The Rapture

[PlainWord]

We are not the ones that believe the GT already happened,complete with a non existent mark in the forehead and the nonexistant beheading of those refusing the mark. The " luck" dimension falls on your own system of situational "interpretation".

You guys have to believe,since the GT is supposedly over, that the gathering by Jesus in rev 14,has taken place somewhere in history,as well as the gathering in mat 24 "one taken,one left".

None if that has ever happened either.

I'm convinced that the mark was a spiritual mark, just as it was in Ezekiel 9. You don't think there was a literal man in white linen with a literal ink horn going around putting "x's" on peoples foreheads, do you? You don't really think six axe wielding men suddenly appeared from nowhere and started going through the city killing the wicked, or do you? Actually, you probably do since you believe in flying demon scorpions and fire breathing men, LOL.

We know Eze 9 applied to the invasion of Babylon. The wicked were slaughtered and the good men were spared, taken to Babylon. This is exactly what happened in 70 AD. The wicked 1.1 million disbelieving Jews were slaughtered while the remaining 98K (who called upon the name of the Lord) were spared and taken to Rome. This is how God righteously judges. He doesn't kill the good with the bad. Look at Noah, look at Lot.

 

[RickyZ]

Now I get it lol.... this is a tongues babbler's smart ass reply to people who actually understand tongues and Matthew 24. Man don't even waste your time commenting on my posts any more.

Fair enough, because this shows pretty positively that you don't understand scripture and don't care to. You dismiss more scripture than you embrace.

Take care and enjoy that hole-ly Bible of yours, my friend.

 

[iamsoandso]

Thanks for sharing. Nobody has it all figured out. Most of what I believe concerning Revelation I feel there is strong evidence for, the identity of the Beast and Harlot, etc. However, the mark is a little less certain, you are correct in that. After reading Josephus and much of the early Christian writers, I've come to realize that too much of the events of 66-70 AD fit and can be tied to Mat 24, most of Rev, etc for most of these events not to have been fulfilled. Add that to the fact that all of the NT writings on the subject call for imminent or first century fulfillment written in a very personal way. Nothing implied a 2,000 year gap. Nothing implies the comfort, blessings, rewards, commands and even the wrath to be passed down through 100 generations. It would be like me knowing my end is coming soon and writing words of wisdom to my descendants 2,000 years and 100 generations removed without having anything to say to my sons or grandsons. Its the people you know and love who you comfort and instruct.

That said, Josephus is our only historian of the era and he was loyal to Titus, even taking Titus' name. He wrote War of the Jews at the request of Titus. So, we have to assume that he put Titus in the best possible light and left out a few details. The Talmud adds in a lot of evil Titus allegedly did but can't really depend too much on it either.

So again, it comes down to preponderance of the evidence. I see so much first century fulfillment along with multiple teachings by Christ Himself that He would return to THAT generation. Take that along with the fact that one would expect to see extensive coverage of the end of Israel which there wouldn't be if we add 2,000 years and skip it in favor of a future desolation. Also, the very earliest of the church writers from 80 AD to 200 AD don't mention a word about any future desolation, or return of Christ when all the apostles, and Jesus, covered these topics in depth. It's like, "This was big news last century and everyone knew about it so we don't need to discuss it anymore."

I hope you can sort things out but if not, know that you will be with the Lord instantly and with your glorified body and not have to sleep in Hades first anymore. Of this much, I'm 100% positive.

There is always that one day Luke 17:22 that everyone seems to be looking to resolve even in our day. This is from A.H. written by Irenaeus about 100 years after the destruction of Jerusalem, CHURCH FATHERS: Against Heresies, V.29 (St. Irenaeus) .

 

[PlainWord]

PlainWord if I understand you correctly you say that the parousia or presence of Christ returned in 70AD.
But this does not make much sense, considering that His presence is already present before 70AD, when you might ask? At Pentecost at the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Certainly that counts as a presence return? How did that change in 70AD?

Please study the use of the word, "parousia" in the Bible, meaning "Presence." You will come to understand it means the temporary "visiting of an important person" such as a ruler, king or other high ranking official. Typically this ruler/king would come and stay awhile, months or even years before returning to their own kingdom. So while this visiting official's "presence" was with you, He belonged to His own kingdom and had His own throne in His own capitol of His own nation.

Christ's actual first return (coming or parousia) happened in 66 AD and His Presence remained to execute His Wrath on those wicked Jews while protecting and residing spiritually with His church. After Jerusalem was destroyed, Christ returned to His heavenly kingdom to once again sit on His heavenly throne.

I believe with all my heart that Josephus records Christ parousia and that it matches perfectly two passages in Revelation. I think I shared this with you before but if not, here it is again.

"...on the eighth day of the month Xanthicus, [Nisan,] and at the ninth hour of the night, so great a light shone round the altar and the holy house, that it appeared to be bright day time; which lasted for half an hour. This light seemed to be a good sign to the unskillful, but was so interpreted by the sacred scribes, as to portend those events that followed immediately upon it." i.e., the Great Tribulation.

Now, if I am correct and Babylon the Great Harlot was first century Jerusalem and Christ's presence would be seen as a very bright light, then this verse makes sense.

After these things I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great authority, and the earth was illuminated with his glory. [SUP]2 [/SUP]And he cried mightily with a loud voice, saying, “Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen...

Who else can illuminate the night for EVERYONE to see? They didn't have stadium lights back then. And now, this verse makes sense:

When He opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour. [SUP]2 [/SUP]And I saw the seven angels who stand before God, and to them were given seven trumpets.

Wouldn't heaven be silent as Christ's presence returned to our realm to begin to execute judgment on the very city responsible for the murders of all those saints and to protect the righteous? Wouldn't they want to watch? Also, look at Numbers 10:1-10 to see how trumpets were used. They were being surrounded by the Romans!!

Also, note when this light came, the 8th of Nisan which would have been around April of 66 AD. It is this time of year that the wheat harvest begins (righteous told to flee by a spiritual voice that everyone heard). Then in early August, (9 Av) when Titus broke through you have the grape harvest begin, as in "the grapes of wrath." Cool huh???

Christ referred to the Holy Spirit as "a Helper that He would send." This implies a separate identity, the third member of the Trinity.

 

[PlainWord]

There is always that one day Luke 17:22 that everyone seems to be looking to resolve even in our day. This is from A.H. written by Irenaeus about 100 years after the destruction of Jerusalem, CHURCH FATHERS: Against Heresies, V.29 (St. Irenaeus) .

Of all the earliest church writers, I trust Irenaeus the least. As one of the fathers of the Roman Catholic Church who was actually raised in the Roman Empire in Smyrna then later moved to France, he appears to be aligned ideologically with today's Catholic church. Much of the RCC doctrine can be traced back to guys like Irenaeus.

As such, he would have a bias towards Rome and would reject Rome being the beast which destroyed Jerusalem and produced the "antichrist." Thus his futurist teachings which were adopted by both the RCC and the Eastern Orthodox churches have led us to this big debate we are having now. He is also the only one that I am aware of who dates John's exile to have started during Domitian. Another effort to by-pass Roman responsibility. Early Syrian transcripts of Revelation are titled,

"The Revelation, which was made by God to John the Evangelist, in the island of Patmos, to which he was banished by Nero the Emperor."

Luke 17 is perfectly resolved historically in my mind.

 

[RedeemedGift]

Of all the earliest church writers, I trust Irenaeus the least. As one of the fathers of the Roman Catholic Church who was actually raised in the Roman Empire in Smyrna then later moved to France, he appears to be aligned ideologically with today's Catholic church. Much of the RCC doctrine can be traced back to guys like Irenaeus.

As such, he would have a bias towards Rome and would reject Rome being the beast which destroyed Jerusalem and produced the "antichrist." Thus his futurist teachings which were adopted by both the RCC and the Eastern Orthodox churches have led us to this big debate we are having now. He is also the only one that I am aware of who dates John's exile to have started during Domitian. Another effort to by-pass Roman responsibility. Early Syrian transcripts of Revelation are titled,

"The Revelation, which was made by God to John the Evangelist, in the island of Patmos, to which he was banished by Nero the Emperor."

Luke 17 is perfectly resolved historically in my mind.

Irenaeus? Don't you mean guys like Origen and Augustine? Irenaeus was one of the more sound fathers.

 

[iamsoandso]

Of all the earliest church writers, I trust Irenaeus the least. As one of the fathers of the Roman Catholic Church who was actually raised in the Roman Empire in Smyrna then later moved to France, he appears to be aligned ideologically with today's Catholic church. Much of the RCC doctrine can be traced back to guys like Irenaeus.

As such, he would have a bias towards Rome and would reject Rome being the beast which destroyed Jerusalem and produced the "antichrist." Thus his futurist teachings which were adopted by both the RCC and the Eastern Orthodox churches have led us to this big debate we are having now. He is also the only one that I am aware of who dates John's exile to have started during Domitian. Another effort to by-pass Roman responsibility. Early Syrian transcripts of Revelation are titled,

"The Revelation, which was made by God to John the Evangelist, in the island of Patmos, to which he was banished by Nero the Emperor."

Luke 17 is perfectly resolved historically in my mind.

Your using the letters RCC as in Roman Catholic/Vatican formed after the Edict of Milan after ad321, Irenaeus was already dead before it was formed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Catholic_Church

 

[KJV1611]

Please study the use of the word, "parousia" in the Bible, meaning "Presence." You will come to understand it means the temporary "visiting of an important person" such as a ruler, king or other high ranking official. Typically this ruler/king would come and stay awhile, months or even years before returning to their own kingdom. So while this visiting official's "presence" was with you, He belonged to His own kingdom and had His own throne in His own capitol of His own nation.

Christ's actual first return (coming or parousia) happened in 66 AD and His Presence remained to execute His Wrath on those wicked Jews while protecting and residing spiritually with His church. After Jerusalem was destroyed, Christ returned to His heavenly kingdom to once again sit on His heavenly throne.

I believe with all my heart that Josephus records Christ parousia and that it matches perfectly two passages in Revelation. I think I shared this with you before but if not, here it is again.

"...on the eighth day of the month Xanthicus, [Nisan,] and at the ninth hour of the night, so great a light shone round the altar and the holy house, that it appeared to be bright day time; which lasted for half an hour. This light seemed to be a good sign to the unskillful, but was so interpreted by the sacred scribes, as to portend those events that followed immediately upon it." i.e., the Great Tribulation.

Now, if I am correct and Babylon the Great Harlot was first century Jerusalem and Christ's presence would be seen as a very bright light, then this verse makes sense.

After these things I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great authority, and the earth was illuminated with his glory. [SUP]2 [/SUP]And he cried mightily with a loud voice, saying, “Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen...

Who else can illuminate the night for EVERYONE to see? They didn't have stadium lights back then. And now, this verse makes sense:

When He opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour. [SUP]2 [/SUP]And I saw the seven angels who stand before God, and to them were given seven trumpets.

Wouldn't heaven be silent as Christ's presence returned to our realm to begin to execute judgment on the very city responsible for the murders of all those saints and to protect the righteous? Wouldn't they want to watch? Also, look at Numbers 10:1-10 to see how trumpets were used. They were being surrounded by the Romans!!

Also, note when this light came, the 8th of Nisan which would have been around April of 66 AD. It is this time of year that the wheat harvest begins (righteous told to flee by a spiritual voice that everyone heard). Then in early August, (9 Av) when Titus broke through you have the grape harvest begin, as in "the grapes of wrath." Cool huh???

Christ referred to the Holy Spirit as "a Helper that He would send." This implies a separate identity, the third member of the Trinity.

Where is the reurn of his presence talked about in the bible?

 

[PlainWord]

Where is the reurn of his presence talked about in the bible?

It was the original question posed by the 4 disciples in Mt 24:3. Please note the actual Greek below.

 

[RickyZ]

KJV, I apologize, I know I roam the halls here like a ghost tossing out tangential comments, that while I hope will stir thought I know they won't. It's just that, having had scripture put up before you a thousand times, there's little hope that my parroting it again is going to do any better. So I shoot from the hip hoping to get in a lucky shot. I'm sure it's gotten annoying. But what more can I do? Your mind is made up.



We debate a lot of issues here, but end times and the gifts carry special significance. They have dangerous consequences. Get it wrong and souls are lost. People who don't think they're going to have to face certain things aren't going to prepare for them. And when they find they got this wrong they're going to question what else they got wrong. And when that well armed trooper is telling them to deny Christ by taking the mark and pledging fealty to the new ruler or die, those doubts are going to come into play and many are going to turn away. Get this wrong and people will turn from God. Jesus and Paul both said that it's going to happen. And hoping it already has is a pretty big gamble.

I also fear for otherwise faithful believers who, when they stand before God, are going to be asked to account for when they attributed bonafide gifts of the Holy Spirit to satan and the flesh. There's a verse in the Bible that tells me what's going to happen to them, but I don't want to believe that so I'm holding out hope there IS an escape clause with at least this. I also hope that all those who falsified the gifts are standing next to you, to account for why they gave you cause to question the real thing.


Again, I apologize for being annoying but the seriousness of your error demands response. But me throwing more seed at you isn't going to help, plenty of seed has been sown but it's found hard ground. All I can hope to do is maybe plow a little furrow into the rock. And you know how grating steel is on granite.

 

[PlainWord]

Your using the letters RCC as in Roman Catholic/Vatican formed after the Edict of Milan after ad321, Irenaeus was already dead before it was formed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Catholic_Church

I know he was dead by then, I'm saying his writings and belief system was very influential on the early church which became the RCC.

 

[Muzungu256]

We debate a lot of issues here, but end times and the gifts carry special significance. They have dangerous consequences. Get it wrong and souls are lost. People who don't think they're going to have to face certain things aren't going to prepare for them. And when they find they got this wrong they're going to question what else they got wrong. And when that well armed trooper is telling them to deny Christ by taking the mark and pledging fealty to the new ruler or die, those doubts are going to come into play and many are going to turn away. Get this wrong and people will turn from God.

lol this is so dumb........... wit all the noise christians are making about the coming mark of the beast do u really think that anyone who grew up in those circles would take it after they turned preterist or something????????? nah what theyd do is they would say ok i was wrong in my preterism and all that church hype was true, im not taking the mark u see........ u dont need to be a professor to figure this out mon, this is just fearmongering here

 

[PlainWord]

Where is the reurn of his presence talked about in the bible?

Meant to point out that "parousia" is 3952 in the text I provided above. They didn't ask when He would return, they asked when His presence would return. This is a hugely important distinction and solves so many problems.

Ask yourself, did the age terminate at the Cross, His resurrection, or when the temple was destroyed and the nation of Israel dissolved for nearly 2 millennia and with it, the Law?

 

[PlainWord]

lol this is so dumb........... wit all the noise christians are making about the coming mark of the beast do u really think that anyone who grew up in those circles would take it after they turned preterist or something????????? nah what theyd do is they would say ok i was wrong in my preterism and all that church hype was true, im not taking the mark u see........ u dont need to be a professor to figure this out mon, this is just fearmongering here

Amen brother. If they start handing out computer chips and forcing us to take them, I'm heading for the hills with all my pre-trib friends and will be man enough to admit I'm wrong. Sadly, the other side won't do the same because they can never be wrong because nothing has happened yet and won't. Another 1,000 years could pass and they'll be saying the same things.

 

[Muzungu256]

Amen brother. If they start handing out computer chips and forcing us to take them, I'm heading for the hills with all my pre-trib friends and will be man enough to admit I'm wrong. Sadly, the other side won't do the same because they can never be wrong because nothing has happened yet and won't. Another 1,000 years could pass and they'll be saying the same things.

maybe by that time the swords and shields and arrows will mean lazer beams sekkluud .......

 

[PlainWord]

KJV,

I realized you answered my question with a question of your own. Here's my question again. Not trying to be argumentative, just trying to get your thought process (a lot of which I agree with, BTW).

I don't know that you can say every eye saw the resurrected Christ during those first 40 days. He appeared to:

Mary Magdalene
After that He appeared in "another form" to two (Cleopas and Simon)
Later He appeared to the 11
Then He appeared to Thomas

Other than Rev 1:7 (which I think happened in 66 AD) who else did the resurrected Christ appear to during those 40 days who recognized Him?

 

[KJV1611]

KJV, I apologize, I know I roam the halls here like a ghost tossing out tangential comments, that while I hope will stir thought I know they won't. It's just that, having had scripture put up before you a thousand times, there's little hope that my parroting it again is going to do any better. So I shoot from the hip hoping to get in a lucky shot. I'm sure it's gotten annoying. But what more can I do? Your mind is made up.



We debate a lot of issues here, but end times and the gifts carry special significance. They have dangerous consequences. Get it wrong and souls are lost. People who don't think they're going to have to face certain things aren't going to prepare for them. And when they find they got this wrong they're going to question what else they got wrong. And when that well armed trooper is telling them to deny Christ by taking the mark and pledging fealty to the new ruler or die, those doubts are going to come into play and many are going to turn away. Get this wrong and people will turn from God. Jesus and Paul both said that it's going to happen. And hoping it already has is a pretty big gamble.

I also fear for otherwise faithful believers who, when they stand before God, are going to be asked to account for when they attributed bonafide gifts of the Holy Spirit to satan and the flesh. There's a verse in the Bible that tells me what's going to happen to them, but I don't want to believe that so I'm holding out hope there IS an escape clause with at least this. I also hope that all those who falsified the gifts are standing next to you, to account for why they gave you cause to question the real thing.


Again, I apologize for being annoying but the seriousness of your error demands response. But me throwing more seed at you isn't going to help, plenty of seed has been sown but it's found hard ground. All I can hope to do is maybe plow a little furrow into the rock. And you know how grating steel is on granite.

That appology goes a long way with me friend... I also apologize for snapping back. Let's stick with bible verses lol.

 

[PlainWord]

Irenaeus? Don't you mean guys like Origen and Augustine? Irenaeus was one of the more sound fathers.

I'll say this, having the ability to do key word searches instantly to check other scripture is a huge advantage that they didn't have and we didn't have until the last 20 years or whenever the Bible went on-line.

 

[KJV1611]

It was the original question posed by the 4 disciples in Mt 24:3. Please note the actual Greek below.

View attachment 172693

At least I know what you're talking about now lol. I believe his presence is him in bodily form, what do you believe his presence is?

 

[heartofdavid]

KJV, I apologize, I know I roam the halls here like a ghost tossing out tangential comments, that while I hope will stir thought I know they won't. It's just that, having had scripture put up before you a thousand times, there's little hope that my parroting it again is going to do any better. So I shoot from the hip hoping to get in a lucky shot. I'm sure it's gotten annoying. But what more can I do? Your mind is made up.



We debate a lot of issues here, but end times and the gifts carry special significance. They have dangerous consequences. Get it wrong and souls are lost. People who don't think they're going to have to face certain things aren't going to prepare for them. And when they find they got this wrong they're going to question what else they got wrong. And when that well armed trooper is telling them to deny Christ by taking the mark and pledging fealty to the new ruler or die, those doubts are going to come into play and many are going to turn away. Get this wrong and people will turn from God. Jesus and Paul both said that it's going to happen. And hoping it already has is a pretty big gamble.

I also fear for otherwise faithful believers who, when they stand before God, are going to be asked to account for when they attributed bonafide gifts of the Holy Spirit to satan and the flesh. There's a verse in the Bible that tells me what's going to happen to them, but I don't want to believe that so I'm holding out hope there IS an escape clause with at least this. I also hope that all those who falsified the gifts are standing next to you, to account for why they gave you cause to question the real thing.


Again, I apologize for being annoying but the seriousness of your error demands response. But me throwing more seed at you isn't going to help, plenty of seed has been sown but it's found hard ground. All I can hope to do is maybe plow a little furrow into the rock. And you know how grating steel is on granite.

I applaud your Christ like attitude