[David in NJ]

So you were rebuking the personal character of the other poster? Why not just admit it then?

How is it the other person's fault you are rebuking them, when they clearly asked you to stick to the points, and not worry about their mental state?

Should we keep pointing out that you have so many wrong beliefs, that only the Second Coming will straighten them all out?

Since we don't really have to address those beliefs, just accept the fact you are wrong and move on. You already proved from Scripture we can do that.

The point is you were not addressing the points. You just declared you could rebuke him personally, because that is Scripture.

pre-trib rapture is a lie from satan

Don't be the spokes person for satan's lies.

Believe the words of the LORD Jesus who says: Matthew 24:29-31

To you, O men, I call,
And my voice is to the sons of men.
O you simple ones, understand prudence,
And you fools, be of an understanding heart.
Listen, for I will speak of excellent things,
And from the opening of my lips will come right things;
For my mouth will speak truth;
Wickedness is an abomination to my lips.
All the words of my mouth are with righteousness;
Nothing crooked or perverse is in them.
They are all plain to him who understands,
And right to those who find knowledge.

 

[Timtofly]

No.

I am post-trib but the two passages are two dif time frames. Matthew 25 is not the second coming, and not a gathering of only His chosen while Matthew 24 is.

Matthew 24:29-31, then the thousand years of Rev 20, then Matthew 25:31-33. The coming in 25 is coming not to Earth per the second coming but coming to the place of judgment, which is not on the Earth which is why he and the angels must come/arrive there after having come/arrived to Earth at the second coming. Ppl always confuse a "coming" as having to be the second coming because they do not realize the GWTJ happens away from the Earth and Christ must go there (come there) to attend it.

That would be the post millennium view. Jesus judges the living at the Second Coming, not 1,000 years later.


The GWT judgment is about the dead in sheol and Death. Not the living. Are there nations in sheol?

The sheep are the firstfruits of the Millennium Kingdom. They live on the earth with Jesus for a thousand years.

 

[Timtofly]

Once AGAIN @marks, all pre-tribbers ADD to God's words what HE did not say. They do this to establish their doctrine.

Once again post tribbers change the meaning, to make God's Word say something totally foreign to God's plan. They do this to establish their doctrine.

No one is saved by works period.

They had to ask why they were chosen. Are you saying believers should be totally ignorant of God's saving grace?

"Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?"

Are you going to ask these questions some day?

 

[David in NJ]

Once again post tribbers change the meaning, to make God's Word say something totally foreign to God's plan. They do this to establish their doctrine.

No one is saved by works period.

They had to ask why they were chosen. Are you saying believers should be totally ignorant of God's saving grace?

"Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?"

Are you going to ask these questions some day?

projection

 

[Timtofly]

This scripture was given to you a while back.

Here it is without any supposed comment.

27John answered and said, “A man can receive nothing unless it has been given to him from heaven. 28You yourselves bear me witness, that I said, ‘I am not the Christ,’ but, ‘I have been sent before Him.’
29He who has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice. Therefore this joy of mine is fulfilled. 30He must increase, but I must decrease. 31He who comes from above is above all; he who is of the earth is earthly and speaks of the earth. He who comes from heaven is above all. 32And what He has seen and heard, that He testifies; and no one receives His testimony. 33He who has received His testimony has certified that God is true. 34For He whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God does not give the Spirit by measure.
35The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into His hand. (Genesis)
36He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.”

John the Baptist identifying the Disciples of Jesus as the Bride and Jesus as the Groom.

Agree with John or Disagree?

All John is saying is that he is the friend of the groom, and not the Christ, nor the groom.

John was definitely not Jesus the Messiah.

Why is John not part of the bride? Is John not a saved born again child of God?

Do you think those baptized of John the Baptist had to then get re-baptized by the disciples of Jesus?

 

[David in NJ]

All John is saying is that he is the friend of the groom, and not the Christ, nor the groom.

John was definitely not Jesus the Messiah.

Why is John not part of the bride? Is John not a saved born again child of God?

Do you think those baptized of John the Baptist had to then get re-baptized by the disciples of Jesus?

John specifically identified the Bride of Christ and the Groom/Christ.

 

[Timtofly]

That is completely false. You are denying the obvious here. Have you never read this:

Ephesians 5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. 25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. 28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. 29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: 30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. 31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. 32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

So, in this passage Paul talks about how wives should submit themselves to their husbands, as unto the Lord. And he said "the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church". And he said "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it". And then later he sums up everything he said in Ephesians 5:22-31 by saying "This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church". He was clearly saying here that the church is the bride/wife of her husband, Jesus Christ. It couldn't be more clear. Yet, here you are denying that the church is the bride of Christ even though it so clearly is.


You have the wrong Israel in mind. God will not wed the nation of Israel that consists mostly of Christ rejecters. He will wed Spiritual Israel which consists only of those who belong to Christ (Romans 9:6-8; cross reference Galatians 3:26-29; 4:28, 6:15-16). Also, it does not say that Jesus cares more about Israel than the Gentiles and only sees Israel as His bride. That's nonsense. He spoke of His Gentile followers here:

John 10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.

Can you not see here that He talked about both of His folds (Israelite believers and Gentile believers) becoming one fold? Why do you try to separate what Jesus has brought together as one? Why do you try to make it as if Jesus cares more about the Jews than the Gentiles even though there is neither Jew nor Gentile in His church?

Then Israel the bride should submit to the church, the body of Christ.

"For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church."

His body was the church. His bride was Israel. That is simple.

Israel is the church also, no? Israel is also the bride. If Israel cannot be the body of Christ, but only the bride, then only a remnant of Israel can be both. The Gentiles cannot be any of the above until the Second Birth happens. Are you saying Gentiles should now be both the body of Christ and the bride at the same time, or are you saying no one prior to the Cross could be both at the same time? And if this is only symbolic, why be so dogmatically literal? There is literally no two distinctions after the Cross. That was the point of the fulness of the Gentiles. The bride is already literally one flesh and blood with the body. One entity, not two. After the Second Coming and fulness of the Gentiles is when Amil denies Israel will be a wife once more to God. They deny the symbolism that after a thousand years, the church will rejoin the groom as the bride signified in the New Jerusalem, a literal city, coming down the aisle, from Heaven on the arms of God the Father. Then both God and Jesus will be the temple in the New Jerusalem as bodies instead of buildings.

You accept the human body is the temple now. In the NHNE Jesus and God will be the physical temple. Humans will have a direct relationship with God and no more symbolism.

Pre-mill don't live in the past as you all keep trying to make us part of the time Jesus spent on the earth. That was 1993 years ago. We point out God's relationship in the future that has not happened yet, and you deny that future, for some unknown reason, unless you yourself are making yourselves first century Israel. I mean that is the name you chose to identify with. The condition of Israel before the Cross. Every one is in Christ. We are spiritual Christians. Right now we are both the bride and the groom one individual body.

 

[Timtofly]

pre-trib rapture is a lie from satan

Don't be the spokes person for satan's lies.

Believe the words of the LORD Jesus who says: Matthew 24:29-31

To you, O men, I call,
And my voice is to the sons of men.
O you simple ones, understand prudence,
And you fools, be of an understanding heart.
Listen, for I will speak of excellent things,
And from the opening of my lips will come right things;
For my mouth will speak truth;
Wickedness is an abomination to my lips.
All the words of my mouth are with righteousness;
Nothing crooked or perverse is in them.
They are all plain to him who understands,
And right to those who find knowledge.

Please, do quote the verse from Scripture where Satan declares a pre-trib rapture happens.

 

[Timtofly]

projection

So why do you project in the majority of your posts?

 

[Timtofly]

John specifically identified the Bride of Christ and the Groom/Christ.

No. John clearly identified he was not the Christ.

 

[David in NJ]

Please, do quote the verse from Scripture where Satan declares a pre-trib rapture happens.

EXACTLY, 'pre-trib' rapture never came out of the Mouth of God = therefore you will never find one in the Bible!!!

Everytime someone says 'pre-trib' rapture is in the Bible they fail = whether intentional or thru ignorance it remains a error/lie.

 

[David in NJ]

No. John clearly identified he was not the Christ.

Why would you think John was?

 

[David in NJ]

So why do you project in the majority of your posts?

i only post what is "written" of the words of Truth = you guys add/project pre-trib to God's words what HE never said

If pre-trib rapture were True you would be able to find God saying it = but you can't AND no one ever has..............

To you, O men, I call,
And my voice is to the sons of men.
O you simple ones, understand prudence,
And you fools, be of an understanding heart.
Listen, for I will speak of excellent things,
And from the opening of my lips will come right things;
For my mouth will speak truth;
Wickedness is an abomination to my lips.
All the words of my mouth are with righteousness;
Nothing crooked or perverse is in them.
They are all plain to him who understands,
And right to those who find knowledge.