The False Doctrine of a 7-year Tribulation

[marks]

New question: Who is left and who is taken? What does that mean?

40 Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left. 41 Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left. 42 Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming.

Well, as long as the other things don't get left behind . . .



Context often gives the answer.

36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39 And knew not until the flood came, and took (Gr. airo - to lift away) them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken (Gr. paralambano - receive alongside), and the other left.
41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken (Gr. paralambano - receive alongside), and the other left.
42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

First question to ask looking for your answer is, what is Jesus prophesying here?

Noah entered the ark, and the flood carried the rest away.

To shall be in the field, on shall be taken, the other left remaining. Taken where? By what? What does that mean, paralambano?

Many interpret it as "taken away to safety". Paralambano is "received alongside". Many think of this as the rapture, that Jesus is prophesying the rapture of the church, the "receiving of us alongside Himself". The word could mean that. But is that what it means in this context?

Should we even be thinking of the gentile church in relation to this passage?

Ephesians 3
1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,
2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,
4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)
5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:
7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.

In this passage, we see that the dispenstion of grace to the gentiles to be fellowheirs was a mystery that was revealed to Paul.

This means it was unknown before that revelation, which is the meaning of the Greek musterion.

If that's so, then I don't think that Jesus was prophesying the rapture of the gentile church.

Jesus is prophesying using the destruction of the flood as point of referrence.

1 Thessalonians 5
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.

39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

Just like the flood came suddenly and carried them away, so will come the sudden destruction at the end of the age, taking one, leaving another.

This seems like the simplest and most harmonious way to understand the passage. It fits the words, it fits the context, and it fits the Bible.

Much love!

 

[CharismaticLady]

Hi CL,

OK, so it sounds like you are saying this idea of no gentiles saved during the future 70th week is derived from your understanding of other passages, not that a particular passage teaches it, is that correct? Something like the Trinity, not specifically taught, but derived from the understanding of various passages. Do I understand correctly?

Much love!

Scripture will explain Scripture and will not contradict Scripture. Such as the account of the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2 does not contradict 1 Corinthians 14:2, yet there are many that do not understand speaking in tongues because their interpretation of Acts 2 makes them twist 1 Corinthians 14:2 into something bazaar. You should hear John MacArthur's version! ROFL (That was a rabbit trail that I'm not saying we should detour to.)

 

[CharismaticLady]

Can you show me exactly where in that chapter that gentiles cannot be saved after a certain time? Because I don't know where that would be.

Much love!

7 What then? Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded.

11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles. 12 Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness!

23 And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.

25 For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And so all Israel will be saved

 

[marks]

Scripture will explain Scripture and will not contradict Scripture.

Of course I agree with you, though I think we understand some passages to be saying some different things, which is why I like to examine the passages to see if they actually say those things.

Much love!

 

[CharismaticLady]

Well, as long as the other things don't get left behind . . .



Context often gives the answer.

36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39 And knew not until the flood came, and took (Gr. airo - to lift away) them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken (Gr. paralambano - receive alongside), and the other left.
41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken (Gr. paralambano - receive alongside), and the other left.
42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.

First question to ask looking for your answer is, what is Jesus prophesying here?

Noah entered the ark, and the flood carried the rest away.

To shall be in the field, on shall be taken, the other left remaining. Taken where? By what? What does that mean, paralambano?

Many interpret it as "taken away to safety". Paralambano is "received alongside". Many think of this as the rapture, that Jesus is prophesying the rapture of the church, the "receiving of us alongside Himself". The word could mean that. But is that what it means in this context?

Should we even be thinking of the gentile church in relation to this passage?

Ephesians 3
1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,
2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,
4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)
5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
6 That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:
7 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.

In this passage, we see that the dispenstion of grace to the gentiles to be fellowheirs was a mystery that was revealed to Paul.

This means it was unknown before that revelation, which is the meaning of the Greek musterion.

If that's so, then I don't think that Jesus was prophesying the rapture of the gentile church.

Jesus is prophesying using the destruction of the flood as point of referrence.

1 Thessalonians 5
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.

39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

Just like the flood came suddenly and carried them away, so will come the sudden destruction at the end of the age, taking one, leaving another.

This seems like the simplest and most harmonious way to understand the passage. It fits the words, it fits the context, and it fits the Bible.

Much love!

I understood the scriptures you used, but you didn't really give your interpretation of those scriptures.

So what does taken mean, and what does left behind mean. From what you did say, we may even be on the same page, but I'm not going to assume.

 

[marks]

7 What then? Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded.

11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles. 12 Now if their fall is riches for the world, and their failure riches for the Gentiles, how much more their fullness!

23 And they also, if they do not continue in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.

25 For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And so all Israel will be saved

I'm sorry, where in this does it say Gentiles cannot be saved after that time?

I mean, before the Gospel "was sent to the gentiles", weren't gentiles being saved? Even when it was still the offer of the kingdom, still gentiles were being saved. During the covenant of law and atoning sacrifice, gentiles could be justified in joining Israel.

After Israel was blinded in part, and the Gospel sent to the gentiles, didn't some Jews still become saved?

Why shouldn't we think the same thing will apply at that time? That though the focus will be on Israel, that some gentiles will still be saved?

I'm still not seeing a passage that prohibits this.

Much love!

 

[marks]

I understood the scriptures you used, but you didn't really give your interpretation of those scriptures.

So what does taken mean, and what does left behind mean. From what you did say, we may even be on the same page, but I'm not going to assume.

Left means left behind in this world. Taken means taken away with the sudden destruction.

Much love!

 

[CharismaticLady]

Of course I agree with you, though I think we understand some passages to be saying some different things, which is why I like to examine the passages to see if they actually say those things.

Much love!

Acts 2 actually agrees with 1 Corinthians 14 if you read it correctly without twisting it with a preconceived idea that like me was learned from childhood.

There have been other verses where we take a different approach from one another. You dissect a word in the Greek, where I look for the context by reading the whole chapter, and even further to get the right rendering.

 

[CharismaticLady]

I'm sorry, where in this does it say Gentiles cannot be saved after that time?

You just asked about Romans 11. That's all I gave you. You must combine it with 2 Thes. 2, the letters to the seven churches, and Revelation 7, 12, and 13.

 

[CharismaticLady]

After Israel was blinded in part, and the Gospel sent to the gentiles, didn't some Jews still become saved?

Of course, they were only partially blinded.

 

[Taken]

The False Doctrine of a 7-year Tribulation.
OP ^

There is not "one" verse in the entire Bible says their a 7-year Tribulation.

Correct.
It is revealed in TWO verses.

Rev 11:2
[2] But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months..

Rev12:
[6] And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.

Some try to claim Daniel 9:24-27 as teaching this, but unless one comes to this passage already having a predisposed bias, they will not find it there.

Daniels prophecy has already come to pass.

a 7-year tribulation occurs where those who were not taken in the secret rapture

There is no Secret.
Men already prepared " IN" Christ are not subject to the Lambs Wrath or Gods Wrath.
So they are "risen UP" above the face of the Earth, just like Noah was "risen UP" above the face of the Earth, Saved out of harms way, as the Earth was in the beginning of Destruction.

will get a chance to "clean up their act"

.

LOL. Uh, it is primarily Gods timeframe for saving Israel, and dividing Israel (and any straggler Gentiles), From all Against God.
(Mass killing by the anti-Christ and Mass killing of people "with" the Earth (quakes for example).

The Comparison between Daniels Prophecy and John's ...is about:

Daniel was foretelling of a king...defiling the Jewish Temple, and killing multitudes of Jews.

John in Revelations is foretelling of a world leader (AntiChrist), again doing similar things.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[CharismaticLady]

Why shouldn't we think the same thing will apply at that time? That though the focus will be on Israel, that some gentiles will still be saved?

Sorry for splitting this post up so badly; I must need some coffee.

That is found in 2 Thes. 2

 

[CharismaticLady]

Left means left behind in this world. Taken means taken away with the sudden destruction.

Much love!

Don't both of your sentences say the same thing? They are both destroyed with the world.

 

[Stranger]

If it's the same answer, -- where the eagles (vultures) are gathered --, we should have our "answer".

Bobby Jo

I wasn't asking you. I am not interested in your answer.

Stranger

 

[Stranger]

Of course. But I asked @marks so I need to wait for his answer. If he doesn't respond, I'll tell you what I believe.

In the meantime, what do you believe? And do you have other scripture to back it up.

Sounds good.

My view, as you know is based on the Dispensational interpretation of Scripture. Of course I have Scripture to support it. But it wouldn't matter as your method of interpreting is different.

I just didn't know if you were asking because you didn't know or if it had already been answered.

Stranger

 

[Bobby Jo]

I wasn't asking you. I am not interested in your answer.

Stranger

Do I care? Is this not an Open Forum, for anyone to comment on any Post? Are you the Moderator who excludes some, in deference to others?

I think NOT!
Bobby Jo

 

[Stranger]

Do I care? Is this not an Open Forum, for anyone to comment on any Post? Are you the Moderator who excludes some, in deference to others?

I think NOT!
Bobby Jo

You can comment all you want. I am just letting you know I am not interested in your comments, answers, bs, etc.etc.etc.

Stranger

 

[marks]

There have been other verses where we take a different approach from one another. You dissect a word in the Greek, where I look for the context by reading the whole chapter, and even further to get the right rendering.

We were talking about a different passage than those.

And you've comment this before, as if my Greek word studies somehow prevent me from getting into the context.

My study of a passage includes word studies, examining the sentences and paragraphs, the relationships between the words (syntax), looking at the overall flow of the passage, the chapter, the book, and making sure that my understanding harmonizes with everything else in the Bible.

Any time I find any conflict between something I'm looking at in the Bible, and some conclusion I've reached, I re-examine using all these steps.

OK, enough about me, and hopefully enough impugning my word studies as if it produces some kind of myopia.

Read the verse, read the chapter, read it all, but if your understanding conflicts with, or isn't supported by the most minute detail in the words themself, I'd relook at it.

Much love!

 

[CharismaticLady]

Sounds good.

My view, as you know is based on the Dispensational interpretation of Scripture. Of course I have Scripture to support it. But it wouldn't matter as your method of interpreting is different.

I just didn't know if you were asking because you didn't know or if it had already been answered.

Stranger

@marks answered, but wasn't clear to me, so I asked him to clarify.

My "method" is context, and Scripture explains Scripture. As far as dispensations, the only change I see in our New Covenant to make another "dispensation" has to do with the last 7 years before Christ comes. But there are differences in people's understanding of dispensationalism, and I can't remember yours, specifically.

 

[marks]

Don't both of your sentences say the same thing? They are both destroyed with the world.

No they don't.

Sudden destruction will come and take many away. Later Jesus will gather the survivors, and separate them in judgment.

Much love!