Will There Be A (Pre-Trib Rapture) As Many Claim?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
8,440
584
113
Mount Morris
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Clearly, Jesus believed that His followers could be protected while on the earth without needing to be taken off of the earth. That still applies today and will apply right up until right before the final wrath when the heavens and the earth are burned up.
Clearly you cannot even see current creation any other way, but your way.

The Day of the Lord is a thousand years of life on earth, God's way. God's way does not include sin, suffering, death, nor decay.

But neither is disobedience allowed. People still have choices, still live their daily lives, but I guess living past 120 is too boring for you. Living without sin is too boring for you. Getting away with sin and disobedience is so normal in your amil view, you cannot see life any other way.
 

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
4,330
1,839
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The New Jerusalem is a geographical location where we live, not a symbolic term for billions of souls.
Revelation 21:2 I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband....One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls full of the seven last plagues came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.” 10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the Holy City, Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God.

Explain to me how a geographical location can be called "the bride, the wife of the Lamb".

The church is referred to as the bride/wife of Christ in Ephesians 5:22-33. Does Jesus have more than one bride/wife?

Do you think billions of souls is literally one female looking entity going to marry Jesus?
LOL! "Literally one female looking entity"? LOL! Of course not. You ask the most ridiculous questions imaginable. You can't be taken seriously.

You are claiming a literal city is symbolic of a symbolic term "bride".
LOL. Another ridiculous comment. No, I'm not saying that. Are you reading what I'm saying or not? I'm saying it's a symbolic city, not a literal city, and it symbolically represents the church, which is figuratively referred to as the bride of Christ in other scripture like Ephesians 5:22-33.

If the New Jerusalem is symbolic, then billions of souls looks like a city when standing on each other?
LOL! Are you incapable of understanding what symbolism is? It seems so, but I'm not sure why you would not even know what symbolism is.

Jesus used symbolism in His parables. For example, he compared the kingdom of heaven to a mustard seed that grows into a large plant resembling a tree (Matthew 13:31-32). Does that mean the kingdom of heaven looks like a mustard plant? LOL. Of course not, right? So, the symbols that are used don't have to resemble what they symbolize in reality. Do you understand that?

The church is symbolic of a bride, not a literal bride.
Of course it's not a literal bride in terms of a literal woman married to her husband. The church is a spiritual bride who is spiritually married to Christ.

The New Jerusalem is a literal city where the church lives.
No, that is not how it is described. The scripture says the new Jerusalem itself is "the bride, the wife of the Lamb", not the people supposedly living in a literal city called New Jerusalem. You're not accepting the text as it is written.

The church is a symbolic term for billions of physical humans with physical bodies.
Yes, and it is the bride of Christ. So is the New Jerusalem (Rev 21:2,9). That makes the New Jerusalem the church.

I am not looking for other entities. I accept the New Jerusalem is the location, sons of God can be found enjoying creation, just like we have cities on the earth today.
It's impossible for "the bride, the wife of the Lamb", which is what the angel talking to John called the New Jerusalem, to be a literal location.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rwb and covenantee

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
4,330
1,839
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The Day of the Lord is a thousand years of life on earth, God's way.
That is not taught anywhere in scripture.

God's way does not include sin, suffering, death, nor decay.
God's way is to give people free will to make choices, both good and bad. People suffer the consequences of their bad choices and God made it that way. Only when the eternal new heavens and new earth are ushered in will there be no more sin, suffering, death or decay (Revelation 21:1-4).

But neither is disobedience allowed. People still have choices, still live their daily lives, but I guess living past 120 is too boring for you. Living without sin is too boring for you. Getting away with sin and disobedience is so normal in your amil view, you cannot see life any other way.
These are all lies. Do you think lying helps your case at all? No, it just reveals that you are a liar.
 

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
4,330
1,839
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Dispen/premil unabashedly claims that He does.
So, they make Him out to be a polygamist. Their lack of understanding is unbelievable.

The Church is claimed to be His heavenly bride, and Israel is claimed to be His earthly bride.

Jesus, the dispen/premil bigamist.
Good grief. It's just a terrible doctrine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: covenantee

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
8,440
584
113
Mount Morris
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
LOL. Another ridiculous comment. No, I'm not saying that. Are you reading what I'm saying or not? I'm saying it's a symbolic city, not a literal city, and it symbolically represents the church, which is figuratively referred to as the bride of Christ in other scripture like Ephesians 5:22-33.
This is what I posted:

You are claiming a literal city is symbolic of a symbolic term "bride". If the New Jerusalem is symbolic, then billions of souls looks like a city when standing on each other?

If the city is not literal, what did John see then? Then you do say it is the literal church. So a bunch of people are not in a city? The word "church" itself is a symbolic term. You are turning it into a literal thing John saw.

John saw a literal city, because he describes it as a literal place people live in. The city is literal. "Church" is symbolic of literal people. The term "bride" is symbolic of literal people.

You did call the city a symbolic description of a symbolic description. You are literally saying John was just making stuff up just to say he saw people come down from heaven to earth.

He could have simply said the bride of Christ descended from heaven. No! John saw the literal New Jerusalem descend as a bride adorned. The bride part is symbolic. The city was a literal city. That is where literal people live. You know, that city made by God, and not humans that Abraham was looking for? You don't think God can create a literal city? God planted a literal Garden. God created the heavens and earth. Now you claim there is no city created by God?

So in the NHNE people have to build a city for God to dwell in?

"And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband."

John saw a literal city, and compared it symbolically to a bride. That is how we know the symbolic church was in that literal city. Both church and bride describe those redeemed who have been in Paradise since the Cross. Now Paradise is called a city, the New Jerusalem.

If it was not a literal city, why did John describe it in so much detail? He even gave the size and shape of this literal city. I guess you think God cannot design a literal city or something? I am sure you will come up with some spiritual (symbolic) explanation why this is not a literal city.

What does the term mean by "father's house"? Why did Jesus not just say city? Many change it to many rooms instead of many dwelling places. They cannot picture literal mansions in a literal house. In John 14:2 Jesus was not speaking about the current arrangement, prior to the Cross. Was Jesus saying in the body of Christ there are many dwelling places? Or is the New Jerusalem a literal place after the NHNE?

Does it not matter where people live, or do they just live outdoors and God only lives inside of them? How does God shine as a light inside a physical body? Are there no literal kings and kingdoms either on the new earth? God just lives inside of everyone?

God does not dwell in us right now, the Holy Spirit does. God is sitting on the GWT, but the GWT is not part of creation in the NHNE. The GWT is where the LOF is. Are these two items in the NHNE?

"And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it."

So now you have a bunch of humans with a temple now inside of them, because you claim God and Jesus do not live in a literal city, but are now a temple inside of each person?

Your interpretation of John 14:2 would be in my father's house, the church are many, and God lives in every room, ie the church, each individual?

Some just interpret that to mean the New Jerusalem where many people have their own dwelling place. The New Jerusalem is the dwelling place of God in the NHNE. The Lord is the light and the temple of that city. The New Jerusalem replaces Paradise which is currently a dwelling place where all live physically in physical dwelling places.
 

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
8,440
584
113
Mount Morris
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So, they make Him out to be a polygamist. Their lack of understanding is unbelievable.
So you make it sound like the church is marrying herself, as the church is both the body and bride of Christ. You seem to take symbolism to some literal extremes, no?

It is all figurative, not literal, no? Maybe the church is marrying the Israelite bride? Since the church is the body of Christ and the bride is Israel. Should we really take symbolism to a literal extreme? You all sure know how to take things out of context and mock God's Word.
 

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
4,330
1,839
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
This is what I posted:
I know what you posted. I actually read what you post. You apparently just skim what others post since you seem to misunderstand almost everything you read.

If the city is not literal, what did John see then? Then you do say it is the literal church. So a bunch of people are not in a city? The word "church" itself is a symbolic term. You are turning it into a literal thing John saw.
LOL. What in the world are you even saying here? Read it yourself and see if even you can figure out what you were saying here. LOL. John say things like a beast with seven heads and ten horns and other symbolic things. He really did see those things. But, they were only symbolic representations of spiritual realities. Do you understand that symbols are not real and only symbolic represent things in reality? It doesn't matter what John saw because they were only symbols of real things rather than the real things they symbolized. How can you not understand this?

John saw a literal city, because he describes it as a literal place people live in. The city is literal. "Church" is symbolic of literal people. The term "bride" is symbolic of literal people.
What he described is what he actually saw, but it was all symbolic. He really did see a beast with seven heads and ten horns. Does that mean it was a literal beast with seven heads and ten horns? Of course not. It symbolized something in reality. So, why are you acting as if what he saw was literal? That's ridiculous.

You did call the city a symbolic description of a symbolic description.
No, I did not. You have absolutely horrible reading comprehension skills as evidenced by the fact that you constantly misquote people and constantly ask questions that have nothing to do with what was actually said.

You are literally saying John was just making stuff up just to say he saw people come down from heaven to earth.
Don't tell me what I'm saying. You should try actually reading what I'm saying. Then you won't have to resort to making things up that I didn't actually say.

He could have simply said the bride of Christ descended from heaven.
Are you for real? Seriously. I'm starting to wonder if you are just messing around and playing games by saying the most ridiculous things you can imagine. That's how you come across.

John could have simply been literal with everything he said in the book, but he obviously wasn't. Why do you think that is? Do you have any idea? Clearly not. Why did he not just reference Jesus instead of "the Lamb"? Why did he reference candlesticks instead of the churches? Why did he reference a dragon with seven heads and ten horns instead of just referring to Satan? The reason there is symbolism in the book is because it was intended only for believers with spiritual discernment to understand just like Jesus's parables.
 

Gottservant

Well-Known Member
Oct 19, 2022
1,836
528
113
45
Greensborough
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
The fact that "[Jesus] will not leave [us] orphans" (gospel of John, from memory), should point to a rapture as well.

The mistake is to think, "rapture" means removing entirely the faith - Jesus said "one will be taken, one will be left" (gospels, from memory). The rapture will not have the one effect.

Jesus said "there is a son, that doesn't want to obey, but does; and a son that wants to obey, that doesn't" (gospels, from memory) so there will be those that don't want to be raptured but are, and those that want to be raptured but won't.
 

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
8,440
584
113
Mount Morris
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I know what you posted. I actually read what you post. You apparently just skim what others post since you seem to misunderstand almost everything you read.


LOL. What in the world are you even saying here? Read it yourself and see if even you can figure out what you were saying here. LOL. John say things like a beast with seven heads and ten horns and other symbolic things. He really did see those things. But, they were only symbolic representations of spiritual realities. Do you understand that symbols are not real and only symbolic represent things in reality? It doesn't matter what John saw because they were only symbols of real things rather than the real things they symbolized. How can you not understand this?


What he described is what he actually saw, but it was all symbolic. He really did see a beast with seven heads and ten horns. Does that mean it was a literal beast with seven heads and ten horns? Of course not. It symbolized something in reality. So, why are you acting as if what he saw was literal? That's ridiculous.


No, I did not. You have absolutely horrible reading comprehension skills as evidenced by the fact that you constantly misquote people and constantly ask questions that have nothing to do with what was actually said.


Don't tell me what I'm saying. You should try actually reading what I'm saying. Then you won't have to resort to making things up that I didn't actually say.


Are you for real? Seriously. I'm starting to wonder if you are just messing around and playing games by saying the most ridiculous things you can imagine. That's how you come across.

John could have simply been literal with everything he said in the book, but he obviously wasn't. Why do you think that is? Do you have any idea? Clearly not. Why did he not just reference Jesus instead of "the Lamb"? Why did he reference candlesticks instead of the churches? Why did he reference a dragon with seven heads and ten horns instead of just referring to Satan? The reason there is symbolism in the book is because it was intended only for believers with spiritual discernment to understand just like Jesus's parables.
So your point is he saw a literal city, but it was not real but represented a bride?

That is not what the verse states, but you seem to avoid the verse entirely.

No, John did not see a literal beast rise out of a literal sea. That is how John described what he literally saw, that was not put in the Scripture. John was using symbolic references from the OT.
 

Spiritual Israelite

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
4,330
1,839
113
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So your point is he saw a literal city, but it was not real but represented a bride?
That depends on what you mean by literal? Do you just mean physical? If so, then yes. Do you believe he literally saw a beast that had seven heads and ten horns? I do. But, did that represent an actual literal beast with seven literal heads and ten literal horns? No, right? Same thing with the dragon, which represents Satan. John saw a dragon that had seven heads and ten horns and it says specifically that it represented Satan, but no one believes that Satan literally is a dragon with seven literal heads and ten literal horns, right?

That is not what the verse states, but you seem to avoid the verse entirely.
Why does it have to state that? When symbolism is used there is no requirement for that to be explicitly pointed out. Sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't.

No, John did not see a literal beast rise out of a literal sea. That is how John described what he literally saw, that was not put in the Scripture. John was using symbolic references from the OT.
Sure, he did. What exactly do you think he saw when he said he saw a beast rise up out of the sea? Do you think when he saw his visions he saw what was symbolized in reality rather than seeing the symbols? If so, what evidence do you have to support that idea?
 

Timtofly

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2020
8,440
584
113
Mount Morris
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
That depends on what you mean by literal? Do you just mean physical? If so, then yes. Do you believe he literally saw a beast that had seven heads and ten horns? I do. But, did that represent an actual literal beast with seven literal heads and ten literal horns? No, right? Same thing with the dragon, which represents Satan. John saw a dragon that had seven heads and ten horns and it says specifically that it represented Satan, but no one believes that Satan literally is a dragon with seven literal heads and ten literal horns, right?

We are talking about a city, then you interject a totally different chapter and phenomenon. Was the writer of Hebrews 11 seeing a vision?

"By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God."

"Confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country. And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city."

Do you think this city changes from spiritual to physical as it descends from Heaven? It is only spiritually in the firmament, but physical on the earth? If it is a literal city it is equally spiritual and physical. There is no separation of creation from God's perspective. It is Adam's dead corruptible flesh who cannot see the spiritual. But surely creation in the firmament is just as physical as on the earth. And that which is spiritual on earth, is equally spiritual in the firmament.

You have this weird perspective that nothing physical can exist in the firmament. When it is sin and death that is not allowed in the firmament. There are sons of God created on the 6th day with physical bodies in heaven, because we only know half the story of creation. We only know about how sin entered the world, and how only Adam's descendants via Noah lived after the Flood. Why do you have such a disdain for anything physical going on in Paradise?

I can read that there is a literal city up there. We are not told if they are waiting for that city for the Second Coming, or if it is already there. We only have the term Paradise, which means Garden. The point being they seem to be waiting for a literal city to live in and not some symbolic bride to live in.

Jerusalem was supposed to be a spiritual city on earth, but human flesh kept getting in the way. Why would God not have a New Jerusalem prepared that is perfect?

Why does it have to state that? When symbolism is used there is no requirement for that to be explicitly pointed out. Sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't.

The verse says he saw a city, then a symbolism was used to describe the phenomenon of that city coming to earth.

Do you think the church is literally going to marry Jesus, or is that just symbolic terminology, because that symbolism is used heavily in both the OT and NT?


Sure, he did. What exactly do you think he saw when he said he saw a beast rise up out of the sea? Do you think when he saw his visions he saw what was symbolized in reality rather than seeing the symbols? If so, what evidence do you have to support that idea?

John saw the formation of Satan's empire throughout history. In Revelation 12, John contrasts the relationship of the nation of Israel as it faced this human governmental opposition starting with Babylon and ending with our current sad state of affairs.

Satan is introduced as the dragon behind this retelling of Daniel 2. Five of the heads are defunct. Babylon, Medes and Persia, Greece, Rome, and the ten toes. So the dragon in Chapter 12 is not just Satan, but the beast in chapters 13 and 17. Satan is one of the heads. But none of the 7 heads will be the 7th kingdom. We are currently under the 6th head. The 6th Kingdom is a non global kingdom. It was the result of the stone cut out finally destroying that ancient beast or statue at the time of the Reformation. The time when the church went out and sprung up every where on earth. Is this current head mortally wounded since the Reformation? When the church leaves will this head be revived from the destruction of the Second Coming at the 6th Seal? Peter claims all the works on earth will be destroyed. Does Satan have some underground resources to reboot this 6th head, as Jesus is working on setting up the 7th Kingdom?

Obviously this beast is not literal. But no one seems to be able to make heads nor tales out of this symbolism. Satan's stars were immediately impounded upon following Satan in disobedience. But they are loosed at the 5th Trumpet, the first woe. Stars are not literal, nor huge physical bodies of gas, up in the firmament. At least not how we are told to view them. (Satan has the whole world deceived as to this imaginary universe. God calls it the firmament and created angels to be the lights called stars in this firmament. The firmament is as physical as the earth, sans sin and death. Scripture does call them a flame of fire and pneuma/air/gas. Hebrews 1:7

"And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire."

Scripture describes them as burning like a gas flame. Is that not what a star does?) They are just the angels, who literally come to earth. Why do you think a simple angel cannot produce a bright light? Even John uses both terms throughout the book interchangeably with each other. Can you figure out which term is literal and which term is their day job?

When Jesus was on the Mount of Transfiguration, Scripture states His face shone as the brightness of the sun, even as small as one's face can be. Another Scripture that states even the sons of God will shine on the earth as bright as any star. Daniel 12:3

"And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever."

Matthew 13:43

"Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear."

I John 3:2

"Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is."

Ok, "as He is" means something. He showed them who He is on the Mount of Transfiguration. A bright light like the sun. When we put on the spirit at the Second Coming, we will be seen "as He is". Not hidden from people spiritually. Having on that white robe per the 5th Seal, is the point of being glorified. All the sons of God from Adam's seed, will be restored to Adam's son of God image, that was physically and spiritually taken away from Adam when he disobeyed God. It is both a physical body and a flaming spirit. That is what putting on the spirit does, turns one into a sun. God is light, God is spirit, the physical and spiritual quality that allows God communication with His creation equally, not divided like many here think earth is only physical and the firmament is only spiritual. And Paul in saying, this death puts on non death is just that, being glorified and looking like a sun or star, or that bright light that will blind us dead humans, because we are "of death". The distinction is both holy and spirit. When creation is restored, humans will be sons of God in God's image which is light.

You seem to miss the point that those before the Cross had to wait as souls in death, no body nor spirit. At the Cross they were awarded the physical restoration in Paradise now in God's presence with the physical Jesus Christ and King. Now we and them await the Second Coming for the restoration of the spirit. The whole point of leaving Abraham's bosom, was the physical body being restored. They are not still merely souls, and why would they have needed bodies in Abraham's bosom in sheol, in death? But Paradise is a physical and spiritual place where now they can enjoy life, ie a physical permanent incorruptible body. That is the Resurrection and the Life. That is the first resurrection, physical.

Now we, the church as a whole, are still waiting for the last restoration, that of the robe of white, putting on the spirit. That is what John says happens at the 5th Seal. Paul calls it this mortal putting on immortality because we on earth need both. Those in Paradise are not mortals. They are alive in Christ, not dead in Christ. They are not physically dead, but physically restored since the Cross, and the ongoing power of them always rising first. They are enjoying this scene in Paradise serving God night and day, out of great tribulation, the last 1993 years, the tribulation of those days as experienced by the church over the centuries.

"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;"

John was seeing something for the first time, that was going on way before he wrote down what he saw. This was not a brand new phenomenon. They had been serving God day and night for almost 2,000 years.
 
Last edited: