The Rapture: Pre-trib, mid or post... what's your opinion

[for_his_glory]

He is free to respond. This is an open discussion. If you want a private conversation there is a place for that.

And that is what I am waiting for is his response as I never asked him for a private conversation as this is a part of the conversations of the OP. Please drop this.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

The context for Matthew 24, Luke 21, and Mark 13 are as so:

Matthew 24: 3 As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” (ESV)​

Two different events which cannot be denied. The temple was destroyed in 70AD. He has not returned.

​

Luke 21: 5 And while some were speaking of the temple, how it was adorned with noble stones and offerings, he said, 6 “As for these things that you see, the days will come when there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” 7 And they asked him, “Teacher, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when these things are about to take place?” (ESV)​

​

He gave them the signs of that destruction and the description of the events in history is astounding.

Mark 13: 3 And as he sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, 4 “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are about to be accomplished?” 5 And Jesus began to say to them, “See that no one leads you astray. (ESV)​

Overall, the whole context comes from the previous chapters where Jesus, as usual, is battling with the religious leaders and exposing how they corrupted the law, etc. Matthew ends this confrontation with a lament over Jerusalem. Yet, when comparing all three, you can't ignore Matthew 24:3's "the sign of your coming and of the end of the age" and while Luke 21 and Mark 13 don't put that line in their handling of the Mount of Olives lecture, it is the context when you get down to Luke 21:25-28 and Mark 13:24-27. You have to remember, despite our translations creating sectionals, chapters, verses, paragraphs, sentence breaks, etc. This isn't in the original text and this is recording one whole speech that's attached to the question the disciples ask him at the beginning and, yes, while the, at that time upcoming destruction of Jerusalem is included in the speech, it goes further beyond that event in history to events in the future.

I agree although it would be better not to assume I don’t already know the bible was later divided into easily referenced sections. It’s somewhat condescending and plays no role in the discussion anyway. The answers are clearly to the questions asked with no association with previous discussions with jewish religious men.

The problem with limiting the Mount of Olives lecture only to the events of 70AD is that Jesus includes in the sequence of events a collection of things that did not happen in 70AD, a collection of things that have happened over the ages, but the key is that he says that the tribulation he's talking about will be such a tribulation for believers that has not been seen since the creation of the universe until now and will never be seen again.

Why do you think the events described didn’t happen? The christians living there understood it was for them…that generation. And the “time of great tribulation” is also called “Jacob’s trouble” and was mainly for the Jews. The christians were specifically told to leave town to avoid this time of tribulations. “Come out of her..”

If everything that happened in 70AD and with Nero, etc. is what Jesus was talking about with the Mount of Olives, and none of that was supposed to be ever seen again, why have we seen consistent persecution of believers in some way and similar ways long after the Romans did what they did to the Jews?

Can you give examples of persecution of christians since that matches what Nero did. He crucified many. Others he stood on poles and lit his garden parties with their burning bodies. There’s more that’s too gross to write. But the time of tribulation was for those who crucified him in any case. When did God ever decide to send tribulation to his faithful ones?

And Jews have been exiled from countries since then all the way up to the middle ages for various, sometimes very silly reasons.

Exile wasn’t the punishment. The death of almost all of them was. The rest weren’t merely in exile. They were slaves not allowed to live out their lives with family etc. In exile they could do this.

I don't limit the celestial signs to just metaphors. Seems to be an obvious sign of which God is providing the world, but specifically believers, a way for them to be able to tell "this is absolutely it." Matthew 24:29-31, Luke 21:25-28, and Mark 13: 24-27 all state that these celestial and earth shaking signs are to mark the Second coming of Jesus. Comparing this with Revelation, it all adds up.

Believers knew that was “it” as soon as “armies surrounded Jerusalem” but yes, the celestial signs were for others. By then the believers were gone. Did you know that a comet in the shape of a sword hung over Jerusalem a year before its destruction? And that inhabitants reported seeing chariots and drivers in the sky in the months before its destruction?

I like how one brother puts it, and so as not to steal credit, it's Dr. Phil Fernandes, he says it this way about eschatology and I summarize, not an exact quote, "It's vague enough for every generation to think they're end it, but specific enough for the generation of the tribulation to know they're in it."

If believers think living in peace in four bedroom houses with an RV, 4 weeks vacations, medical care, and free schooling for their children is a “tribulation” then they are spoiled rotten. Prophesy means nothing at all if it means every generation experiences it repeatedly.

Well that was foretold in prophesy and had to happen to provide reconciliation to the world for those that would receive it through Jesus' sacrifice.

What could the world or a particular generation do that's possibly more evil? Well, in this sense, I'll quote this passage and then comment:

Matthew 18: 1 At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” 2 And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them 3 and said, “Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.​

​

5 “Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, 6 but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. (ESV)​

So, I'd say the "more evil" thing a generation can do is what we've been doing. We as in a generation, society, culture at large, etc. And yes, the we can and does include compromised, corrupt, theologies and "Christianity." We've been leading people astray, removing the validity of the Bible, watering down the message, corrupting it, diminishing it's integrity and power in favor of a variety of things that lead people into deception and rob them of their potential reconciliation and eternity with God.

We aren’t eating our babies, running each other through with the sword so that the blood gushes through the streets putting out the fires of homes and food burning. Men aren’t eating their belts and mothers their children. We aren’t setting christians a fire nor looting every home. Most cities are safe to go from a to b. We have police that do their duty. We aren’t dragging families out of their homes and throwing stones at them until they die. We aren’t at all evil compared to them.

What could be "more evil" in the sense of having an eternal, unchangeable, fixed, permanent repercussion for people ?

Eating each other. Gutting people with swords. Wild gangs running things killing everyone they like. Iow, Jerusalem 70 AD.

Deceiving people into an eternity without God on their side because they've become His enemy and an eternity separated from him.

Anyone would prefer that to being gutted while living.

Jesus died, came back to life, and is now at the right hand of God. Those who had a hand in that act and didn't repent likely already came to terms with their mistake and will have to further answer for that in the end just like everyone else.

Not only that. Jesus returned in judgement as he says he would. That generation received the punishment of all the prophets killed from Abel to Zachariah, as Jesus said.

At least those who had a hand in it, saw the error of their ways, or even those who doubted and hated him (his brother James, for example) had the opportunity to figure out they were wrong, right it, and got themselves on the right path.

Most did not but persecuted his followers to the death. They who had pierced him saw the judgement, as it says in Revelation.

 

[jbc092671]

I stand with neither, we shall gather back to Christ but ain't nobody going to Heaven unless they die before the return of Christ , .He comes here and stays here from His return on , all the way to the rejuvenation of this earth

My question to you is, what is the tribulation ?

The tribulation is the seven-year period in which God will judge the world for sin and rebellion. Most of the Book of Revelation is specifically about the Tribulation.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

The tribulation is the seven-year period in which God will judge the world for sin and rebellion. Most of the Book of Revelation is specifically about the Tribulation.

Bummer for that generation. All the other generations equally sinful and rebellious got off with a normal life and death. (One of the advantages of believing God judged Jerusalem for rejecting Jesus and crucifying him and killing all the prophets from Abel to Zechariah is one does not have to believe that one very unlucky generation is coming who will suffer horribly although they are not any worse than other generations. Seems pretty unfair.)

 

[BroRoyVa79]

Two different events which cannot be denied. The temple was destroyed in 70AD. He has not returned.

The language there is about his coming and the end of the age meaning that the entire Olivet Discourse cannot be limited to 70AD.

He gave them the signs of that destruction and the description of the events in history is astounding.

The signs about the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem are clear:
Matthew 24:1Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. 2 But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” (ESV)

Luke 21:5 And while some were speaking of the temple, how it was adorned with noble stones and offerings, he said, 6 “As for these things that you see, the days will come when there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” (ESV)

Mark 13: 1 And as he came out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher, what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!” 2 And Jesus said to him, “Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”(ESV)

Equally, Matt 25:15-20, Luke 21:20-22, and Mark 13:14-18 tell the people of that time to flee to the mountains because they will be surrounded by armies.

The problem with stopping there, as I said before, is that the language around these events are not limited to the at-that-time Jews, just going to focus on Matthew here in an attempt at brevity:

Matt 24:5-8 - wars, rumors of wars, nations fighting, famines, earthquakes in various places, the beginning of birth pains. Birth pains for what? When did overwhelmingly noticeable earthquakes and famines happen in 70 AD?
Matt 24:9 - believers will be delivered up for tribulation and hated by all nations for Jesus' name sake. These are Christians, not the Jews who crucified Christ.
Matt 24:10-12 - false prophets, falling away, betrayal, increase in wickedness, cold love.
Matt 24:13 - specifically says those who endure to the end.
Matt 24:14 - gospel has to be preached to the whole world and then the end will come.

This is not language limited to the past. One, as there were areas of the world at that time that the disciples and Apostles couldn't reach. Currently projects like the Joshua Project are still tracking where the Gospel has not reached people in the world. You can see their global statistics here, they're showing 42.5% of the global population has not been reached with the message of the Gospel.

And this is just the beginning of the Olivet Discourse showing where all of the language is not specifically limited to the destruction of Jerusalem.

I agree although it would be better not to assume I don’t already know the bible was later divided into easily referenced sections. It’s somewhat condescending and plays no role in the discussion anyway. The answers are clearly to the questions asked with no association with previous discussions with jewish religious men.

I brought it up to point out that it's one continuous discourse with the reader on the overall initial context. You said that the judgment was because Israel crucified Christ. The judgement from Jesus had been consistent, the religious leaders, as always, had led Israel astray and they rejected the Messiah. They wanted a military leader, a physical liberator, and that's what they did, attempted to rebel against Roman rule and it led to 70AD and exile and the diaspora. There was no condescension there. I don't talk assuming who knows what, etc.

Why do you think the events described didn’t happen? The christians living there understood it was for them…that generation. And the “time of great tribulation” is also called “Jacob’s trouble” and was mainly for the Jews. The christians were specifically told to leave town to avoid this time of tribulations. “Come out of her..”

All of the events described didn't happen because you have, at least, a seemingly partial fulfillment or simply as I said, some things are clearly meant for an event at that time while others are clearly not meant for that time.

Can you give examples of persecution of christians since that matches what Nero did. He crucified many. Others he stood on poles and lit his garden parties with their burning bodies. There’s more that’s too gross to write. But the time of tribulation was for those who crucified him in any case. When did God ever decide to send tribulation to his faithful ones?

First of all, Nero was prior to 70AD. Still, the deciding factor of the Nero persecutions was burning Christians because he claimed they set fires to Rome. Crucifixion was a standard Roman punishment and by extension persecution method, so we can find plenty of that in history with Rome post-Nero. Much of the persecution in Rome came at the instigation of local rulers and persisted until Constantine declared Christianity an accepted religion in Rome. But here is a quick list of the Roman emperors who persecuted Christians, after Nero you have Vespian (roughly 69-79AD) who would have been the Emperor in place during 70AD's events. Trajan who condemned some believers to fight wild beasts in Rome, most specifically Ignatius according to The Martyrdom of Ignatius, Diocletian and Maximian burned 20,000 Christians in 303ish AD according to the Synaxarion and Eusebius, etc. Most Roman Emperors simply didn't stop the persecution of Christians and allowed it to persist if they didn't enact the action themselves by way of edict or a change in an edict or something. Most of the time the persecution occurred because surprisingly at that time the Christians were seen as atheists since they didn't worship Roman deities. Either way, there are so many to list, but I suggest you investigate early Christian writings as well as Foxe's Book of Martyrs for places to start with this. Assuming you are unfamiliar with any of that based on your questioning.

Here are some quickly found modern examples from a cursory search:
So, given the burning of Christians was the somewhat new thing Nero did. We have in 1999 Hindu Militants burn an Australian Christian Missionary and his two young sons (CNN)
In 2009, six Christians burnt alive in Pakistan (Reuters)
In 2014: Pakistani Christians burned alive (NBC News)
In 2018: Fulani militants ravaged a predominantly Christian area in Nigeria, killing more than 230 people (although the headline says only 20 Christians were burned alive), and displacing over 11,000 people who fled (WorldWatch Monitor)
In 2016: Pastor, his family, and an uncounted number of church members burned alive in Nigeria for refusing to convert to Islam (CBN News)
Recently, in 2022: An evangelist burned to death by his own family (Baptist Press)
Also recently, in 2022: A Christian student was stoned and burned in northern Nigeria (Church in Need)
Recently, in 2023: Catholic Priest burned to death in Nigeria. Death toll from church attacks in Conga raised to 17 (Catholic News)
Open Doors tracks worldwide Christian persecution. Open Doors covers the trends in the areas with the most persecution. Equally, you can investigate Voice of Martyrs at Persecution.com. Plenty of Christians have gotten burned alive since Nero and 70AD and beyond.

To be continued...

 

[BroRoyVa79]

Exile wasn’t the punishment. The death of almost all of them was. The rest weren’t merely in exile. They were slaves not allowed to live out their lives with family etc. In exile they could do this.

Sure, the result of the Jewish-Roman wars was ultimately exile, or a dispersal of the Jews. They were forbidden to return to Jerusalem after years of attempting to liberate themselves from Roman rulership. This second exile is often lumped into the already existing diaspora. This is part of why I say none of this can be specifically limited to 70AD because some of the events that started in that year extend beyond into 100, 130ish AD and beyond.

They knew it was “it” as soon as armies surrounded Jerusalem but yes, the celestial signs were for others. By then the believers were gone.

As I said above, the siege of Jerusalem was but one event in a collection of events surrounding the attempted revolts of the time. Yes, the language specifically talking about the destruction of the temple and the armies were talking about that event, the other language was not. About the only thing you can attribute is famine because of how sieges work, but in reality, it was a battle that the Jews lost. Not a siege of a fort like Masada. In Masada, which happened some 2-3 years later, about 1,000 people died by suicide after a 2-3ish month siege.

We aren’t eating our babies, running each other through with the sword so that the blood gushes through the streets putting out the fires of homes and food burning. Men aren’t eating their belts and mothers their children. We aren’t setting christians a fire nor looting every home. Most cities are safe to go from a to b. We have police that do their duty. We aren’t dragging families out of their homes and throwing stones at them until they die. We aren’t at all evil compared to them.

Eating each other. Gutting people with swords. Wild gangs running things killing everyone they like. Iow, Jerusalem 70 AD.

Anyone would prefer that to being gutted while living.

Your question was what could be more evil than crucifying Christ and my response was leading someone into eternal damnation. I'm not sure what all of these things have to do with what I said. All of the "do we do more evil things than this one event that happened in history" wasn't the core of your question." Plus, yes, many of those things have been repeated in history whenever a siege happened on an ancient city all up to middle age times. That was the whole point of siege warfare. If the leaders didn't prepare their cities for a siege, the civilians suffered and sometimes resulted in people eating people, people killing people within the walls of the city or behind the border of the siege. Look up Siege of Suiyang during the An Lushan Rebellion at about 757AD, look up the Siege of Ma'arra at about 1098 AD, you can also look up the siege of Lieningrad, where some Leningraders did resort to cannibalism. So, this is not some solo thing that happened to the Jews as I said. Events like that have happened since then.

Furthermore, I can show you any bad area of the world and you will find murder, etc. evil done by people justifying their evil acts through poverty, hunger, etc. So, how then can you call that the great tribulation when Jesus said the great tribulation won't be something that's ever been seen before or ever again?

Not only that. Jesus returned in judgement as he says he would. That generation received the punishment of all the prophets killed from Abel to Zachariah, as Jesus said.

Jesus returned in judgement?
Where is the evidence of that?
I seem to recall the scriptures speaking of one final return. Not multiple.

Most did not but persecuted his followers to the death. They who had pierced him saw the judgement, as it says in Revelation.

My point was that those who saw the error of their ways about him went on to receive salvation if they sought salvation out. Those who did not see the error in their ways went on to eternal judgment.

 

[Charlie24]

Someone please give me the scriptures where it says Jesus returns twice as these below scriptures say nothing about a pre mid or post, but that Jesus comes on the last day after that of the seventh trumpet sounding.

2 Thes. 2:1

"Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,"

When I was in Bible school I read quite a bit from the great theologians, this is the verse the UK theologians referred to as the 2 comings of Christ.

The Second Coming/ "by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."

The Rapture/ "and by our gathering together unto Him."

They point out that in Matt. 24:31, the gathering together is of the Jews only, in fact, they say that the entirety of Matt. 24 is referring to only the Jews.

"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."

They point to the question asked by the apostles to Christ concerning the temple, and all that Christ says in Matthew 24 is pertaining to Israel.

They further point out that "the elect" here is referring to only Israel, as they are the elect of God chosen by Him to evangelize the world. But of course we know they failed by rejecting Christ, and God turned to the Gentiles and the Church was born to evangelize the world to Christ.

 

[miamited]

@miamited, tell her that Rev 19:11-21 is obviously a metaphor. Look at it carefully. No one literally draws blood by employing a book. The sword is the Word of God. That does not draw blood although it might “slay” or overcome a man.

Hi Dorothy Mae

Sorry, but I would need to know which time of Jesus' return you're referring to. There is coming a day when Jesus will return with his armies to fight against the armies of the nations gathered together for the great battle of Armageddon, but that's another time than when Paul speaks of our being gathered together with the Lord in 2 Thessalonians 2.

According to the Scriptures, as I understand them, the world is going to go off the rails and there will be terrible persecution against the believers. Then Jesus will step out on the clouds and call for those who are his to "Come up here." At that time we believers will be taken into the clouds, just as Jesus was. Then God's wrath will be released, and sometime during that time, Jesus will then return to the earth to defeat the armies of the world and the blood will run as high as a horse's bridle.

Now, it may well be that the armies of locusts and various creatures that we read about during the period of the 'wrath of God', will be the armies of God that Jesus comes with to destroy the earthly armies. But Rev. Chap. 14 describes the rapture and then the following couple of chapters describe what's going to happen to those who were 'left behind'. It seems to break down like this:

Then I heard a loud voice from the temple saying to the seven angels, “Go, pour out the seven bowls of God’s wrath on the earth.” The first angel went and poured out his bowl on the land, and ugly, festering sores broke out on the people who had the mark of the beast and worshiped its image. The second angel poured out his bowl on the sea, and it turned into blood like that of a dead person, and every living thing in the sea died. The third angel poured out his bowl on the rivers and springs of water, and they became blood. Then I heard the angel in charge of the waters say: “You are just in these judgments, O Holy One, you who are and who were; for they have shed the blood of your holy people and your prophets, and you have given them blood to drink as they deserve.”
https://www.biblestudytools.com/revelation/16-7.html
And I heard the altar respond: “Yes, Lord God Almighty, true and just are your judgments.” The fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and the sun was allowed to scorch people with fire. They were seared by the intense heat and they cursed the name of God, who had control over these plagues, but they refused to repent and glorify him. The fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and its kingdom was plunged into darkness. People gnawed their tongues in agony and cursed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, but they refused to repent of what they had done. The sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried up to prepare the way for the kings from the East. Then I saw three impure spirits that looked like frogs; they came out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet. They are demonic spirits that perform signs, and they go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them for the battle on the great day of God Almighty. “Look, I come like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and remains clothed, so as not to go naked and be shamefully exposed.” Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon. The seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air, and out of the temple came a loud voice from the throne, saying, “It is done!”

But all of that comes after this:

I looked, and there before me was a white cloud, and seated on the cloud was one like a son of man with a crown of gold on his head and a sharp sickle in his hand. Then another angel came out of the temple and called in a loud voice to him who was sitting on the cloud, “Take your sickle and reap, because the time to reap has come, for the harvest of the earth is ripe.” So he who was seated on the cloud swung his sickle over the earth, and the earth was harvested.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Rookie]

First I do not have the time to sit and listen to an hour video and was only asking for scripture support as in what everyone here believes. Do you have scripture to support what it is you believe when the catching up of the saints will be?

You cannot condemn something as unScriptoral then refuse to do the homework or look into you're opponents references if the provide it in a way contrary to your style. That is what theWind is doing to you.

I do not hold a specific view on the trib because I personally don't feel like I can know but the most prominent I've heard is pre-trib

Revelation 3:10 supports pre-trib "because you have kept my word about patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial that is coming on the whole world, to try those who dwell on the earth."

Here is a website that breaks that down: https://aplaceforyou.org/pastor-blog/does-revelation-310-support-a-pre-tribulation-rapture-view/

 

[for_his_glory]

You cannot condemn something as unScriptoral then refuse to do the homework or look into you're opponents references if the provide it in a way contrary to your style. That is what theWind is doing to you.

I do not hold a specific view on the trib because I personally don't feel like I can know but the most prominent I've heard is pre-trib

Revelation 3:10 supports pre-trib "because you have kept my word about patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial that is coming on the whole world, to try those who dwell on the earth."

Here is a website that breaks that down: https://aplaceforyou.org/pastor-blog/does-revelation-310-support-a-pre-tribulation-rapture-view/

How can I condemn anything that I haven't the time to sit for an hour and watch. If you do not hold any views then may I ask what you are doing in this type of thread? The OP is asking for others opinions as in when the Rapture (catching up of the saints) will happen as in pre, mid or post. There is so much more to understanding it then just one verse in Rev 3:10.

 

[Rookie]

How can I condemn anything that I haven't the time to sit for an hour and watch. If you do not hold any views then may I ask what you are doing in this type of thread? The OP is asking for others opinions as in when the Rapture (catching up of the saints) will happen as in pre, mid or post. There is so much more to understanding it then just one verse in Rev 3:10.

Originally I said:
"I don't have a solid (didn't say any idea) idea, but probably pre is the more solid one I've heard, but I'm not completely sure. Or that Jesus second return will consist of 2 apperances one pre and one post.

Check out Aoc Network on youtube for stuff like this."

I was the first one on this thread as a responder. And second, it does not take 7+ Scriptures to make a sound biblical point, you can make an entire sermon series off of a couple of verses. If God said it once, it stands as something he said a thousand times as all Scripture is good and acceptable (2 Timothy 3:16-17). My point to the original question was were do I stand, and I said I (unfirmly) stand on pre-trib as it's the most solid i heard.

 

[for_his_glory]

2 Thes. 2:1

"Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,"

When I was in Bible school I read quite a bit from the great theologians, this is the verse the UK theologians referred to as the 2 comings of Christ.

The Second Coming/ "by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."

The Rapture/ "and by our gathering together unto Him."

They point out that in Matt. 24:31, the gathering together is of the Jews only, in fact, they say that the entirety of Matt. 24 is referring to only the Jews.

"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."

They point to the question asked by the apostles to Christ concerning the temple, and all that Christ says in Matthew 24 is pertaining to Israel.

They further point out that "the elect" here is referring to only Israel, as they are the elect of God chosen by Him to evangelize the world. But of course we know they failed by rejecting Christ, and God turned to the Gentiles and the Church was born to evangelize the world to Christ.

Even the so called great theologians can not agree with each other. 2Thessalonians says nothing about when Christ will return, but only that we will be gathered up to him when He does as scriptures says the last day. The word "Rapture" is a man made word as scripture calls it the catching up, or the gathering of those who are truly God's own through that of Christ Jesus.

Gal 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

 

[Charlie24]

Even the so called great theologians can not agree with each other. 2Thessalonians says nothing about when Christ will return, but only that we will be gathered up to him when He does as scriptures says the last day. The word "Rapture" is a man made word as scripture calls it the catching up, or the gathering of those who are truly God's own through that of Christ Jesus.

Gal 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

The word "rapture" is nothing more than an identifier, just as your name Identifies you.

As for me, I place more faith in the old theologians than the scholars of today.

 

[for_his_glory]

Originally I said:
"I don't have a solid (didn't say any idea) idea, but probably pre is the more solid one I've heard, but I'm not completely sure. Or that Jesus second return will consist of 2 apperances one pre and one post.

Check out Aoc Network on youtube for stuff like this."

I was the first one on this thread as a responder. And second, it does not take 7+ Scriptures to make a sound biblical point, you can make an entire sermon series off of a couple of verses. If God said it once, it stands as something he said a thousand times as all Scripture is good and acceptable (2 Timothy 3:16-17). My point to the original question was were do I stand, and I said I (unfirmly) stand on pre-trib as it's the most solid i heard.

All I can say is that there is nothing solid without proof. We do not study scripture by a majority rule teaching, but by every word from Genesis to Revelation that has already been written.

I agree one can do a whole sermon on one or two scriptures as many do stand alone when there is no cross referencing them.

 

[for_his_glory]

The word "rapture" is nothing more than an identifier, just as your name Identifies you.

As for me, I place more faith in the old theologians than the scholars of today.

I place my faith in the word of God through the Holy Spirit teaching me either direct ow working through others. I never rely on man.

 

[miamited]

I do not hold a specific view on the trib because I personally don't feel like I can know

Hi Soldiers

Actually, this is what you said.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Charlie24]

I place my faith in the word of God through the Holy Spirit teaching me either direct ow working through others. I never rely on man.

Well, if you don't get a little help from the theologians, you won't get very far.

 

[for_his_glory]

Well, if you don't get a little help from the theologians, you won't get very far.

Been doing pretty good at study this subject for the past forty years just by using all the scriptures that pertain to the catching up of the saints. Not saying I know it all, but there are so many different theories out there so which one do you suppose we are to believe if we do not go into our own in-depth study.

 

[Charlie24]

Been doing pretty good at study this subject for the past forty years just by using all the scriptures that pertain to the catching up of the saints. Not saying I know it all, but there are so many different theories out there so which one do you suppose we are to believe if we do not go into our own in-depth study.

LOL, I certainly don't claim to know it all either!

I was taught in school to learn the doctrines from the theologians, learn what their about. then compare the differences they point out.

Based on that do your own study asking the Holy Spirit to guide you in all truth. When you get used to doing this, much of the work is already cut out for you. You can see all the doctrines and all the views surrounding those doctrines.

But the drawback is much, much reading, some can't do that much reading. So I say, whatever works for you.

 

[Shilohsfoal]

You left out no rapture.