I just did in the post that you responded to, which is the gathering of the church described in John 14:1-3, I Cor.15:51-53 and I Thess.4:16-17.
The other gathering is found in Matt.24:30-31 when Jesus returns to the earth to end the age, where at which time, He sends His angels out to gather those who will have made it alive through the entire tribulation period.
The Lord's promise to gather His church: (John 14:1-3, I Cor.15:51-53, I Thess.4:16-17)
None of this is evidence for pre-trib. I am not asking for a ride on the pre-trib highway of circular reasoning. I am asking for the on-ramp. Where do you come up with pre-trib....from scripture... in the first place.
Why shouldn't I take a common-sense approach that if Jesus wrote about His parousia (coming) and Paul wrote about it, that they are talking about the same thing?
Look at these passages. I f you look at Matthew 24:30-31 in context, Christ's parousia happens after the great tribulation. If you read I Thessalonians 4:16-17 in context, it happens at Christ's parousia. Paul refers to the coming of our Lord Jesus CHrist and our gathering unto him in II Thess. 2:1, which pre-tribbers typically take to refer to the rapture. But Matthew 24:30-31 sets the gathering at the parousia.
If you
assume pretrib and make this refer to two different comings of Christ, two different gatherings of the church and/or elect, and eisegete that into the text, then you can read it that way. Notice that other scripture uses 'elect' in reference to the church. The problem is this is that it is
not reason to assume two second comings of Christ or two 'gatherings' of the elect.
The end of Revelation tells of the New Jerusalem descending out of heaven after the 1000 years. Christ went to prepare a place for us. Trying to make John 14:1-3 out as proof of pre-trib isn't work when there are other scenarios in scripture that fulfill it.
Since it is clear that believers are not appointed to suffer God's wrath, then the Lord will keep His promise to come and take us back to the Father's house prior to said wrath. Because Jesus already satisfied God's wrath on behalf of every believer, then we cannot and will not go through it.
This is the same type of reasoning that gets us doctrines like purgatory, limbo, and the idea that you have to confess your sins to a priest. They take some kind of Biblical issue that seems to be a problem and spin a whole doctrine out of it.
In the past example we see in history, God preserved His people when He poured out judgments in Egypt--which is similar in some ways to some things we see in Revelation. There is also the issue that Paul, whose immediate audience was first century (or centuries) Christians who are already asleep in Christ, that they were not appointed unto wrath but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ. Is Paul talking about living on earth during a time when God pours out wrath on it, or is He talking about their not being objects of God's wrath, but rather of mercy? Then you are also assuming a certain chronology to Revelation as opposed to some of these things being pictures of events that happen at the same time.
This is one of the problems that comes with entrenching yourself in a theological position and then using interpretation of apocalyptic literature as your primary approach to eschatology? The arguments you have for pre-trib are not weighty (or conclusive) enough to outweigh direct teaching of scripture on the matter, or to posit two parousia's or two gatherings of two different elects in the eschatalogical passages.