The Rapture of the Church is after the Tribulation
- Thread starter mobius8curve
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I myself am a post tribber. I believe the 7 year period consists of its first 3.5 years in which the environmental catastrophes in Revelation 8 occur. Upon the opening of the bottomless pit in Revelation 9:2, the beast then rises from the sea in Revelation 13. His 42 month reign that follows is the second half of the 7 years.
During the first half of the 7 years (1,260 days/3.5 times) in Revelation 12, we see a woman in travail, who brings forth a man child.
This man child are the saints, who are spiritually caught up to God and His throne, while physically they remain on the earth.
The reason we know that it is a spiritual catching up/rapture to God and not a physical catching up/rapture, is that we see Satan who has been cast to the earth going off to make war with the remnant surviving offspring (after the first 1,260 days) in Revelation 12:17.
Correlating these data together, it then appears to me that the spiritual catching up/rapture of the saints occurs sometime following Revelation 8 where the environmental catastrophes are causing global tribulation; but preceding the 42 month reign of the beast.
The wrath of God on the beasts worshipers then follows these seven years.
Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
During the first half of the 7 years (1,260 days/3.5 times) in Revelation 12, we see a woman in travail, who brings forth a man child.
This man child are the saints, who are spiritually caught up to God and His throne, while physically they remain on the earth.
The reason we know that it is a spiritual catching up/rapture to God and not a physical catching up/rapture, is that we see Satan who has been cast to the earth going off to make war with the remnant surviving offspring (after the first 1,260 days) in Revelation 12:17.
Correlating these data together, it then appears to me that the spiritual catching up/rapture of the saints occurs sometime following Revelation 8 where the environmental catastrophes are causing global tribulation; but preceding the 42 month reign of the beast.
The wrath of God on the beasts worshipers then follows these seven years.
Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
Revelation 14 shows events following the beasts reign, and has a reaping of both the righteous and the unrighteous.
The whole earth is reaped; Revelation 15 commences in retrospect with details, prior to the earth being reaped.
Revelation 14:14 And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.
15 And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe.
16 And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.
17 And another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle.
18 And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe.
19 And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.
The whole earth is reaped; Revelation 15 commences in retrospect with details, prior to the earth being reaped.
Revelation 14:14 And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle.
15 And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe.
16 And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped.
17 And another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle.
18 And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe.
19 And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.
That's great. We should all be humble about seeking the truth. I still don't see the question you asked as a kind of rebuttal to what I had posted before (which is really hard to keep track of without embedded/nested quotes from pervious conversations.)
I'd have to look back at what was posted now, to remember the details. I'm sure I'd disagree with you, unless I was asking a nonsensical question to a comment that seemed nonsensical to point out that it seemed nonsensical. But conversations go better if neither of us gets offended easily or shows it.
Hold on a second. Maybe this is why we keep going back and forth. Do you take the teaching that Jesus gave that said unless the days were shortened there should no flesh be saved, but for the elect's sake, they will be shortened to mean that no one will survive but the elect? Or that this is evidence that it is extremely unlikely any non-elect will be saved.
If that is the case, I consider that to be an illogical and unreasonable conclusion. If the days are shortened for the elects' sake, that is not evidence that there will be no non-elect beneficiaries of the days being shortened. If God spared Israel from destruction due to the intercession of Moses for the sake of Moses, that does not mean there were no other beneficiaries. (He may have done it for His own name's sake as well, but the point still stands logically.)
If that is the point you were making, no wonder we were going back and forth wth your quoting this verse and getting upset when I ask for evidence of your position. I see no evidence for all unbelievers requiring that all unbelievers be destroyed in this teaching of Jesus. I'm just guessing that is the point you are making. You weren't explicit about it.
Where does the Bible say He speaks a blessing over them. If some unbelievers survive into the
God did not promise THEM if they endured till the end they would be saved, He promised the believers. And he keeps his promises. He will start his 1000 year reign with these people. There are premillers who interpret Daniel 11 to mean that Edom, Moab, Ammon, and Egypt will escape the hand of the beast. That sort of thing is floating around in the back of my mind. So when I read about the beast making 'all' take the mark or killing them if they don't, I don't view it as necessarily every human being on earth if there are some pockets that escape and if Israel somehow escapes this. You have probably heard the maxim 'all does not always mean all' when interpreting scripture.
If you do not read the parts about the beast with that sort of mindset, and you take it to mean every human being who does not take the mark on earth is dead, then I can see how you would arrive at your conclusion. But if Israel survives without all of them taking the mark, that is a reason not to see the 'all' in Revelation 13 as always referring to every single human being on the planet.
What do you consider to be the gathering of II Thessalonians 2:1?
If you want to talk about comments are a bit goading and irritating, this is one of them. I have pointed out I Thessalonians 4:15 and passages that mention the parousia quite a bit. That does not mean I base my faith on one word.
So what do you consider to be the evidence this time? That the days being shortened for the elect's sake? Do you take that as evidence that the non-elect will not benefit.
We also have to consider that if there are survivors who did not take the mark, for example in a country who was not under the beasts reign, even if they weren't Israel hiding in the desert or whatever, that it is conceivable that they could be unbelievers but have their name in the Lamb's book of Life because they repent later on. Israel mourns for the Savior at some point when they look at Him Whom they have pierced. I am not sure the exact timing of the reconciliation of Israel as a nation on the timeline.
I believe I mentioned that in regard to the personal comments where you imply that I hold to a view that is post-trib or similar because you think my mind is closed or some spiritual thing. These type of comments imply ..."If your mind was as open as mine is..." "If you prayed as much as I did..."
I used to be pre-trib, but I let go of that opinion because I was at least somewhat open minded.
I'd have to look back at what was posted now, to remember the details. I'm sure I'd disagree with you, unless I was asking a nonsensical question to a comment that seemed nonsensical to point out that it seemed nonsensical. But conversations go better if neither of us gets offended easily or shows it.
Hold on a second. Maybe this is why we keep going back and forth. Do you take the teaching that Jesus gave that said unless the days were shortened there should no flesh be saved, but for the elect's sake, they will be shortened to mean that no one will survive but the elect? Or that this is evidence that it is extremely unlikely any non-elect will be saved.
If that is the case, I consider that to be an illogical and unreasonable conclusion. If the days are shortened for the elects' sake, that is not evidence that there will be no non-elect beneficiaries of the days being shortened. If God spared Israel from destruction due to the intercession of Moses for the sake of Moses, that does not mean there were no other beneficiaries. (He may have done it for His own name's sake as well, but the point still stands logically.)
If that is the point you were making, no wonder we were going back and forth wth your quoting this verse and getting upset when I ask for evidence of your position. I see no evidence for all unbelievers requiring that all unbelievers be destroyed in this teaching of Jesus. I'm just guessing that is the point you are making. You weren't explicit about it.
Where does the Bible say He speaks a blessing over them. If some unbelievers survive into the
God did not promise THEM if they endured till the end they would be saved, He promised the believers. And he keeps his promises. He will start his 1000 year reign with these people. There are premillers who interpret Daniel 11 to mean that Edom, Moab, Ammon, and Egypt will escape the hand of the beast. That sort of thing is floating around in the back of my mind. So when I read about the beast making 'all' take the mark or killing them if they don't, I don't view it as necessarily every human being on earth if there are some pockets that escape and if Israel somehow escapes this. You have probably heard the maxim 'all does not always mean all' when interpreting scripture.
If you do not read the parts about the beast with that sort of mindset, and you take it to mean every human being who does not take the mark on earth is dead, then I can see how you would arrive at your conclusion. But if Israel survives without all of them taking the mark, that is a reason not to see the 'all' in Revelation 13 as always referring to every single human being on the planet.
What do you consider to be the gathering of II Thessalonians 2:1?
If you want to talk about comments are a bit goading and irritating, this is one of them. I have pointed out I Thessalonians 4:15 and passages that mention the parousia quite a bit. That does not mean I base my faith on one word.
So what do you consider to be the evidence this time? That the days being shortened for the elect's sake? Do you take that as evidence that the non-elect will not benefit.
We also have to consider that if there are survivors who did not take the mark, for example in a country who was not under the beasts reign, even if they weren't Israel hiding in the desert or whatever, that it is conceivable that they could be unbelievers but have their name in the Lamb's book of Life because they repent later on. Israel mourns for the Savior at some point when they look at Him Whom they have pierced. I am not sure the exact timing of the reconciliation of Israel as a nation on the timeline.
I believe I mentioned that in regard to the personal comments where you imply that I hold to a view that is post-trib or similar because you think my mind is closed or some spiritual thing. These type of comments imply ..."If your mind was as open as mine is..." "If you prayed as much as I did..."
I used to be pre-trib, but I let go of that opinion because I was at least somewhat open minded.
Some premil speakers and authors believe some will escape the rule of the beast such as Edom and Moab the way they interpret Daniel 11. Do you think all Israel will take the mark? Why do you call him the 'AC.' There is no explicit passage calling him the 'antiChrist.' John wrote about the spirit of Antichrist already having gone out into the world.
The boasting of one eschatology against another can come off as a bit obnoxious. I've been reading alerts and haven't been reading the whole thread.
If you are going to post something like this, it would be helpful if you removed the snark part and replaced it with the verses from Revelation 14 that you believe indicate a pre or mid or whatever trib rapture, and justify your assumption that Revelation is exactly chronological, as opposed to having some vingettes that show some of the same events in different ways and the various other approaches to the passage.
If you are going to post something like this, it would be helpful if you removed the snark part and replaced it with the verses from Revelation 14 that you believe indicate a pre or mid or whatever trib rapture, and justify your assumption that Revelation is exactly chronological, as opposed to having some vingettes that show some of the same events in different ways and the various other approaches to the passage.
-
1
- Show all
Matthew 24
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31 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.
II Thessalonians 2:1
1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
Compare the Greek words for 'gather' and 'gathering. I heard a pretrib preacher not to long ago say the 'gathering' here refers to the rapture. I would imagine that is a standard interpretation among premillineal types. Would you agree with that?
I Thessalonians 4
15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.
The Greek word 'parousia', which means 'presence' and which we generally take to be the 'second coming' is found in verse 15. I hear that in the old days, when the emperor or some important official came, the people would go outside and escourt him into the city with a big procession when he arrived. In this case, the living saints meet the Lord in the air.
Here, we see in I Thessalonians 4 about 'we who are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord'-- so the rapture hasn't taken place seven years before His coming. It happens at His coming, his parousia
In I Thessalonians 2:8, we read:
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
So we see the rapture happens at His parousia. And we see the man of sin destroyed by the brighteness of His parousia, His coming. How does that fit with pre-trib. Assuming that the man of sin is the beast of Revelation (and is there any pre, mid, or post tribber who does not?) then how is Paul being consistent with pre or mid trib at all? In Revelation, the beast and false prophet are thrown into the lake of fire in chapter 19, after the scene of the Word of God on a white horse.
If the rapture occurs at the parousia, then wouldn't the man of sin be destroyed before the tribulation starts?
And 'parousia' is used in verses 1 and verse 8 of the very same chapter. Wouldn't it be referring to the same coming of Christ, since Paul uses the same word right here in the same passage?
II Thessalonians 2
1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
and
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
If the church is raptured/gathered at His coming and that wicked is destroyed by the brightness of the Lord's coming, then doesn't it stand to reason that the rapture occurs at the coming of the Lord at end of the tribulation when the beast is destroyed?
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31 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.
II Thessalonians 2:1
1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
Compare the Greek words for 'gather' and 'gathering. I heard a pretrib preacher not to long ago say the 'gathering' here refers to the rapture. I would imagine that is a standard interpretation among premillineal types. Would you agree with that?
I Thessalonians 4
15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.
The Greek word 'parousia', which means 'presence' and which we generally take to be the 'second coming' is found in verse 15. I hear that in the old days, when the emperor or some important official came, the people would go outside and escourt him into the city with a big procession when he arrived. In this case, the living saints meet the Lord in the air.
Here, we see in I Thessalonians 4 about 'we who are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord'-- so the rapture hasn't taken place seven years before His coming. It happens at His coming, his parousia
In I Thessalonians 2:8, we read:
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
So we see the rapture happens at His parousia. And we see the man of sin destroyed by the brighteness of His parousia, His coming. How does that fit with pre-trib. Assuming that the man of sin is the beast of Revelation (and is there any pre, mid, or post tribber who does not?) then how is Paul being consistent with pre or mid trib at all? In Revelation, the beast and false prophet are thrown into the lake of fire in chapter 19, after the scene of the Word of God on a white horse.
If the rapture occurs at the parousia, then wouldn't the man of sin be destroyed before the tribulation starts?
And 'parousia' is used in verses 1 and verse 8 of the very same chapter. Wouldn't it be referring to the same coming of Christ, since Paul uses the same word right here in the same passage?
II Thessalonians 2
1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
and
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
If the church is raptured/gathered at His coming and that wicked is destroyed by the brightness of the Lord's coming, then doesn't it stand to reason that the rapture occurs at the coming of the Lord at end of the tribulation when the beast is destroyed?
