Pre Tribulation rapture of the Church

[Eric E Stahl]

We should all make note of the fact that it was God who shut the door on Noah's Ark ..... then the rain and destruction began.

I feel God will do something similar just before the tribulation wrath begins .... possibly a rapture of those he plans to save.

It is also used in Matthew 25:10 The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut.

Obviously there has to be some significant event that (suddenly) starts the tribulation ..... if not the rapture ...... then what ??

I think the signing of the 7 year covenant will start the last week for Israel.

[SIZE=16pt]Daniel 9:26-27[/SIZE]
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Daniel 11:39-40
39Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory: and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain.
40And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.

1 Thessalonians 5:3
For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.
3For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.

 

[mjrhealth]

Whole topic is really a waste of time. Simply so many christians think that because they go to church they belong to Jesus, sorry Jesus never said that. My Sheep Hear My Voice and will follow no other. In other words it doesnt really matter if there is one or not, most christians will not be ready, " foolish virgins", wont go to Jesus and get there lamps filled. What was it He said to the Pharisees, who thought they had it all.

Joh 10:25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
Joh 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
Joh 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

If you are not " in Christ", being "in church" is not going to help you.

Look for Him while He can be found, He isnt hiding.

In all His Love

 

[veteran]

We should all make note of the fact that it was God who shut the door on Noah's Ark ..... then the rain and destruction began.

I feel God will do something similar just before the tribulation wrath begins .... possibly a rapture of those he plans to save.

It is also used in Matthew 25:10 The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut.

Obviously there has to be some significant event that (suddenly) starts the tribulation ..... if not the rapture ...... then what ??

First of all, the example God sealing Noah and his family in the ark is about Noah having gone through... the flood. He didn't have to leave the earth to escape the flood.

In Rev.12:7-17, Christ used the idea of Noah's flood for what comes out of the serpent's mouth. For the tribulation we are to be 'sealed' by Christ, for Jesus Christ is our Passover sacrificed for us too. So some of the examples of His protecting the children of Israel through the plagues in Egypt is in association with all that too.

Secondly, the "wrath" you're speaking of from your preachers talking about 1 Thess.5, is NOT about the tribulation time, it's about God's cup of wrath poured out upon the wicked on the LAST DAY of this world, associated with the battle of Armageddon on the 7th Vial. That's what the "day of the LORD" events are about per both the OT and NT. And that's when Christ Jesus will come, on that final day of this present world.

You've also got the ten virgins parable wrong, because the five wise virgins don't go in with Christ until AFTER He comes. And IF you'd only think about what you said on that, you ought to wonder how it is the five foolish virgins are not shown turned away by Christ UNTIL they first SEE Him, meaning AFTER He had come.

1 Thessalonians 5:3
For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.
3For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.

That's one of the 1 Thess.5 Scriptures the Pre-Trib Rapture preachers often leave out, and when they don't they misinterpret it.

That time of "Peace and safety" Apostle Paul mentioned there is the tribulaiton time. That... is when the deceived will be claiming peace on earth and safety (per Dan.8:25). It will be a very short period just prior to the end, just prior to Christ's coming. Then, it's Christ's coming on the "day of the LORD" that causes that "sudden destruction" upon "them". That's the timing all of God's OT prophets showed, and all the NT writers also, including our Lord Jesus in His Revelation given through Apostle John.

Whole topic is really a waste of time. Simply so many christians think that because they go to church they belong to Jesus, sorry Jesus never said that. My Sheep Hear My Voice and will follow no other. In other words it doesnt really matter if there is one or not, most christians will not be ready, " foolish virgins", wont go to Jesus and get there lamps filled. What was it He said to the Pharisees, who thought they had it all.

Joh 10:25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
Joh 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
Joh 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

If you are not " in Christ", being "in church" is not going to help you.

Look for Him while He can be found, He isnt hiding.

In all His Love

Our Lord Jesus didn't give us the events of the end to be watching for nothing. Not paying Him heed on these things is the same thing as not listening to Him and not obeying His warnings. The end of this world is going to happen, and it's going to happen how HE said it per His Word, and not how others think that don't heed His warnings.

 

[iamlamad]

[SIZE=1em]If you want to sway someone over to your side, try coming up with biblical evidence that supports your doctrine that doesn't first require that person to believe your conclusion in order to accept said evidence. As long as your arguments are based in eisegesis, you're not going to get anywhere. [/SIZE]

I have provided bible evidence over an over, but preconceived glasses prevent some from reading.

It is SO simple: the church was seen IN HEAVEN by John in Rev. 7, having just been raptured, before John as even begun the 70th week. The ONLY thing posttribbers can do with this is deny it is the raptured church, or rearrange the book to fit their theory.

Note: if the church is seen in heaven before the 70th week begins, which is was, then the rapture is PReTRIB.

2nd point: Paul was the ONLY New Testament writer that received revelation knowledge of the rapture. Therefore, we cannot find the rapture anywhere else. Don't even bother to look. When did PAUL say His rapture would be?

2 Thes. 2
1. Nowe we beseech you, brethren, by the comming of our Lord Iesus Christ, and by our assembling vnto him,
3 Let no man deceiue you by any meanes: for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first, and that that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition, (Geneva Bible)

Paul should KNOW when his rapture will take place: here he says it will be BEFORE (first) the man of sin is revealed or disclosed.

In 1 Thes. Paul is also clear, the rapture will be the trigger for the signs of the Day of the Lord. These signs are seen at the 6th seal. So according to Paul, the rapture will come ONE INSTANT before the earthquake of the 6th seal. In fact, the earthquake will be caused by the dead in Christ rising. So Paul and John are in perfect agreement. The rapture will be the trigger for the SIGNS of the start of the Day. The signs are in chapter 6, the DAY begins in chapter 8 with the first trumpet judgment.

These are the ONLY places we find the timing of the rapture. And in these two it is very clearly PRETRIB.

Lamad

We should all make note of the fact that it was God who shut the door on Noah's Ark ..... then the rain and destruction began.

I feel God will do something similar just before the tribulation wrath begins .... possibly a rapture of those he plans to save.

It is also used in Matthew 25:10 The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut.

Obviously there has to be some significant event that (suddenly) starts the tribulation ..... if not the rapture ...... then what ??

You have hit the nail squarely on the head! Of course it is the rapture that is the trigger for the signs of the Day, as shown at the 6th seal. Shortly after that John saw the church around the throne in heaven. The rapture is the SUDDENLY in 1 Thes. 5 that causes the sudden destruction. It will come at a time of peace and safety.

Lamad

 

[TWC]

I have provided bible evidence over an over, but preconceived glasses prevent some from reading.

It is SO simple: the church was seen IN HEAVEN by John in Rev. 7, having just been raptured, before John as even begun the 70th week. The ONLY thing posttribbers can do with this is deny it is the raptured church, or rearrange the book to fit their theory.

Does the Bible identify the multitude as being the church?

Note: if the church is seen in heaven before the 70th week begins, which is was, then the rapture is PReTRIB.

2nd point: Paul was the ONLY New Testament writer that received revelation knowledge of the rapture. Therefore, we cannot find the rapture anywhere else. Don't even bother to look. When did PAUL say His rapture would be?

They were raptured there? Where does John say how they got there?

2nd point: Paul was the ONLY New Testament writer that received revelation knowledge of the rapture. Therefore, we cannot find the rapture anywhere else. Don't even bother to look. When did PAUL say His rapture would be?

Does the Bible say that only Paul knew about it? Do you believe that Jesus knew about it?

2 Thes. 2
1. Nowe we beseech you, brethren, by the comming of our Lord Iesus Christ, and by our assembling vnto him,
3 Let no man deceiue you by any meanes: for that day shall not come, except there come a departing first, and that that man of sinne be disclosed, euen the sonne of perdition, (Geneva Bible)

Paul should KNOW when his rapture will take place: here he says it will be BEFORE (first) the man of sin is revealed or disclosed.

Where in scripture does apostasia mean a physical departure? Since the one-other-time usage of the word isn't good enough for you, perhaps you should try the Septuagint. I'll give you a hint: you're wrong.

In 1 Thes. Paul is also clear, the rapture will be the trigger for the signs of the Day of the Lord. These signs are seen at the 6th seal. So according to Paul, the rapture will come ONE INSTANT before the earthquake of the 6th seal. In fact, the earthquake will be caused by the dead in Christ rising. So Paul and John are in perfect agreement. The rapture will be the trigger for the SIGNS of the start of the Day. The signs are in chapter 6, the DAY begins in chapter 8 with the first trumpet judgment.

These are the ONLY places we find the timing of the rapture. And in these two it is very clearly PRETRIB.

Way to add to the book there...

 

[iamlamad]

Does the Bible identify the multitude as being the church?


They were raptured there? Where does John say how they got there?


Does the Bible say that only Paul knew about it? Do you believe that Jesus knew about it?


Where in scripture does apostasia mean a physical departure? Since the one-other-time usage of the word isn't good enough for you, perhaps you should try the Septuagint. I'll give you a hint: you're wrong.


Way to add to the book there...

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, acts like a duck, it is a DUCK! iIs there a clear scripture telling us this is NOT the raptured bride?

For those that believe John 14, then 1 Thes. 4:17, we KNOW there is coming an event that will take the bride to heaven. From Revelation 1:1 to Rev. 8 there is no hint of this rapture, EXCEPT this great crowd without number.

of all nations, tribes, peoples, and tongues........Does this fit the body of Christ? Certianly it does.

standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, with palm branches in their hands,...Does this fit John 14 and 1 Thes. 4:17? These verses are not that pointed, that we will go before the throne, but I think that is universially understood: when we get there, that will be our goal!

crying out with a loud voice, saying, “Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!” ....does this fit the Bride? Certainly it does!

washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. ....does this fit the Bride? Most certainly it does!

“These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation....this is the one phrase that causes some to think these are NOT the bride. They have imprinted in their brain, that these two words together can ONLY mean that period of time Jesus spoke of after the abomination, and on into the second half of the week. I am convinced, if this phrase had been left out, most of the church would believe this to be the raptured bride. So what is the intent of the author here? What is the real meaning? First notice that the week has not yet even started! Much less has John arrived at the second half of the week. The days of Great tribulation that Jesus spoke of will not start in Revelation until AFTER chapter 14, after the image has been erected and the Mark established and enforced. Therefore, this cannot possibly be the intended meaning. We also notice, John used these two verses before in Revelation, again not possibly meaning those days of GT Jesus spoke of. So the meaning is only this: at the time of the rapture, people will be dying for thier testimony. It is that way now in half the world, and it will spread here. So all John is telling us, when the rapture takes place, many will be martyed around the world. How can "tribulation" get any worse than if one is murdered? They cannot be murdered twice.

Next, the TIMING of this group in heaven fits the timing of Paul's rapture EXACTLY. Paul tells us the rapture will be the trigger for the signs of the Day of the Lord. What is just before chapter 7? The signs for the start of the DAY. Therefore, there is amply proof that this IS the raptured church.

They were raptured there? Where does John say how they got there? John DIDN'T say how they got there. But Paul does, and John 14 does.

Does the Bible say that only Paul knew about it? Do you believe that Jesus knew about it? Did Peter write of the rapture? No. Did James write of the rapture? No, no ther writer mentions the catching up of the Bride. Since the rapture will be pretty much the rapture of the Gentile church, it is fitting that Paul got the revelation of it. It will come when the fullness of the Gentiles comes in.

Of course Jesus knew about it when He gave Paul the revelation of it. But did Jesus know about it when He was on the earth? I doubt it.

Where in scripture does apostasia mean a physical departure? Since the one-other-time usage of the word isn't good enough for you, perhaps you should try the Septuagint. I'll give you a hint: you're wrong.

Right here in 2 Thes. 2. That is enough. The Greek Lexicons tell us it CAN mean a spacial depature. If it can, then certainly it does here. May I suggest you study this passage until you really understand the intent of the author? it is clear you don't yet.
Did you not understand verses 6-8? They tell us clearly over and over that there is one restraining or holding back the revealing of the man of sin, so that he can be revealed at the proper time. And when the restrainer is taken out of the way, THEN the man of sin will be revealed. Agreed? I hope so, for it is TRUTH.

Now, if you go back to verse 3, you will be forced to agree that in Paul's argument, in verse 3B the man if sin IS REVEALED. Therefore, verse 3A absolutely must be the one restraining or holdng down or preventing has to be taken out of the way.
Case closed......unless you think that a falling away from truth can be the restrainer removed! it cannot! Evil cannot restrain evil! Only GOOD can restrain evil. So whatever meaning you associate with apostasia, it MUST carry the meaning of something restraining and being taken out of the way. Since the very THEME of this passage is the gathering, there can be no OTHER meaning.

Of course you are free to disagree, but when you get to heaven, you will see that the early translators got this verse RIGHT. Depature is the very best word to fit apostasia and fit the intended meaning of this passage.

Lamad

 

[TWC]

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, acts like a duck, it is a DUCK!

The same can be said for eisegesis.

“These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation....this is the one phrase that causes some to think these are NOT the bride. They have imprinted in their brain, that these two words together can ONLY mean that period of time Jesus spoke of after the abomination, and on into the second half of the week. I am convinced, if this phrase had been left out, most of the church would believe this to be the raptured bride. So what is the intent of the author here? What is the real meaning? First notice that the week has not yet even started! Much less has John arrived at the second half of the week. The days of Great tribulation that Jesus spoke of will not start in Revelation until AFTER chapter 14, after the image has been erected and the Mark established and enforced. Therefore, this cannot possibly be the intended meaning. We also notice, John used these two verses before in Revelation, again not possibly meaning those days of GT Jesus spoke of. So the meaning is only this: at the time of the rapture, people will be dying for thier testimony. It is that way now in half the world, and it will spread here. So all John is telling us, when the rapture takes place, many will be martyed around the world. How can "tribulation" get any worse than if one is murdered? They cannot be murdered twice.

Next, the TIMING of this group in heaven fits the timing of Paul's rapture EXACTLY. Paul tells us the rapture will be the trigger for the signs of the Day of the Lord. What is just before chapter 7? The signs for the start of the DAY. Therefore, there is amply proof that this IS the raptured church.

They were raptured there? Where does John say how they got there? John DIDN'T say how they got there. But Paul does, and John 14 does.

Are they martyred or raptured?

Does the Bible say that only Paul knew about it? Do you believe that Jesus knew about it? Did Peter write of the rapture? No. Did James write of the rapture? No, no ther writer mentions the catching up of the Bride. Since the rapture will be pretty much the rapture of the Gentile church, it is fitting that Paul got the revelation of it. It will come when the fullness of the Gentiles comes in.

Of course Jesus knew about it when He gave Paul the revelation of it. But did Jesus know about it when He was on the earth? I doubt it.

So you believe that Jesus, despite all the prophecy He gave, didn't know about the rapture? I honestly didn't think you'd go that far...

Right here in 2 Thes. 2. That is enough. The Greek Lexicons tell us it CAN mean a spacial depature. If it can, then certainly it does here. May I suggest you study this passage until you really understand the intent of the author? it is clear you don't yet.
Did you not understand verses 6-8? They tell us clearly over and over that there is one restraining or holding back the revealing of the man of sin, so that he can be revealed at the proper time. And when the restrainer is taken out of the way, THEN the man of sin will be revealed. Agreed? I hope so, for it is TRUTH.

Now, if you go back to verse 3, you will be forced to agree that in Paul's argument, in verse 3B the man if sin IS REVEALED. Therefore, verse 3A absolutely must be the one restraining or holdng down or preventing has to be taken out of the way.
Case closed......unless you think that a falling away from truth can be the restrainer removed! it cannot! Evil cannot restrain evil! Only GOOD can restrain evil. So whatever meaning you associate with apostasia, it MUST carry the meaning of something restraining and being taken out of the way. Since the very THEME of this passage is the gathering, there can be no OTHER meaning.

Of course you are free to disagree, but when you get to heaven, you will see that the early translators got this verse RIGHT. Depature is the very best word to fit apostasia and fit the intended meaning of this passage.

Lamad

It's interesting how you insist that the apostasia and the restrainer being "taken out of the way" are one and the same, tied at the hip, when at the same time you insist that the coming of Christ and our gathering to Him are completely separated, isolated events.

Good to see that you admit that your definition of apostasia is simply based on the fact that that definition fits your doctrine.

You also might want to go study Genesis 3 in regards to your appealing to the intent of the author. That didn't work out so well back then.

 

[iamlamad]

The same can be said for eisegesis.


Are they martyred or raptured?


So you believe that Jesus, despite all the prophecy He gave, didn't know about the rapture? I honestly didn't think you'd go that far...


It's interesting how you insist that the apostasia and the restrainer being "taken out of the way" are one and the same, tied at the hip, when at the same time you insist that the coming of Christ and our gathering to Him are completely separated, isolated events.

Good to see that you admit that your definition of apostasia is simply based on the fact that that definition fits your doctrine.

You also might want to go study Genesis 3 in regards to your appealing to the intent of the author. That didn't work out so well back then.

If you don't think this group is the raptured church, then who do YOU say they are?

Do you understand that Jesus laid aside all His Godly attributues to become a man? All He did, He did as a MAN anointed by the Holy Spirit. So He knew only what the Father revealed to Him, which was a LOT. Do you imagine He remembered the plans the Godhead made before the foundation of the earth was made? I don't think so! So you tell me: HOW could Jesus have known anything about the rapture, while He was still on earth? He could have known ONLY if the Holy Spirit had revealed it to Him. But we find barely a TRACE or hint of ANYTHING about the church in His ministry.

Is there even one tiny hint they are martyrs? In other places John is very clear when a group is martyrs.

your definition of apostasia is simply based on the fact that that definition fits your doctrine.

I go by what is writtten. I did not write 2 Thes. 2 verses 6-8, Paul did! Let's read it together:

6 And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time.

What do we learn from this ONE verse?

1) Paul has already TOLD us who or what is holding him back, for he writes, "now you know." Well, Paul, HOW can we now know?
Why would Paul write these words? It is very simply, because HE JUST TOLD US, but did it in a way that we might not get - so he is hinting that we go back and read previous verses again!
2) We learn that there will be a proper time for the revealing, but not now, because now something or someone is holding him back from being revealed

7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.
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.

What can we learn here? There is one holding back the revealing, and weill continue to hold back or restrain or prevent the revealing, UNTIL he is taken out of the way.

So in these three verses we learn that there is one restraining or holding back or preventing the man of sin from being revealed, but at the proper time, whoever or whatever is hold back or restraining will be taken out of the way. There is nothing really complicated here, it is basic language presenting a simple concept. But one more thing, we learn that WE NOW KNOW WHO......again, HOW can we now know who is restraining? Why would Paul write this? There can be only one reason, HE TOLD US WHO!

Now let's look at verse 3

3....and the man of sin have been revealed, the son of perdition; (Darby version)
3...and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. (NIV)
3...and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition (KJV)
3... and the appearing of the man of sin, the son of perdition, who sets himself against, (Weymouth)
3...and the Apocalypse of the Man of Lawlessness, the Man of Sin, Son of Destruction, is unveiled.

So, in Paul's argument, at this moment in time, is the man of sin revealed - or is he not? A large percentage of texts say "Is revealed." Paul goes on to say, "he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God." Therefore, Paul is concluding here that the man of sin at this moment in time, verse 3B, HAS BEEN [already] revealed [in Paul's argument].

If the verses 6,7,and 8 have any meaning at all, then we MUST CONCLUDE that [in Paul's argument] the one restraining or holding back the revealing, has now been removed or taken out of the way, for this is the only way the man of sin can be revealed. This is just logic and understanding language and argument. There are no preconceptions here, unless they were Paul's preconceptions.

So WHAT is in verse 3A that would be any hint of something "taken out of the way?"

3 Let no one deceive you by any means.... Is there any slight hint of something taken out of the way here? NO!
3...for that Day will not come unless the apostasia [departure] comes first....Can there be something here taken out of the way?

Of course there can, if we use the first translations into English, where DEPARTURE is used. This Greek word is a compound word. Here from Strongs is what APO (apo-stasia) can mean, one of the meanings: "b) of separation of a part from the whole, 1) where of a whole some part is taken

I did not write this! I copied and pasted from Blueletter Bible.

So HOW can you even THINK that my take on this verse is preconception only? I did not write, "and now you know!"
I did not write, "concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him."
Paul wrote these words! This is the THEME of this passage, yet in your defintion of this passage, there is NO GATHERING!
And you DON'T KNOW who the restrainer is, yet Paul told us.

Make a note: when you get to heaven and see Paul, ASK HIM what his intent was in this passage!

Lamad

 

[ENOCH2010]

Lamad , Michael is the restrainer, the group in " heaven" you speak of are the all the souls of the dead that have died in the past 2000 years. No where in the Bible is it said this group got there any other way except through death.

 

[The_highwayman]

If you don't think this group is the raptured church, then who do YOU say they are?

Do you understand that Jesus laid aside all His Godly attributues to become a man? All He did, He did as a MAN anointed by the Holy Spirit. So He knew only what the Father revealed to Him, which was a LOT. Do you imagine He remembered the plans the Godhead made before the foundation of the earth was made? I don't think so! So you tell me: HOW could Jesus have known anything about the rapture, while He was still on earth? He could have known ONLY if the Holy Spirit had revealed it to Him. But we find barely a TRACE or hint of ANYTHING about the church in His ministry.

Is there even one tiny hint they are martyrs? In other places John is very clear when a group is martyrs.

your definition of apostasia is simply based on the fact that that definition fits your doctrine.

I go by what is writtten. I did not write 2 Thes. 2 verses 6-8, Paul did! Let's read it together:

6 And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time.

What do we learn from this ONE verse?

1) Paul has already TOLD us who or what is holding him back, for he writes, "now you know." Well, Paul, HOW can we now know?
Why would Paul write these words? It is very simply, because HE JUST TOLD US, but did it in a way that we might not get - so he is hinting that we go back and read previous verses again!
2) We learn that there will be a proper time for the revealing, but not now, because now something or someone is holding him back from being revealed

7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.
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.

What can we learn here? There is one holding back the revealing, and weill continue to hold back or restrain or prevent the revealing, UNTIL he is taken out of the way.

So in these three verses we learn that there is one restraining or holding back or preventing the man of sin from being revealed, but at the proper time, whoever or whatever is hold back or restraining will be taken out of the way. There is nothing really complicated here, it is basic language presenting a simple concept. But one more thing, we learn that WE NOW KNOW WHO......again, HOW can we now know who is restraining? Why would Paul write this? There can be only one reason, HE TOLD US WHO!

Now let's look at verse 3

3....and the man of sin have been revealed, the son of perdition; (Darby version)
3...and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. (NIV)
3...and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition (KJV)
3... and the appearing of the man of sin, the son of perdition, who sets himself against, (Weymouth)
3...and the Apocalypse of the Man of Lawlessness, the Man of Sin, Son of Destruction, is unveiled.

So, in Paul's argument, at this moment in time, is the man of sin revealed - or is he not? A large percentage of texts say "Is revealed." Paul goes on to say, "he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God." Therefore, Paul is concluding here that the man of sin at this moment in time, verse 3B, HAS BEEN [already] revealed [in Paul's argument].

If the verses 6,7,and 8 have any meaning at all, then we MUST CONCLUDE that [in Paul's argument] the one restraining or holding back the revealing, has now been removed or taken out of the way, for this is the only way the man of sin can be revealed. This is just logic and understanding language and argument. There are no preconceptions here, unless they were Paul's preconceptions.

So WHAT is in verse 3A that would be any hint of something "taken out of the way?"

3 Let no one deceive you by any means.... Is there any slight hint of something taken out of the way here? NO!
3...for that Day will not come unless the apostasia [departure] comes first....Can there be something here taken out of the way?

Of course there can, if we use the first translations into English, where DEPARTURE is used. This Greek word is a compound word. Here from Strongs is what APO (apo-stasia) can mean, one of the meanings: "b) of separation of a part from the whole, 1) where of a whole some part is taken

I did not write this! I copied and pasted from Blueletter Bible.

So HOW can you even THINK that my take on this verse is preconception only? I did not write, "and now you know!"
I did not write, "concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him."
Paul wrote these words! This is the THEME of this passage, yet in your defintion of this passage, there is NO GATHERING!
And you DON'T KNOW who the restrainer is, yet Paul told us.

Make a note: when you get to heaven and see Paul, ASK HIM what his intent was in this passage!

Lamad

Lamad,
The answer to where the people in Rev 7 came from is answered by one of the 24 elders in Rev 7.14:
14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

These are the tribulation saints who held fast and were martyred and are also described in Rev 20.3-5

 

[day]

Not all of Revelation is sequential, some of it is asides and closeups. The vision of chapter 7 is just the answer to the question at the end of Chapter 6 "Who can stand" (be saved)? The answer is "the full intended number (symbolized by the number 144,000) of Israel and a larger, vast number of Gentiles". The narrative picks up again in Chapter 8. These two groups are mentioned again later in the time narrative.

These texts were meant to be vague and we can never be sure we understand them correctly until they happen. In the mean time we need to be faithful servants and prepare for both persecution and catching away. Both are part of keeping watch. If we are ready for either occurrence we can give God glory and praise whichever role he calls us to play.

 

[TWC]

If you don't think this group is the raptured church, then who do YOU say they are?

Do you understand that Jesus laid aside all His Godly attributues to become a man? All He did, He did as a MAN anointed by the Holy Spirit. So He knew only what the Father revealed to Him, which was a LOT. Do you imagine He remembered the plans the Godhead made before the foundation of the earth was made? I don't think so! So you tell me: HOW could Jesus have known anything about the rapture, while He was still on earth? He could have known ONLY if the Holy Spirit had revealed it to Him. But we find barely a TRACE or hint of ANYTHING about the church in His ministry.

Again, your point assumes your conclusion. It's entirely possible that He didn't mention it because... there was nothing for Him to mention. For your argument to be valid, you would have to assume that your doctrine is correct.

So, according to you, was Jesus a false prophet?

I go by what is writtten. I did not write 2 Thes. 2 verses 6-8, Paul did! Let's read it together:

6 And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time.

What do we learn from this ONE verse?

1) Paul has already TOLD us who or what is holding him back, for he writes, "now you know." Well, Paul, HOW can we now know?
Why would Paul write these words? It is very simply, because HE JUST TOLD US, but did it in a way that we might not get - so he is hinting that we go back and read previous verses again!
2) We learn that there will be a proper time for the revealing, but not now, because now something or someone is holding him back from being revealed

7 For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.
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.

What can we learn here? There is one holding back the revealing, and weill continue to hold back or restrain or prevent the revealing, UNTIL he is taken out of the way.

So in these three verses we learn that there is one restraining or holding back or preventing the man of sin from being revealed, but at the proper time, whoever or whatever is hold back or restraining will be taken out of the way. There is nothing really complicated here, it is basic language presenting a simple concept. But one more thing, we learn that WE NOW KNOW WHO......again, HOW can we now know who is restraining? Why would Paul write this? There can be only one reason, HE TOLD US WHO!

2 Thessalonians 2:5-8
Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. 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.

Paul wasn't telling them anything new. He was reminding them of something they already knew, something he had already told them. If they were familiar with the book of Daniel, then they would definitely know the identity of the restrainer Paul was talking about.

Now let's look at verse 3

3....and the man of sin have been revealed, the son of perdition; (Darby version)
3...and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. (NIV)
3...and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition (KJV)
3... and the appearing of the man of sin, the son of perdition, who sets himself against, (Weymouth)
3...and the Apocalypse of the Man of Lawlessness, the Man of Sin, Son of Destruction, is unveiled.

So, in Paul's argument, at this moment in time, is the man of sin revealed - or is he not? A large percentage of texts say "Is revealed." Paul goes on to say, "he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God." Therefore, Paul is concluding here that the man of sin at this moment in time, verse 3B, HAS BEEN [already] revealed [in Paul's argument].

If the verses 6,7,and 8 have any meaning at all, then we MUST CONCLUDE that [in Paul's argument] the one restraining or holding back the revealing, has now been removed or taken out of the way, for this is the only way the man of sin can be revealed. This is just logic and understanding language and argument. There are no preconceptions here, unless they were Paul's preconceptions.

So WHAT is in verse 3A that would be any hint of something "taken out of the way?"

3 Let no one deceive you by any means.... Is there any slight hint of something taken out of the way here? NO!
3...for that Day will not come unless the apostasia [departure] comes first....Can there be something here taken out of the way?

If "apostasia" means a "defection" as it is defined every other time it is used in scripture, your argument falls apart. Again, your premise is standing on your conclusion. Even if it were a spatial departure, you have nothing in the text that states exactly who or what is departing, where to and where from.

I did not write this! I copied and pasted from Blueletter Bible.

So HOW can you even THINK that my take on this verse is preconception only? I did not write, "and now you know!"
I did not write, "concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him."
Paul wrote these words! This is the THEME of this passage, yet in your defintion of this passage, there is NO GATHERING!
And you DON'T KNOW who the restrainer is, yet Paul told us.

Sure, you didn't write those things, but you do apply your assumptions to it as though you did. Both the coming of the Lord and the gathering are associated with "the day" which will not arrive until the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness is revealed.

 

[iamlamad]

Again, your point assumes your conclusion. It's entirely possible that He didn't mention it because... there was nothing for Him to mention. For your argument to be valid, you would have to assume that your doctrine is correct.

So, according to you, was Jesus a false prophet?


2 Thessalonians 2:5-8
Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. 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.

Paul wasn't telling them anything new. He was reminding them of something they already knew, something he had already told them. If they were familiar with the book of Daniel, then they would definitely know the identity of the restrainer Paul was talking about.


If "apostasia" means a "defection" as it is defined every other time it is used in scripture, your argument falls apart. Again, your premise is standing on your conclusion. Even if it were a spatial departure, you have nothing in the text that states exactly who or what is departing, where to and where from.


Sure, you didn't write those things, but you do apply your assumptions to it as though you did. Both the coming of the Lord and the gathering are associated with "the day" which will not arrive until the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness is revealed.

The point remains, this group too large to number MUST BE some group. We know they are a group that are born again, by their definition. We know they came out of a period of time called "great tribulation." There is not one hint that they were martyred, so why assume they are? I know (perhaps you don't) that John has not yet even started the 70th week. So I know this would fit "pretrib." From 1 Thes. 4:17 and John 14, we know that soon Jesus will come to the air and the clouds, and rapture (and resurrect) His bride, and take her to heaven. I will agree, it is an assumption to anyone to identify this group as the bride. However, I believe it is a good assumption. The pretrib group in general mistakenly chose Rev. 4:1 as the rapture. When I see Paul telling us the rapture will be the trigger for the signs for Day of the Lord, and John showing us the signs at the 6th seal, then I know the church was caught up just before the 6th seal events. Is it then a big assumption to see this large group seen in heaven shortly after, as the bride? I don't think so.

Perhaps He did not mention it because He said He ONLY speaks what He hears, and He heard nothing of the church. OF COURSE Jesus was not a false prophet! Please tell me what made you write this. What did I write that triggered this thinking?

OF COURSE Paul was reminding them. He previously taught them of the gathering, or the rapture of the church. Logic tells us, if they had been taught previously of a POST TRIB rapture, they would have no reason to be upset at all. But if they had been taught of a pretrib rapture, of course they would be upset since they thought the "trib" of Day of the Lord had started, and they were still on the earth! That meant Paul had taught them something wrong, or that they had missed the rapture!

Aha! So you want then to refer back to Daniel to find the restrainer? Now you are making Michael, the great archangel "falling away!" Are you SURE you wish to name Michael as the archangel?

You cannot have it both ways: if you assume apostasia means falling away, and you assume Michael is the restrainer, you have painted yourself into a corner, for verse 3A absolutely must be the restrainer being taken out of the way, for in 3B the man of sin IS REVEALED. Therefore, if you insist on Michael being the restrainer, then HE has fallen away to allow the man of sin to be revealed.

If "apostasia" means a "defection" as it is defined every other time it is used in scripture, your argument falls apart. Again, your premise is standing on your conclusion. Even if it were a spatial departure, you have nothing in the text that states exactly who or what is departing, where to and where from.

Ha ha. The way you wrote it is as if this word was used many times, and that is simply not the truth. You and I both know that over the history of the planet writers have taken liberties with words and have changed their meaning slowly over time. Paul could well have used this word in a way it had not been used before and my argument still holds, for it is the ONLY argument that fits the context of the passage. OF COURSE we know who or what is departing, for the THEME of the passage is the gathering!

The truth is, the rapture or gathering is the THEME of this passage, and translating apostasia as the earlier translators did, as departure, is the ONLY way that the theme of the gathering is satisfied. Why would Paul establish the theme, and then never satisfy it? Of course, he would not.

Both the coming of the Lord and the gathering are associated with "the day" ha ha! Now your premise is standing on your conclusion! IS there a connection with the gathering and the Day? Of course there is, written in 1 Thes. 5. But what is that connection? Paul writes of the Day, just three verses after the classic rapture verse. He describes a SUDDEN event, and two different groups of people receiving two different outcomes at this sudden event. Those in the Light, get "salvation" [rapture] and get to "live together with Him." Those in the dark get the "Sudden destruction." The Sudden destruction is the connection with the Day. So as you say, we cannot separate the rapture from the Day; they are tied together: the rapture is the trigger for the Day; or rather, the signs for the Day. But now we must refer to Revelation to see where the Day begins. JOhn gives us the signs in chapter 6, an intermission in chapter 7, and the Day beginning in chapter 8. So alligning Paul with John, the rapture must come just before, and as a trigger for the signs given at the 6th seal. It is no wonder then, John saw the raptured church in heaven in chapter 7. This is just connecting the dots God has given us to draw the correct picture.
Lamad

 

[TWC]

The point remains, this group too large to number MUST BE some group. We know they are a group that are born again, by their definition. We know they came out of a period of time called "great tribulation." There is not one hint that they were martyred, so why assume they are? I know (perhaps you don't) that John has not yet even started the 70th week. So I know this would fit "pretrib." From 1 Thes. 4:17 and John 14, we know that soon Jesus will come to the air and the clouds, and rapture (and resurrect) His bride, and take her to heaven. I will agree, it is an assumption to anyone to identify this group as the bride. However, I believe it is a good assumption. The pretrib group in general mistakenly chose Rev. 4:1 as the rapture. When I see Paul telling us the rapture will be the trigger for the signs for Day of the Lord, and John showing us the signs at the 6th seal, then I know the church was caught up just before the 6th seal events. Is it then a big assumption to see this large group seen in heaven shortly after, as the bride? I don't think so.

The question remains: Does John say who they were and how they got there?

Perhaps He did not mention it because He said He ONLY speaks what He hears, and He heard nothing of the church. OF COURSE Jesus was not a false prophet! Please tell me what made you write this. What did I write that triggered this thinking?

If He predicted that Peter would die when he was old in age, then how could there be an imminent return prior to Peter's death? He was alive when Paul wrote his letters to the Thessalonians, so if Paul was teaching an imminent return, then someone is wrong here.

Ephesians 5:25
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.

OF COURSE Paul was reminding them. He previously taught them of the gathering, or the rapture of the church. Logic tells us, if they had been taught previously of a POST TRIB rapture, they would have no reason to be upset at all. But if they had been taught of a pretrib rapture, of course they would be upset since they thought the "trib" of Day of the Lord had started, and they were still on the earth! That meant Paul had taught them something wrong, or that they had missed the rapture!

Does the Bible say that the tribulation and the Day of the Lord are the same? The Thessalonians had already been going through a period of tribulation, so avoiding it altogether wasn't an issue.

Aha! So you want then to refer back to Daniel to find the restrainer? Now you are making Michael, the great archangel "falling away!" Are you SURE you wish to name Michael as the archangel?

You cannot have it both ways: if you assume apostasia means falling away, and you assume Michael is the restrainer, you have painted yourself into a corner, for verse 3A absolutely must be the restrainer being taken out of the way, for in 3B the man of sin IS REVEALED. Therefore, if you insist on Michael being the restrainer, then HE has fallen away to allow the man of sin to be revealed.

You do know what the word "and" means, don't you? Paul mentions two separate events that must occur before the Day of the Lord.

Ha ha. The way you wrote it is as if this word was used many times, and that is simply not the truth. You and I both know that over the history of the planet writers have taken liberties with words and have changed their meaning slowly over time. Paul could well have used this word in a way it had not been used before and my argument still holds, for it is the ONLY argument that fits the context of the passage. OF COURSE we know who or what is departing, for the THEME of the passage is the gathering!

The truth is, the rapture or gathering is the THEME of this passage, and translating apostasia as the earlier translators did, as departure, is the ONLY way that the theme of the gathering is satisfied. Why would Paul establish the theme, and then never satisfy it? Of course, he would not.

The word carries a consistent meaning throughout scripture. Your definition has NO precedent. God is not the author of confusion and there are words in Greek that indicate spatial departure.

Both the coming of the Lord and the gathering are associated with "the day" ha ha! Now your premise is standing on your conclusion! IS there a connection with the gathering and the Day? Of course there is, written in 1 Thes. 5. But what is that connection? Paul writes of the Day, just three verses after the classic rapture verse. He describes a SUDDEN event, and two different groups of people receiving two different outcomes at this sudden event. Those in the Light, get "salvation" [rapture] and get to "live together with Him." Those in the dark get the "Sudden destruction." The Sudden destruction is the connection with the Day. So as you say, we cannot separate the rapture from the Day; they are tied together: the rapture is the trigger for the Day; or rather, the signs for the Day. But now we must refer to Revelation to see where the Day begins. JOhn gives us the signs in chapter 6, an intermission in chapter 7, and the Day beginning in chapter 8. So alligning Paul with John, the rapture must come just before, and as a trigger for the signs given at the 6th seal. It is no wonder then, John saw the raptured church in heaven in chapter 7. This is just connecting the dots God has given us to draw the correct picture.

Again, does the Bible say that the tribulation and the Day of the Lord are the same?

 

[BLACK SHEEP]

The point remains, this group too large to number MUST BE some group. We know they are a group that are born again, by their definition. We know they came out of a period of time called "great tribulation."

Most Christians view the tribulation as a time period. It's actually more accurate to call it the condition of a time period. The word means...

1) a pressing, pressing together, pressure
2) metaph. oppression, affliction, tribulation, distress, straits

The word is used like this........the number is amount of times translated as such in the bible.

AV — tribulation 21, affliction 17, trouble 3, anguish 1, persecution 1, burdened 1, to be afflicted + 1519 1

There is no end-time great tribulation period mentioned in Rev. 7:14. It's more accurate to say that it's a condition those around the throne went through to get there. The elders around the throne are very likely the Old Testament patriarchs.

This is what I think about Rev 14. John is translated to heaven. The scene for John fluctuates between heaven......where he's at at the moment.....and earth......the things which are to come.

The twelve thousand of each tribe he sees in heaven are already there in his presence. This heavenly event of the throne and twelve tribes is what John observed about the throne "while he was there." This a a picture of the throne in AD 70 (or whatever) at John's present time.

13 And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they?
14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

These people around the throne (24 elders and those with white robes) were resurrected at the same time Christ was resurrected! It's easy to fabricate anything you want to in Revelation. But a careful word study of the key words in Rev. 14 shows John's observance of the throne in heaven to be in the present, yet what he sees happening on earth is what is future.

There is not one hint that they were martyred, so why assume they are? I know (perhaps you don't) that John has not yet even started the 70th week. So I know this would fit "pretrib."

Again your assumption is that the throne that John observes in Rev. 7 or the martyrs beneath the altar in Rev. 6 are saint's resurrected before Jacob's trouble. If these people went through great tribulation and the same word is also translated trouble, persecution, anguish, affliction, burden and oppression, I would speculate that many of them were martyrs.

From 1 Thes. 4:17 and John 14, we know that soon Jesus will come to the air and the clouds, and rapture (and resurrect) His bride, and take her to heaven. I will agree, it is an assumption to anyone to identify this group as the bride. However, I believe it is a good assumption. The pretrib group in general mistakenly chose Rev. 4:1 as the rapture. When I see Paul telling us the rapture will be the trigger for the signs for Day of the Lord, and John showing us the signs at the 6th seal, then I know the church was caught up just before the 6th seal events. Is it then a big assumption to see this large group seen in heaven shortly after, as the bride? I don't think so.

It's amazing how you arrive at you conclusions by your many preconceived inaccuracies.


Jesus raptures (Harvest) His own from the clouds here....

Revelation 14:12-20

Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
13 And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them.
14 And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.
15 And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe.
16 And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.
17 And another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle.
18 And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe.
19 And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.
20 And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand and six hundred furlongs.

APOSTASY!!!

Apostasia means to forsake something and comes from the word divorce. It is a political or religious revolt and rebellion that results in a defection, abandonment or desertion of your PREVIOUS affiliation.
You can't abandon, desert or divorce something and still be a part of it. Apostasy is not a defection from truth.
Besides that. There is no indication in the passage that it has anything at all to do with the Church.

 

[veteran]

I have provided bible evidence over an over, but preconceived glasses prevent some from reading.

It is SO simple: the church was seen IN HEAVEN by John in Rev. 7, having just been raptured, before John as even begun the 70th week. The ONLY thing posttribbers can do with this is deny it is the raptured church, or rearrange the book to fit their theory.

Note: if the church is seen in heaven before the 70th week begins, which is was, then the rapture is PReTRIB.

Any false prophet can pull just the one Rev.7:9 verse out of its context minus the rest of the verses it's given with, and make up lies. That's who you've been listening to, false prophets who do that very thing with butchering God's Word to their own destruction. Here's the ACTUAL context of those Rev.7 "great multitude"...

Rev 7:9-17
9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;
10 And cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.
11 And all the angels stood round about the throne, and about the elders and the four beasts, and fell before the throne on their faces, and worshipped God,
12 Saying, Amen: Blessing, and glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honour, and power, and might, be unto our God for ever and ever. Amen.


Question is, just what TIMING is this when these stand before the throne and The Lamb? Nothing here yet to tell just 'when', but the verses that follow DO show us the timing. But this is where many of the Pre-Trib secret Rapture preachers stop and just teach those verses above, skipping the rest of this Scripture...

Rev.7:13 And one of the elders answered, saying unto me, "What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they?"

NOW we're getting to 'where' ("whence") this "great multitude" came from. We... are actually being asked this question too when we read this part...

Rev.7:14 And I said unto him, "Sir, thou knowest." And he said to me, "These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.


John is told these "came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." Does that mean they were 'raptured' prior to that tribulation?? NO! It is declaring how they 'overcame' the tribulation through Jesus Christ.


Rev.7:15 Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve Him day and night in His temple: and He That sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them.

"Therefore", i.e., for this reason, they are before the throne of God and serve Him day and night in His WHAT? In His temple in Heaven? No, in Christ's future Milennium Temple that will be on earth, per Ezek.40 thru 47.

At the very last verse of Ezek.48 The full Godhead has returned to the earth. That won't happen until after Christ's future "thousand years" reign of Rev.20 though, and with NO NEED of a temple. But for Christ's thousand years reign, there will be a temple in Jerusalem with Christ and His elect reigning over all nations from that location. THAT is the TIMING of these verses here about the "great multitude".

Rev.7:16 They shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more; neither shall the sun light on them, nor any heat.
17 For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.
(KJV)

That's God's River of the Waters of Life established in Jerusalem per Ezekiel 47! That doesn't happen until AFTER Christ's return to subdue His enemies here on earth. That's when we shall hunger no more, neither will the sun light upon us nor any heat, etc. That is about the following... timing...

Rev 21:2-4
2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself shall be with them, and be their God.
4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
(KJV)

 

[michaelvpardo]

1 Thessalonians 5:1 ¶But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.
2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.
3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.
4 But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.

To say that the tribulation is a time of peace and safety contradicts what we already know about "tribulation!"
If people are saying peace and safety that means we are in a time of trouble. I don't think the verse implies there will be peace and safety. I think it implies people are wanting it. That interpretation aligns with all the other things we know written in prophecy about the tribulation.
It really makes no sense that tribulation would be a time of peace and safety.

Howdy Kaotic,
I actually find myself agreeing with you here, and that doesn't seem to happen a lot. The peace and safety thing was also what was being preached by the false prophets of Jeremiah's day, prior to the fall of Jerusalem to Nebuchadnezzar. When people are frightened by what's going on, they want to hear that everything is going to be okay, not that they are under judgment and that things will only get worse. So as it is today, as well.

 

[zhavoney]

This thread is a gross misrepresentation of Scripture. Did anyone bother to read the owner of this forums thread on the rapture? Here is a link to it. http://www.christianityboard.com/topic/15958-what-about-the-rapture/#entry151369 . There is no rapture at all the word Harpazo does not mean rapture it means "taken by force". Here is the word harpazzo used in another new testament scripture. John 6
15 Therefore when Jesus perceived that they were about to come and take Him by force (Harpazo) to make Him king, He departed again to the mountain by Himself alone.

Christ will come again one time and take His Saints by the forces of heaven and raise them up into the air of earth. Christ and His saints will then reign here on earth for one thousand Years.

"There is no rapture" and not a single scripture anywhere that says that anyone is going to heaven.

When Christ's two witnesses start the great tribulation you better be full grown in faith just to make it through the three and a half year tribulation. Because true faith in the Lord alone will be the only onesw who make it through into the Kingdom of God.

 

[veteran]

This thread is a gross misrepresentation of Scripture. Did anyone bother to read the owner of this forums thread on the rapture? Here is a link to it. http://www.christianityboard.com/topic/15958-what-about-the-rapture/#entry151369 . There is no rapture at all the word Harpazo does not mean rapture it means "taken by force". Here is the word harpazzo used in another new testament scripture. John 6
15 Therefore when Jesus perceived that they were about to come and take Him by force (Harpazo) to make Him king, He departed again to the mountain by Himself alone.

Christ will come again one time and take His Saints by the forces of heaven and raise them up into the air of earth. Christ and His saints will then reign here on earth for one thousand Years.

"There is no rapture" and not a single scripture anywhere that says that anyone is going to heaven.

When Christ's two witnesses start the great tribulation you better be full grown in faith just to make it through the three and a half year tribulation. Because true faith in the Lord alone will be the only onesw who make it through into the Kingdom of God.

You're right pretty much, but we will be in the heavenly, because the resurrection and change to a spiritual body involves the heavenly dimension. The difference is that the heavenly dimension is going to be realized right here, upon this earth.

 

[pilgrim1]

Eric...

1Th_5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

( Note! The words tribulation (in Matt 4:21)and affliction (in Mark 13:19) are from the same Greek word: thlipsis. )

How can you reconcile your interpretations or your statements with the following verses spoken by Jesus?

Matt 24:
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
25 Behold, I have told you before.
26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
27 For as the lightning comes out of the east, and shines even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
28 For wherever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.


Mark 13:
19 For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be.
20 And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he has chosen, he has shortened the days.
21 And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here is Christ; or, lo, he is there; believe him not:
22 For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall show signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.
23 But take heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.
24 But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light,
25 And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.
26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.
27 And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.

I can’t see any possibility that anyone who understands English would believe in a pre tribulation coming when the word “after” means “after”, not pre or before!!! The verses Jesus said, I quote using only scripture rather than 50 pages of boring opinions and many ambiguous, vague, uncertain, confusing, capable of being misinterpreted.etc. verses that can’t be agreed on by any or all Bible readers!!!