Rapture Top Dogs Admit no Proof Exists.

[Keraz]

Yeshua, any time He quoted the scripture, always seems to use a conservative literal approach.

The Bible prophets were always careful to differentiate between Israel and Judah. In over 160 prophesies, they tell us of the different outcomes for each of the two Houses. Including Jesus, when He said; I have come to save the House of Israel and them alone. Matthew 15:24

Rather obvious, isn't it; that if you think the Jews are the true Israel, then Jesus failed in His mission.
But He did not fail and we Christian believers are the proof of that. We are the Israel of God, by faith and in the majority; by descent as well.

 

[Phoneman777]

I agree with you about Enoch. Always good to converse with. But I have no clue what a Barq Soda is...let alone a po-boy sandwich????

A "Poor boy" aka "po-boy" is like a sub except WAAAAAAYYYYYYY better! Usually made with French bread which has that nice light crispy crust with tasty soft inside and "dressed" with choice of veggies, condiments, and the unique delicacies of New Orleans recipe meats/seafood. During the Great Depression, it was a cheap, delicious way to fill up the tummy, and Barq's was the favorite for root beer, creme soda, cola, or whatever. They're still in business after almost 150 years!

A roast beef 'debris" po-boy with au jus sauce dressed with a ice cold Barq's - and you can get em with gravy so that you need a bath after you finish - well, suffice it to say it's enough to make a vegetarian fall off the wagon LOL

 

[Phoneman777]

I have not been following along on this thread, just reading through some alerts
What do you think of the bolded text of the following scripture?

Daniel 9:24-27
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."

I am going to take a gander here and say that the "prince" is the Antichrist. Are the "people" spoken of here Romans?? Wasn't it Romans who destroyed the Temple? Just a thought

Hey Nancy! The "people of the prince" can refer to either one thing or another:

1) the "people (soldiers) of prince Titus" who came and destroyed Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

2. the "Jewish people of Messiah the Prince" - who, by their rejection of Him, caused God's hand of protection to be withdrawn from the land - destroyed their city and temple in 70 A.D.

Both can be considered valid. However, Futurism says that the Antichrist or Antiochus Epiphenes IV is the "prince", which really doesn't fit at all. For instance, Antiochus long before "Messiah the Prince"; and the Antichrist hadn't even arrived on the scene yet when Jerusalem was destroyed (which defenders of the idea will argue that destruction is during the "last seven years" which is the 70th Week transported to the end of time via a 2,000 years "gap" between the 69th and 70th, which can be shown to be a flawed idea for other reasons. Too much to address in one post

 

[Copperhead]

Rather obvious, isn't it; that if you think the Jews are the true Israel, then Jesus failed in His mission.

Except Yeshua made it clear that both Ephraim (Israel) and Judah would have to acknowledge their offense of rejecting Him and reference Psalms 118... Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord.... before He would return. Hosea 5:14-15 and Matthew 23:39.

If things are as you suggest, then when did the believers (who make up literal, physical Israel as you contend) reject Yeshua, before He returned to His place after being here on earth, so that they have to then acknowledge that offense before He will return? Kind of opens a flaw in your logic. It certainly pokes a hole in the Two House / Ephraimite theory.

Just as Judah was the largest of the southern tribes therefore they cumulatively were called Judah, Ephraim was the largest of the northern tribes and many times the northern kingdom was referenced as Ephraim.....

Hosea 5:14-15 (NKJV) For I will be like a lion to Ephraim,
And like a young lion to the house of Judah.
I, even I, will tear them and go away;
I will take them away, and no one shall rescue.
15 I will return again to My place
Till they acknowledge their offense.
Then they will seek My face;
In their affliction they will earnestly seek Me.”

Following basic syntax and grammatical principles, "them / they" is a reference to both houses by Hosea. The "offense" was before He returned to His place. The Lion of the Tribe of Judah was rejected by both Ephraim (Israel) and Judah, therefore both Ephraim and Judah (they) collectively must acknowledge that offense before He will return.

And if those of Ephraim (Israel) were not there along side those of Judah but instead playing off in Europe or other regions, then how is it that Yeshua included them as committing the offense? How could Ephraim reject Yeshua unless they were where Yeshua was rejected and participated in that rejection? It supports 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, etc that all the tribes had commingled prior to, during, and after the Babylonian Exile.

Zion (Jerusalem) collectively represents all of the Hebrew people in many passages of scripture. Jerusalem was not the only place that prophets and those sent were killed.....

Matthew 23:37-39 (NKJV Strong's) “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing! 38 See! Your house is left to you desolate; 39 for I say to you, you shall see Me no more till you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!

So it would seem that both houses of Jacob are in the same boat.

The "church" wasn't even around to reject Yeshua before He returned to His place. The entity we know as the "church of Yeshua" did not start till Shavuot after He had already returned to His place. So there is no way that on a physical level the redeemed make up literal physical Israel. Spiritually, Yes. Physically, no.

 

[Nancy]

Hey Nancy! The "people of the prince" can refer to either one thing or another:

1) the "people (soldiers) of prince Titus" who came and destroyed Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

2. the "Jewish people of Messiah the Prince" - who, by their rejection of Him, caused God's hand of protection to be withdrawn from the land - destroyed their city and temple in 70 A.D.

Both can be considered valid. However, Futurism says that the Antichrist or Antiochus Epiphenes IV is the "prince", which really doesn't fit at all. For instance, Antiochus long before "Messiah the Prince"; and the Antichrist hadn't even arrived on the scene yet when Jerusalem was destroyed (which defenders of the idea will argue that destruction is during the "last seven years" which is the 70th Week transported to the end of time via a 2,000 years "gap" between the 69th and 70th, which can be shown to be a flawed idea for other reasons. Too much to address in one post

Yeah, this subject could go on forever! I tend to think it is door number "1" as, why would the Jews destroy their own temple? Their own city? Kay...got to get off here for a while...later

 

[Keraz]

Except Yeshua made it clear that both Ephraim (Israel) and Judah would have to acknowledge their offense of rejecting Him and reference Psalms 118... Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord.... before He would return. Hosea 5:14-15 and Matthew 23:39.

As we Christians of the Western, Caucasian peoples have acknowledged our offense; [come out] of apostasy and have accepted the Salvation offered by Jesus, then we are the 'Ephraim' that the prophets tell us will be Redeemed, restored, and forgiven.
The Jews have not acknowledged their offenses and remain in apostasy, excepting for a very small number. Their fate is well documented.

That these truths conflict with your beliefs, my advice is for you to change your beliefs.

 

[Copperhead]

As we Christians of the Western, Caucasian peoples have acknowledged our offense;

How could that be? Were the western Caucasion people in Jerusalem to do the offense of rejecting Yeshua when He was there? You can't have it both ways. Being in the land to reject Yeshua and being scattered to Europe at the same time. To be guilty of an offense, one has to be where the offense was done.

This warmed over, rehashed British Israelism / Two House / Ephraimite idea is really without any biblical support. It is based on secular conjecture.

 

[Keraz]

How could that be? Were the western Caucasion people in Jerusalem to do the offense of rejecting Yeshua when He was there? You can't have it both ways. Being in the land to reject Yeshua and being scattered to Europe at the same time. To be guilty of an offense, one has to be where the offense was done.

This warmed over, rehashed British Israelism / Two House / Ephraimite idea is really without any biblical support. It is based on secular conjecture.

The offense was done when the House of Israel forsook God and worshipped idols, until they were conquered and removed from the Land by Assyria, circa 722-715 BC. God decreed that they receive 390 years of punishment by exile, Ezekiel 4:4-5. This period was increased because of their continuing sins - multiplied by seven; Leviticus 26:18. This calculates to a total exile of 2730 years, now in 2019 - just completed.

The BI people did go somewhat overboard in their promotion of British supremacy, but their basic premise is correct and there is documented proof of their Israelite ancestry. There is also heraldic, archaeological and linguistic indications of their migration across Europe, eventually to America and New Zealand, etc. Jeremiah 31:21

I know that these facts do not suit many people, including yourself, so your reaction is to just reject them. But what you cannot do, is give a viable alternative to the origins of the Western peoples. It is generally accepted that they did migrate from the East, from the Caucasus region. There; most anthropologists on this subject, stop. They fail to make the connection; THAT IS where the House of Israel was exiled to Northern Assyria and when Assyria lost its power, they moved toward the fertile, virtually empty lands of Europe, then scattered around the world, as we are now.

The amazing Plan of God for His chosen people WILL come to fruition; He Will have a people in all of the holy Land, as His witnesses and displaying His glory to the nations. We Christians are that people, the Lord will clear and cleanse the Land, Deuteronomy 32:34-43, and the homecoming of His faithful people is near. Ezekiel 36:8

 

[Copperhead]

The offense was done when the House of Israel forsook God and worshipped idols, until they were conquered and removed from the Land by Assyria, circa 722-715 BC. God decreed that they receive 390 years of punishment by exile, Ezekiel 4:4-5. This period was increased because of their continuing sins - multiplied by seven; Leviticus 26:18. This calculates to a total exile of 2730 years, now in 2019 - just completed.

The BI people did go somewhat overboard in their promotion of British supremacy, but their basic premise is correct and there is documented proof of their Israelite ancestry. There is also heraldic, archaeological and linguistic indications of their migration across Europe, eventually to America and New Zealand, etc. Jeremiah 31:21

I know that these facts do not suit many people, including yourself, so your reaction is to just reject them. But what you cannot do, is give a viable alternative to the origins of the Western peoples. It is generally accepted that they did migrate from the East, from the Caucasus region. There; most anthropologists on this subject, stop. They fail to make the connection; THAT IS where the House of Israel was exiled to Northern Assyria and when Assyria lost its power, they moved toward the fertile, virtually empty lands of Europe, then scattered around the world, as we are now.

The amazing Plan of God for His chosen people WILL come to fruition; He Will have a people in all of the holy Land, as His witnesses and displaying His glory to the nations. We Christians are that people, the Lord will clear and cleanse the Land, Deuteronomy 32:34-43, and the homecoming of His faithful people is near. Ezekiel 36:8

Your assertion doesn't fit the context of Hosea 5. The passage is clear that the offense occurs when Yeshua is here and it causes Him to return to His place. You are off into several hundred years prior. If the offense was prior to His coming, it would have caused Him not to come if it was bad enough to cause Him to return. So no, your assertions are not facts, just assumptions, and yes.... I do reject them. The only way the passage in Hosea works is if Yeshua left His place and the offense caused Him to return to His place. He did not not leave His place to come live among men until the time record in the NT.

Hosea 5:14-15 (NKJV) For I will be like a lion to Ephraim,
And like a young lion to the house of Judah.
I, even I, will tear them and go away;
I will take them away, and no one shall rescue.
15 I will return again to My place
Till they acknowledge their offense.
Then they will seek My face;
In their affliction they will earnestly seek Me.

Matthew 23:37-39 (NKJV) O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing! 38 See! Your house is left to you desolate; 39 for I say to you, you shall see Me no more till you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!

These two passage, the context is present tense that the offense is the rejection of Yeshua when He was here. Not some obscure notion 700 years prior. The offense was done by both Judah and Ephraim (Israel) together at the same time so it also conforms to 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, etc that the two houses had commingled by the time of the exile and afterward.

 

[Copperhead]

That these truths conflict with your beliefs, my advice is for you to change your beliefs.

No way. If you choose to poke your finger in the eye of Yahweh, that is your choice. I will not be an accomplice.

 

[Davy]

What "trap"? Where in God's Word is the "timing" of the arrival of Antichrist in the apostle's generation?

Also, the apostles expected the destruction of the temple would usher in the Second Coming and the end of the world - they couldn't help but think the two were inseparable...yet they were wrong, were they not? Some of the ECFs also believed the Antichrist's arrival would also usher in the same...but expectations of men are not the same as "thus saith the Lord".

The prophecies are claer that the "Little Horn" Antichrist was to reign for "1,260 days" symbolic, which are YEARS in the literal - the papacy ruled from 538 to 1798, before recieving a "deadly wound" which is now being healed by those of you who deny the truth of prophecy as revealed in the teachings of Historicism.

The time of the Biblical Antichrist is for the LAST generation of this world, the generation that will see Christ's coming. That is what is written in God's Word. End of debate.

2 Thess 2:8-9
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
KJV

 

[Phoneman777]

Yeah, this subject could go on forever! I tend to think it is door number "1" as, why would the Jews destroy their own temple? Their own city? Kay...got to get off here for a while...later

Me too, I like prince Titus, seeing that his father was an emperor king. But, number 2 is kinda like the story of "the boy who cried wolf" - we assign blame to the boy for his demise - even thought it was the wolf that killed him - because by his unwise actions he removed himself from his only source of protection from wolf attack. Come back soon!

 

[Phoneman777]

The time of the Biblical Antichrist is for the LAST generation of this world, the generation that will see Christ's coming. That is what is written in God's Word. End of debate.

2 Thess 2:8-9
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
KJV

Sorry, but this verse is far from ending the debate that the AC arises just before the Second Coming.

If you read the entire passage, you'll see that it's telling us that the Man of Sin arises after the "Falling away" (Gr. "Apostasia") which means after the Great Apostasy - when Christians were taught to venerate statues, confess sins to a man, submit to the authority of a sinful man calling himself "holy father", that what motivated God to offer the gift of salvation was Christ's "obedient life" apart from His substitutionary death, worship on the wrong day, etc. If that ain't apostasy, i don't know what is

 

[Davy]

Sorry, but this verse is far from ending the debate that the AC arises just before the Second Coming.

If you read the entire passage, you'll see that it's telling us that the Man of Sin arises after the "Falling away" (Gr. "Apostasia") which means after the Great Apostasy - when Christians were taught to venerate statues, confess sins to a man, submit to the authority of a sinful man calling himself "holy father", that what motivated God to offer the gift of salvation was Christ's "obedient life" apart from His substitutionary death, worship on the wrong day, etc. If that ain't apostasy, i don't know what is

No sense in arguing, the Scripture I quoted is clear. That Wicked one is destroyed with the "brightness of His coming", AS WRITTEN.

If you want to hold to things OTHER THAN Biblical Christianity, then that is your choice to not heed that simple 2 Thess.2:8-9 Scripture by Apostle Paul.

 

[Phoneman777]

No sense in arguing, the Scripture I quoted is clear. That Wicked one is destroyed with the "brightness of His coming", AS WRITTEN.

If you want to hold to things OTHER THAN Biblical Christianity, then that is your choice to not heed that simple 2 Thess.2:8-9 Scripture by Apostle Paul.

Hold on a sec, I'm not talking anything that is "other than" Biblical. I simply hold to the Biblical truth that the Man of Sin is not a "man" but a system, a kingdom, as the Bible describes the Antichrist.

Do you agree that the Little Horn is not a system, a kingdom? If the 10 Horns are indeed kingdoms as the Bible says, then the Litthe Horn must also be a kingdom.

The Little Horn Antichrist among the Ten Horns way back in tjhe past, continues to this day, and will be destroyed by the Second Coming.

 

[Copperhead]

Sorry, but this verse is far from ending the debate that the AC arises just before the Second Coming.

If you read the entire passage, you'll see that it's telling us that the Man of Sin arises after the "Falling away" (Gr. "Apostasia") which means after the Great Apostasy - when Christians were taught to venerate statues, confess sins to a man, submit to the authority of a sinful man calling himself "holy father", that what motivated God to offer the gift of salvation was Christ's "obedient life" apart from His substitutionary death, worship on the wrong day, etc. If that ain't apostasy, i don't know what is

Could be, but many Greek scholars and many English translations say that the departure (as in a spatial departure not a spiritual one) is the correct translation of apostasia in 2 Thessalonians 2. Without a reference in the verse to state what is being departed from, the departure is all that can be implied. Is is disingenuous to apply a English word “apostasy” onto the Greek word “apostasia” because the are similar sounding words. The former does have a understanding of “falling away”, but the latter simply means “departure”. And the passage context given in verse 1... our gathering to the Lord... the “departure” can very well mean the removal of the righteous... i.e. our gathering to the Lord.

Given the amount of “falling away” that has happened at various times in history, it doesn’t seem valid that the key witness of the end is a falling away. Even Paul was dismayed that the majority of those in Asia had turned away from the faith. The church as a whole was a mess before the first century ended.

 

[Phoneman777]

Could be, but many Greek scholars and many English translations say that the departure (as in a spatial departure not a spiritual one) is the correct translation of apostasia in 2 Thessalonians 2. Without a reference in the verse to state what is being departed from, the departure is all that can be implied. Is is disingenuous to apply a English word “apostasy” onto the Greek word “apostasia” because the are similar sounding words. The former does have a understanding of “falling away”, but the latter simply means “departure”. And the passage context given in verse 1... our gathering to the Lord... the “departure” can very well mean the removal of the righteous... i.e. our gathering to the Lord.

Given the amount of “falling away” that has happened at various times in history, it doesn’t seem valid that the key witness of the end is a falling away. Even Paul was dismayed that the majority of those in Asia had turned away from the faith. The church as a whole was a mess before the first century ended.

Hey, Copperhead, thanks for your two cents The only prob with the "spatial" idea is that Paul and John both specifically predicted a spiritual apostasy with other writers eluding to it.

Paul talked about the "grievous wolves" coming in and waylaying the flock and "evil men and seducers" which would increase.

John seemed to have gone temporarily insane when warning devout Christians to "keep yourselves from idols" but he knew the papacy was soon to arise and drag statues into the church - his predicted "Antichrist" which he said himself would arise from within the church, not outside the church.

What history tells us is that an apostasy of almost incalculable proportion took place - every stripe and type of heresy was introduced by the papacy as "truth" and ushered in over 1,000 years of spiritual church darkness, as well as darkness in every other area of human life. Sad.

 

[Keraz]

Your assertion doesn't fit the context of Hosea 5. The passage is clear that the offense occurs when Yeshua is here and it causes Him to return to His place. You are off into several hundred years prior. If the offense was prior to His coming, it would have caused Him not to come if it was bad enough to cause Him to return. So no, your assertions are not facts, just assumptions, and yes.... I do reject them. The only way the passage in Hosea works is if Yeshua left His place and the offense caused Him to return to His place. He did not not leave His place to come live among men until the time record in the NT.

Hosea 5:15...I will return to My dwelling place.....
Ezekiel 10:18-19, 11:22-23 describes the Shekinah Glory of God leaving Solomon's Temple. This is because the Israelite people had apostasied then. Read Ezekiel 11:1-13 and many other scriptures that say how even Solomon himself fell away from God.
So your contention that it was Jesus, killed by the Jews, that caused the holy Spirit to depart, is wrong.

The Shekinah glory will return to the new Temple; Ezekiel 43:1-4, then after all then is prophesied has happened, Jesus will Return and reign on earth for 1000 years.

the two houses had commingled by the time of the exile and afterward.

This idea is simply impossible. Even the Jews admit that they are only of Judah, Benjamin and a part of Levi.
The Jewish people have not fulfilled the Promises of God to every tribe. They are not as many as the sands of the sea.
Look at Ezekiel 11:14-20 it clearly delineates the two Houses: Judah thinks they possess the Land, but the Lord says He will give the Land to their brethren who are dispersed around the world and they will be His people and He will be their God. Romans 9:24-26

 

[Copperhead]

Hosea 5:15...I will return to My dwelling place.....
Ezekiel 10:18-19, 11:22-23 describes the Shekinah Glory of God leaving Solomon's Temple. This is because the Israelite people had apostasied then. Read Ezekiel 11:1-13 and many other scriptures that say how even Solomon himself fell away from God.
So your contention that it was Jesus, killed by the Jews, that caused the holy Spirit to depart, is wrong.

The Shekinah glory will return to the new Temple; Ezekiel 43:1-4, then after all then is prophesied has happened, Jesus will Return and reign on earth for 1000 years.

This idea is simply impossible. Even the Jews admit that they are only of Judah, Benjamin and a part of Levi.
The Jewish people have not fulfilled the Promises of God to every tribe. They are not as many as the sands of the sea.
Look at Ezekiel 11:14-20 it clearly delineates the two Houses: Judah thinks they possess the Land, but the Lord says He will give the Land to their brethren who are dispersed around the world and they will be His people and He will be their God. Romans 9:24-26

Well, we will just have to disagree. Matthew 23 pretty well addresses Hosea 5, so that meets the Torah requirement.

The following verses in Hosea after Yeshua returns to His place speaks volumes.

Hosea 6:1-2 (NKJV) Come, and let us return to the Lord; For He has torn, but He will heal us;
He has stricken, but He will bind us up.
2 After two days He will revive us;
On the third day He will raise us up,
That we may live in His sight.

Well it sure wasn't two literal days after Yeshua returned to His place. So it obviously has a longer period in view. And follow the Torah requirement yet again, Psalms and 2 Peter both support the concept that the two day represent 2000 years. With them being restored to live in His sight on the 3rd day or the millennial reign of Yeshua. So Hosea 6 also does not support your view.

Yep. We will just have to disagree.

 

[Copperhead]

Hey, Copperhead, thanks for your two cents The only prob with the "spatial" idea is that Paul and John both specifically predicted a spiritual apostasy with other writers eluding to it.

Oh, there will be spiritual apostasy. But likely more in line spiritual fornication with New Age, Prosperity Gospel, Eastern religions, even witchcraft being introduced into the church. That is more in line with those coming in like wolves and doctrine of demons stuff mentioned in scripture. The Gospel is reduced to something that is totally unrecognizable.

But the passage of 2 Thessalonians 2:3 is not a supporting statement for that. All apostasia can mean is simply "departure", unless there is a reference to what is being departed from. Like when the only other time the word is used, Acts 21:21, where it is used in conjunction with speaking of Moses (Law). There it has a connotation of departing from Moses. But by itself in the other passage, it can only mean simply "departure".

And the context of 2 Thessalonians 2 is in the first verse... our gathering to the Lord. To say then that a falling away is meant is grammatically incorrect. But departure does tie into "our gathering". Else we some sort of schizophrenic mumbo jumbo going on. The topic in verse 1 about our gathering to the Lord but the focus is our apostasy / or departing from the Lord.

Either way, there is ample scripture support also in the OT than the redeemed are removed prior to the revealing of the Antichrist, just as in 2 Thessalonians 2.

For instance. Daniel is clearly talking about this critter in Daniel 8...

Daniel 8:23-26 (NKJV) “And in the latter time of their kingdom,
When the transgressors have reached their fullness,
A king shall arise,
Having fierce features,
Who understands sinister schemes.
24 His power shall be mighty, but not by his own power;
He shall destroy fearfully,
And shall prosper and thrive;
He shall destroy the mighty, and also the holy people.
25 “Through his cunning
He shall cause deceit to prosper under his rule;
And he shall exalt himself in his heart.
He shall destroy many in their prosperity.
He shall even rise against the Prince of princes;
But he shall be broken without human means.
26 “And the vision of the evenings and mornings
Which was told is true;
Therefore seal up the vision,
For it refers to many days in the future.

But when does this character really come out in the end days? A few verses earlier.....

Daniel 8:19 (NKJV) And he said, “Look, I am making known to you what shall happen in the latter time of the indignation; for at the appointed time the end shall be.

So how do the redeemed fit into this......

Isaiah 26:20-21 (NKJV) Come, my people, enter your chambers,
And shut your doors behind you;
Hide yourself, as it were, for a little moment,
Until the indignation is past.
21 For behold, the Lord comes out of His place
To punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity;
The earth will also disclose her blood,
And will no more cover her slain.

The same Hebrew word is used for indignation in both references... za'am which can mean indignation or wrath. So since the antichrist is revealed in the latter time of the indignation per Daniel, after it has already been underway, and Isaiah seems to imply both dead and living righteous enter their chambers (see John 14) before the indignation begins, then that would seem to support that the redeemed are removed before the tribulation period / indignation period begins.

It also supports the idea that the indignation begins at the first seal of Revelation.

And then we show the same idea in 2 Thessalonians 2, 1 Thessalonians 4, and John 14 along with several other passages in the NT.

1 Thessalonians 4:16-18 (NKJV) For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.

John 14:1-3 (NKJV Strong's) Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. 2 In My Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also.

Sounds like an echo of Isaiah 26 in those two passages.