Jesus comes immediately AFTER the tribulation, there is no Left Behind Secret Rapture=Stop causing fear.

[FreeGrace2]

Luke 14:14 This is a statement of fact; no more and no less. And since it is the word of God, it is a TRUE fact.

Well, thank you for so noting.

But what is the intent of the speaker? Will your reward be given the instant your are caught up into the air? I don't think that is the intent here. The meaning is, the saints will get their reward during the millennial reign. Of course there is a more obvious meaning: any righteous that has died will certainly be resurrected. WHO is this verse pointing to? Since it is still Old Testament, it is pointed to the Jews. Remember Mary and Martha? They certainly believed that at some point in time there would be a resurrection day for the righteous.

Why are you trying SO HARD to ignore the obvious fact that there is just ONE resurrection of the saved, and Jesus NOTED that. Why can't you?

To use this verse to prove there can only be ONE resurrection for the righteous is very poor exegesis.

Oh, stop it. Don't be so ridiculous. Jesus noted "the resurrection of the righteous". That's singular. If there are going to be "waves" or "stages" or "series" of resurrections, then Jesus would have said "the resurrertions of the righteous".

And Jesus and Paul agreed on the FACT that there is just ONE resurrection of the saved. Acts 24:15 and 1 Cor 15:23.

Why can't you agree with Jesus and Paul?

It was not written to answer that question.

How do you know that? You have NO WAY of knowing that.

A better place to answer this question is to look at various resurrections and see what is written about them.

Well, since there is VERY CLEAR and UNAMBIGUOUS verses about the number of resurrections, I HAVE looked at them.

Luke 14:14, Acts 24:15, 1 Cor 15:23.

So, where do you find "various resurrections"?

For example, for the Gentile church of today, we look to Paul for He is the one that received the revelation about the rapture. He tells us that his rapture will come before wrath, and probably JUST before wrath.

No he didn't tell us that. Not even close. 2 Thess 2:1-3 is again, very clear and UNAMBIGUOUS. The Second Coming and gathering (rapture) occurs together (the singular resurrection) AFTER the revealing of the beast (A/C).

Does that agree with the timing of the resurrection of the beheaded? No, it cannot possibly be at the same time. Before wrath would be before any of the martys of the trib would be martyred.

Your calculations are way off because your presumptions have gotten in the way, plus you seem unable to understand Paul.

Where did Paul say what you are claiming? Why do you make these claims about what Paul tells us but leaves out the verse?

You cannot use Acts 14:15 to answer this question either: It only states there will be a resurrection of the righteous and of the wicked - exactly what Rev. 20 shows us.

Of course I can use it. It is Scripture and Paul was clear that there will be a resurrection of the saved (FIRST) and one of the unsaved (SECOND).

Are you having trouble with math?

When are the two witnesses resurrected? Do you know?

1 Cor 15:23 tells us clearly: "when He comes". Second Advent.

I suppose you presume that when God puts a breath of life into their dead bodies lying on the street in Jerusalem, they are resurrected.

So, let me ask you; where is the evidence that they received resurrection bodies? Since you bring up the witnesses, what do you do with Enoch and Elijah? Do you assume/presume they received resurrection bodies as well?

If either the witnesses or Enoch and Elijah were resurrected, ALL of which was BEFORE Christ the firstfruits, then 1 Cor 15:23 CANNOT BE TRUE.

So, is that your argument?

John tells us that they suddenly show up and begin their testimony just 3 1/2 days before the midpoint. They testify for 1260 days which will take them to just 3 1/2 days before the 7th vial that ENDS the week. But after they are killed, they lay dead those 3 1/2 days. That means their resurrection will be at the end of the week or at the 7th vial. How amazing; that is also when the OLD testament saints arise. After all, Jesus told them several times He would raise them up "on the last day." The 7th vial will be poured out to END the week, so that would certainly be "on the last day."

Listen closely. The 2 witnesses AREN'T resurrected until Christ returns, just as 1 Cor 15:23 says.

Did you ever read Matthew 27 where it is written: the earth did quake...and the graves were opened"

Please give me proof that any of them received resurrection bodies. And that would mean they received a resurrection body BEFORE Jesus did.

So, apparently, from your "calculations", Jesus COULDN'T POSSIBLY be the "firstfruits". Absurd.

Did you notice there was an earthquake mentioned when the Two Witnesses rise up? That makes two witnesses.

Yep, and totally irrelevant to the discussion of when saved people receive their resurrection bodies.

Without a doubt, when God raises the rest of the OT saints, it is going to cause the world's worst earthquake. This will also include all the righteous from before the flood. Parts of their bodies could have been scattered around the world. How amazing, at the last day, at the 7th vial, we find the world's worst earthquake. That pinpoints the time God will raise the OT saints, along with the Two witnesses AND the beheaded. They are all raised together.

According to 1 Cor 15:23, ALL saved people receive their resurrection body when Christ comes.

Just so you know, wisdom decrees that when a subject is covered in depth in one passage but is only mentioned in passing in another, we form our doctrine from the in-depth passage. For NT resurrections then, we should form our doctrine from passage like 1 Thes 4 and 1 Cor. 15.

Then why don't you believe 1 Cor 15:23?

when Jesus comes back, "those who belong to Him" will be resurrected. All of them. What about the parable of the ten virgins? It would seem only 50% made it.

No parable can be used to form doctrines. They weren't meant to be. Or are you also totally unaware of what Jesus told His discples when He used parables?

Those who must use parables to defend their position are in a very weak position.

What about Heb. 9:28? It states that Jesus will appear only to those who are looking for Him.

Are you really trying to negate all the verses I've shared about the single saved resurrection?

Please answer this question as honestly as you can: will you be looking for Christ's coming TONIGHT? Will you be expecting Him when you believe He will not come until after?

I am convinced beyond all doubt that Jesus Christ will come back at the Second Advent, to end the Tribulation, and give resurrecrtion bodies to ALL believers, from Adam on.

And I have verses that prove it.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
Why do you presume that these witnesses will receive their resurrection bodies when God puts their souls back in them? The text certainly DOESN'T say any such thing.

You bet I do.

And, why not? What's so bad about a clear and unambigous verse? Oh, right. You don't have any.

The truth is, neither does mid trib have any, neither does prewrath have any, and neither does posttrib have any. Such a verse does not exist.

You have been given clear and unambiguous verses about a SINGLE resurrection for the saved and WHEN the gathering will occur.

So don't give me that jazz about not having any unambiguous verses. At least you've admitted that YOU don't have any. As we all know.

You are right. The text does not say it specifically. But then, it does not deny it either.

OK, this is hardly an argument. So let's move on.

Since I think the text shows us they will be resurrected at the 7th vial that ends the week, and the Old Testament saints will be resurrected then, I lump them in with the rest of the OT saints, since both of them will also be OT saints.

Believe whatever you want, since it seems you don't believe 1 Cor 15:23, which says UNAMBIGUOUSLY that "those who belong to Him" will be resurrected "when He comes". Couldn't be any more clear.

A clear and unambiguous verse? The truth is, there is no clear verse anywhere telling us that Paul's rapture will be _ _ _ _ _ _ _ the 70th week.

There is no such thing as "Paul's rapture", so your point is irrelevant. Again, 1 Cor 15:23 TELLS us UNAMBIGOUSLY when the saved people will be resurrected.

If there was such a verse, the church would be agreed. After all, the church agrees that Jesus died and rose again. We find very clear verses proving that.

Hardly. Just consider the polar opposite views between Calvinists and Arminians. Your observation is totally incorrect.

You have time and time again laid out "after the tribulation of those days" as if that ere a clear and unambiguous verse proving the rapture will be post-trib.

And I laid it all out with verses that make that clear. Verses that you apparently don't believe.

However, the ONLY THING that verse proves unambiguously is that Jesus will come after the trib' and will send out angels to gather the elect. It does not prove the ones gathering are the church. Pretribbers see reasons why they cannot be.

Right. pretribbers are "seeing" a lot of things that aren't there. Such as a pretrib rapture.

So the great debate continues and probably will continue Until He comes.

Of course it will. Satan deceives the whole world, or didn't you know?

I've given both Calvinists and Arminians verses that refute some of their points and both sides simply do what you are doing; not believing the clear verses.

And so it goes.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
Have you considered how much of the first 3 horsemen that can be seen now?

And how close the 4 horseman is now?

None have been sent.
Jesus has not broken any seals.

Really? But you are free to close your eyes and ears to reality, all you want. Not my problem.

2thes
2 :1
Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
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:

See that?

yep. ALL of it. Where the Second Advent and gathering (rapture) occur together, and NOT UNTIL AFTER the A/C is revealed.

Something removed ....then the AC REVEALED.
Not seated in power...REVEALED.

Count the number of times The Holy Spirit writes " REVEALED" in those verses....as if HE knew some would try to reframe it.

I was taught that the passages refers to the Holy Spirit is what is "removed" before the Trib. And that is explained by the fantasy Pretrib rapture. The idea being that when the "church" is gone, so is the Holy Spirit.

However, that is just stupid. The Holy Spirit is omnipresent. He can't be removed.

What IS removed is moral government. And that has already occurred. You can pinpoint it by either of 2 dates: Nov 4 or Jan 20, 2020.

Take your pick.

The USA went from being a moral government that kept Satan and evil at bay around the world to an evil government, saturated with Marxism, which is from the pit of hell. Satan's ace in the hole.

 

[FreeGrace2]

postribs ignore " firstfruits"

Lying doesn't become you.

1 Cor 15:23 is the relevant verse when discussing the resurrection and rapture. Jesus is the firstfruits, because Jesus is the FIRST one to receive a resurrection body. But, regarding the rest of humanity, there are only 2 resurrections; one for the saved and one for the unsaved.

Jesus noted a singular resurrection of the saved in Luke 14:14, and Paul clearly noted a singular resurrection of the saved and one for the unsaved in Acts 24:15. And in 1 Cor 15:23, Paul UNAMBIGUOUSLY told us WHEN believers will receive their resurrection bodies. It is "when He comes", obviously referring to the Second Advent. Which he also noted in 2 Thess 2:1.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Yet another dilemma for postribbers.
( the doctrine of omissions)

The only thing posttribbers omit is the fallacy of a pretrib rapture/resurrertion. Cannot happen.

There will be only a singular resurrection/rapture for the saved. Luke 14:14, Acts 24:15 and 1 Cor 15:23 all prove that fact.

If there would be a pretrib resurrection and rapture, then NO saved person after that will get a resurrection body. Yet Rev 20:5 proves otherwise and even describes the resurrection of the trib martyrs as the FIRST RESURRECTION.

Not real difficult to grasp.

Unambiguous, in fact.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Another thing is, in the ten virgins parable the wise were adamant about not sharing any oil. That to me is interesting because it raises a question, were they thinking that their lamp had to be full and if they gave the foolish oil they would have less than a full lamp? There are several possibilities, but it certainly appears Jesus is not coming back for a people not operating in the Holy Spirit. He's coming back for a red-hot bride.

When people have to go to parables for support for their claims, it shows how desperate they are.

This is what Jesus told His disciples about WHY He taught in parables.

Matt 13:10-13
10 The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?”
11 He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance.
12 Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them.
13 This is why I speak to them in parables: “Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.

Those who have to prop up their doctrines with parables are on very shaky ground.

 

[FreeGrace2]

He's coming back for a red-hot bride.

Oh, where is that verse that shows Him taking that "red-hot bride" back to heaven? Hmm?

Are you "omitting" it? 'Cause you seem to make the claim but haven't provided ANY evidence for it.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"""However, since there is ONLY ONE resurrection, which will occur "when He comes", and Rev 20:5 describes the trib martyrs as the FIRST resurrrection, you have no ground to stand on"""

There can not possibly be one resurrection.

And you've even been shown the unambiguous verses that SAY there is only 1 for the saved. You're either brave or brash. Can't decide.

In any case, your statement here directly contradicts what Jesus said in Luke 14:14 and what Paul said in Acts 24:15 and 1 Cor 15:23.

But, go ahead. It's your life.

Jesus is firstfruits resurrection.

Do you really comprehend what that means? It means NO ONE who was brought back to life through His miracles or death can be counted as a "resurrection". Yes, they were raised to life, but you're going to have to prove a resurrection by showing that all these people received a resurrection body. Not even Lazarus received a resurrection body.

That automatically makes at least 2 more....or even three.[/QUOTE]
Jesus isn't counted among the "saved people". That's why His resurrection is described differently as "firstfruits". Then 1 Cor 15:23 continues to pinpoint WHEN all the saved people will be resurrected, whch is "WHEN HE COMES". That's one resurrection for ALL believers, from Adam on.

Firstfruits omission is your friend.

Nope. You obviously just don't understand it.

Those martyrs of rev 20 are gathered before the end of the trib.

Yes, they are. And John described that resurrection as the FIRST one. For saved people. Just one. Luke 14:14, Acts 24:15, 1 Cor 15:23.

Your docrine teachers left out "firstfruits".

Nope. I explained WHY Paul used that description for Jesus' resurrection.

But postrib doctrine is the doctrine of omission.

It certainly DOES omit the fallacy of a pretrib rapture, since NO verse describes Jesus taking resurrected/raptured believers to heaven.

 

[randyk]

Wrong, he gave the signs, and then the LAST SIGN was the Sun and Moon turning dark. How did you guys even figure out that Salvation comes by Faith alone at his rate, I mean this isn't even that hard to grasp. We get the Matt. 4-31 SIGNS then Jesus tells the disciples a Parable comparing things....

Matt. 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree(after THE SIGNS); When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: (So, we can know when the Summer is nearby the Figs ripeness, LIKEWISE, see that, this is comparing the these two things, so LIKEWISE, when ye see what ? THESE THINGS........What things? These SIGNS Jesus just told us about, its like 12 by my count, and the LAST SIGN is all-important because Jesus says when ye see ALL THESE THINGS/Signs.)

33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.

34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

THIS GENERATION !! What Generation? The one that sees ALL THESE SIGNS, well What Signs? The SIGNS Jesus just told us about in Matt. 24:4-32, so what wraps up ALL THESE SIGNS? Well, what is the LAST SIGN?

The Last Sign

Matt. 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.

This is not that hard brother, you guys want YOUR UNDERSTANDINGS to be correct more than you cherish the truth it seems, I don't get it tbh. This is an EASY UNDERSTANDING, it's not even a debatable point.

Jesus said THIS GENERATION referring to THE GENERATION that saw all of THESE SIGNS. Now go reread Matt. 24:4-31 and see the 12 or so signs for yourself.

Now, every other point you made after that first point becomes irrelevant.

You seem to think there is only your argument? There is actually quite a good other argument, which is the approach I take.

My view is based on the idea that Jesus was not referring to all the signs he had listed, but rather, only to those signs connected to the fall of the temple in 70 AD. He was in effect saying "all these things [that I've given you as birth pains of the fall of Jerusalem] will take place in this generation." In other words, he is excluding any signs he gave for his 2nd Coming, because he had gone on record as saying this event was not to be timed.

Words mean what they mean in context. Let me give you one example, if I can.

I'm a prophet and hear from God that Mt. Rainier is going to explode as a volcano soon. And so, you ask about this and want to know when it's going to happen? So I say, there will be rumblings, smoke, and a few lava dumps, and ultimately will come the volcanic explosion.

And then I go on to say all these things, the rumblings, smoke, and lava dumps will presage the big event. And afterwards, this volcanic explosion will lead to a lot of people moving out of the area for generations to come. And finally, at the end of this great dispersal, people will finally come back.

But I return to the main subject about the soon coming eruption of Mt. Rainier, and tell you that all these things are going to happen in this generation. I'm not saying that the events to follow the explosion will take place in that generation, but only that the events presaging the explosion, and the explosion itself, will take place in that generation.

It is a matter of reading things in proper context, rather than assuming Jesus was speaking of his 2nd Coming, which is clearly excluded from any predicted timing scheme. In my view, the main subject of the Discourse was not the 2nd Coming, but rather, the fall of Jerusalem.

The 2nd Coming was certainly asked about, and Jesus certainly answered questions about that. But the main prediction here was the timing of the fall of Jerusalem. And Jesus clearly answered by saying it would take place in "this generation."

 

[lamad]

The only thing posttribbers omit is the fallacy of a pretrib rapture/resurrertion. Cannot happen.

There will be only a singular resurrection/rapture for the saved. Luke 14:14, Acts 24:15 and 1 Cor 15:23 all prove that fact.

If there would be a pretrib resurrection and rapture, then NO saved person after that will get a resurrection body. Yet Rev 20:5 proves otherwise and even describes the resurrection of the trib martyrs as the FIRST RESURRECTION.

Not real difficult to grasp.

Unambiguous, in fact.

Where you miss it: you IMAGINE that "first" means first in sequence and ONLY ONE TIME. That is not at all the intent of the Author.

It is first in HONOR and happens OVER TIME All the righteous over all time will at one time receive their resurrection body and THEIR resurrection. Jesus was called the firstfruits as the very first human being to receive a resurrection body that will live forever. Almost instantly after Him, He raised the elders of the Old Covenant as shown in Matthew 27. They were the secondfruits, thirdfruits, etc. But these were the first people to take part in the CHIEF of resurrections: the resurrection for the saved. The only other resurrection is for all the damned.

For example, the Old Testament saints will be resurrected "on the last day" or the 24 hour period of time before Jesus comes to Armageddon. Their resurrection, which will include all those righteous from before the flood and will cause the world's worst earthquake, as we read at the 7th vial.

The dead in Christ, on the other hand, will be resurrected just before wrath. Since many of them have been dead for nearly 2000 years, their resurrection will cause a worldwide earthquake (Just not as powerful as we read at the 7th vial) - the first such earthquake in the book of Revelation. WHERE is that earthquake? It is "just before wrath" and the Day of His wrath. As a "clincher" that Paul's rapture will happen a moment before the 6th seal - shortly after that John SAW the raptured church in heaven, as that great crowd too large to number.

Ask yourself, which crowd would be bigger: those martyred during the church age, or those NOT martyred? Of course those NOT martyred would be a far larger crowd. Why then do some people imagine this great crowd are martyrs when there is not one hint in any word describing them that they are martyrs? When we leave verse IN CONTEXT, this great crowd best fits the raptured church.

By the very definition of "resurrection" we could say that Jesus resurrected Lazarus. But that was not a resurrection into a body that would live forever. Lazarus had to die twice. Paul made it clear in 1 Cor. 15 that there will be a resurrection where mortal puts on immortality and corruption puts on incorruption. It is a resurrection into a body that will never die: Jesus said it was a flesh and bone body. From that time on, our bodies will not need blood to stay alive.

 

[lamad]

FreeGrace2 said:
Have you considered how much of the first 3 horsemen that can be seen now?

And how close the 4 horseman is now?

Really? But you are free to close your eyes and ears to reality, all you want. Not my problem.


yep. ALL of it. Where the Second Advent and gathering (rapture) occur together, and NOT UNTIL AFTER the A/C is revealed.


I was taught that the passages refers to the Holy Spirit is what is "removed" before the Trib. And that is explained by the fantasy Pretrib rapture. The idea being that when the "church" is gone, so is the Holy Spirit.

However, that is just stupid. The Holy Spirit is omnipresent. He can't be removed.

What IS removed is moral government. And that has already occurred. You can pinpoint it by either of 2 dates: Nov 4 or Jan 20, 2020.

Take your pick.

The USA went from being a moral government that kept Satan and evil at bay around the world to an evil government, saturated with Marxism, which is from the pit of hell. Satan's ace in the hole.

Here I must agree with you. If we just leave the first seal in its CONTEXT, we see Jesus ascending and sending the Holy Spirit down (Rev. 5) and Jesus taking the book from the right hand of the Father. And the next thing John wrote after the worship was Jesus opening the first seal. That would have been around 32 or 33 AD.

I am in full agreement with several of the commentators that state the first seal is to represent the Church taking the GOSPEL to the world.

But since the world is controlled by Satan, this certainly caused martyrs. There are STILL martyrs being added to that total. The church has been at the 5th seal now for almost 2000 years.

Here is where you will disagree: very soon the pretrib rapture will END the church age, and make a certain martyr the final church age martyr, and judgment will begin. The 6th seal will be broken right after the rapture, and TIME will then be The Day of the Lord. Shortly after the DAY begins, showing us God is getting angry with the world, Jesus will break the 7th seal and the 70th week of Daniel will begin. The first trumpet judgment will be the first event coming with WRATH.

 

[lamad]

FreeGrace2 said:
Why do you presume that these witnesses will receive their resurrection bodies when God puts their souls back in them? The text certainly DOESN'T say any such thing.

You bet I do.

And, why not? What's so bad about a clear and unambigous verse? Oh, right. You don't have any.

As I have said over and over, there is NO clear and unambiguous verse telling us plainly WHERE Paul's rapture will take place. If there were such a verse, the whole church world would be in agreement.

I think we can safely say that the entire church world agrees with John 3:16. I have never heard people argue about the meaning of that verse.

If you disagree, show us a clear and unambiguous verse proving Paul's rapture is at Jesus coming to Armageddon. So far, in my 75 years of life on earth, I have not seen such a verse. Just SHOW US ONE. Oh, right. You don't have any.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Where you miss it: you IMAGINE that "first" means first in sequence and ONLY ONE TIME. That is not at all the intent of the Author.

You have no apparently idea what the "intent of the Author" is. And I have provided a number of verses that ALL clearly indicate that there is just ONE resurrection for saved people.

Jesus said in Luke 14:14 - and you will be blessed. Although they cannot repay you, you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.”

So, explain how you squeeze more than one resurrection in the words "at THE resurrection of the righteous".

Acts 24:15 - and I have the same hope in God as these men themselves have, that there will be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.

Same here. How many resurrections can you squeeze in the words "A resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked".

1 Cor 15:23 - But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.

Here, Paul very clearly tells us WHEN the SINGULAR resurrection will occur; "when He (Christ) comes".

There is NO WAY to squeeze more than 1 resurrection in any of these verses.

For example, the Old Testament saints will be resurrected "on the last day" or the 24 hour period of time before Jesus comes to Armageddon.

1 Cor 15:23 says that's when "those who belong to Him" will be resurrected. That means every saved person from Adam on, NOT just OT Jews.

The dead in Christ, on the other hand, will be resurrected just before wrath.

And...you have no verses that say this. In fact, I've just shown again that there is only one resurrection of the saved.

Since many of them have been dead for nearly 2000 years, their resurrection will cause a worldwide earthquake (Just not as powerful as we read at the 7th vial) - the first such earthquake in the book of Revelation. WHERE is that earthquake? It is "just before wrath" and the Day of His wrath. As a "clincher" that Paul's rapture will happen a moment before the 6th seal - shortly after that John SAW the raptured church in heaven, as that great crowd too large to number.

All saved people will be resurrected/raptured at the same event; the Second Coming of Christ.

Ask yourself, which crowd would be bigger: those martyred during the church age, or those NOT martyred?

It makes no difference the size of any crowd. Irrelevant. All saved people WILL BE resurrected when Christ comes. That clearly indicates just ONE resurrection event.

Of course those NOT martyred would be a far larger crowd. Why then do some people imagine this great crowd are martyrs when there is not one hint in any word describing them that they are martyrs? When we leave verse IN CONTEXT, this great crowd best fits the raptured church.

The number of saved people who "are alive and remain" when He comes (1 Cor 15:23) will be a VERY SMALL number, in comparison to all the dead saints already in heaven who will come with Jesus (Rev 19).

By the very definition of "resurrection" we could say that Jesus resurrected Lazarus.

The key is whether the person received their new imperishable resurrection body. And, no, Lazarus is still waiting for his, which he will get when Christ comes back at the Second Advent.

btw, if you want to use the strict definition, you have a real problem. Jesus raised a number of people from the dead, and at least Peter did also. Yet, 1 Cor 15:23 says that Christ is the FIRSTFRUITS of resurrrection, so you can scratch your definition of "resurrection" in this discussion.

The ONLY MEANING that is relevant to end times is when a believer receives their resurrection bodies. Not even the 2 witnesses will receive theirs, until Christ comes back.

But that was not a resurrection into a body that would live forever. Lazarus had to die twice. Paul made it clear in 1 Cor. 15 that there will be a resurrection where mortal puts on immortality and corruption puts on incorruption. It is a resurrection into a body that will never die: Jesus said it was a flesh and bone body. From that time on, our bodies will not need blood to stay alive.

yep.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Here I must agree with you. If we just leave the first seal in its CONTEXT, we see Jesus ascending and sending the Holy Spirit down (Rev. 5) and Jesus taking the book from the right hand of the Father. And the next thing John wrote after the worship was Jesus opening the first seal. That would have been around 32 or 33 AD.

I am in full agreement with several of the commentators that state the first seal is to represent the Church taking the GOSPEL to the world.

I don't agree with that. The first seal is the application of God's wrath on the earth. As are all the judgments; seals, trumpets and bowls.

I understand the first seal to be conquest by evil governments/groups. We sure are seeing that now.

But since the world is controlled by Satan, this certainly caused martyrs. There are STILL martyrs being added to that total. The church has been at the 5th seal now for almost 2000 years.

Again, I disagree. All the 3 sets of judgments occur during the 70th week. In fact, the first seal begins the 70th week.

Here is where you will disagree: very soon the pretrib rapture will END the church age, and make a certain martyr the final church age martyr, and judgment will begin.

All the seals are judgments, and part of the 70th week, or the 7 year Tribulation. There can be no pretrib rapture, because ALL believers will be resurrected (including the living raptured) when He comes. 1 Cor 15:23 refutes a pretrib rapture.

 

[FreeGrace2]

As I have said over and over, there is NO clear and unambiguous verse telling us plainly WHERE Paul's rapture will take place.

Good grief, of course He did. Twice, in fact.

1 Cor 15:23 - But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.

2 Thess 2:1 - Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters,

Paul's words are unambiguous.

If there were such a verse, the whole church world would be in agreement.

Don't forget that the Bible says the devil "deceives the whole world" and "leads the whole world astray".

Jut look across the expanse of evangelicalism. There is hardly agreement on a whole host of doctrines and principles.

I think we can safely say that the entire church world agrees with John 3:16. I have never heard people argue about the meaning of that verse.

And that isn't end times.

If you disagree, show us a clear and unambiguous verse proving Paul's rapture is at Jesus coming to Armageddon.

I have been, all along. 1 Cor 15:23 and 2 Thess 2:1 both say the same thing.

So far, in my 75 years of life on earth, I have not seen such a verse. Just SHOW US ONE. Oh, right. You don't have any.

Well, you can't use that excuse any longer.

Unless you can prove unambiguously that neither 1 Cor 15:23 and 2 Thess 2:1 refer to Christ's Second Coming, you have no case.

These are clear and unambiguous verses. You can call them whatever you want.

 

[lamad]

FreeGrace2 said:


lamad said:
The truth is, neither does mid trib have any, neither does prewrath have any, and neither does posttrib have any. Such a verse does not exist.


You have been given clear and unambiguous verses about a SINGLE resurrection for the saved and WHEN the gathering will occur.

So don't give me that jazz about not having any unambiguous verses. At least you've admitted that YOU don't have any. As we all know.


OK, this is hardly an argument. So let's move on.


Believe whatever you want, since it seems you don't believe 1 Cor 15:23, which says UNAMBIGUOUSLY that "those who belong to Him" will be resurrected "when He comes". Couldn't be any more clear.


There is no such thing as "Paul's rapture", so your point is irrelevant. Again, 1 Cor 15:23 TELLS us UNAMBIGOUSLY when the saved people will be resurrected.


Hardly. Just consider the polar opposite views between Calvinists and Arminians. Your observation is totally incorrect.


And I laid it all out with verses that make that clear. Verses that you apparently don't believe.


Right. pretribbers are "seeing" a lot of things that aren't there. Such as a pretrib rapture.


Of course it will. Satan deceives the whole world, or didn't you know?

I've given both Calvinists and Arminians verses that refute some of their points and both sides simply do what you are doing; not believing the clear verses.

And so it goes.

Just so you know, NO ONE in the posttrib camp has ever proven with scripture that the gathering in Matthew 24 is Paul's rapture. And don't say there is no such thing. First Thes. 4:17 is "Paul's rapture" because Paul received a revelation on the rapture and wrote of it. NO ONE in the posttrib came has proven that all the righteous will be resurrected at the same time. Many have tried, as you have tried, but when posttrib verses are studied and exegeted IN CONTEST, they really don't say what posttribbers believe they say, and the first on the "first" or chief or primary resurrection is no exception.

Can you refute this? Just three verses after Paul's classic rapture verse, the alive in Christ being caught up, Paul tells us of the Day of the Lord. It is ambiguous because Paul did not say word for word, "the Day of the Lord" will come just after the rapture." But did Paul HAVE to say it word for word for us to understand?

It is the same for God's wrath: Paul did not say word for word, "the rapture will come JUST before God's wrath begins." Again, did Paul HAVE to write it word for word for us to understand it? Why would Paul mention the Day of the Lord and the wrath of God (that we have no appointments with) in a rapture passage - UNLESS the rapture would be the trigger for the start of the Day of the Lord and the start of God's wrath? In a previous verse in his same epistle, Paul wrote, "which delivered us from the wrath to come." I say there can be no doubt that Paul is telling us—WRATH—God's wrath—will follow hard after the rapture. A prewrath writer put it this way: they are back to back events—no time between. I say it this way: Jesus' coming will trigger (start) the resurrection of the dead in Christ. Then those alive in Christ: the catching up. And the catching up will trigger the start of the DAY. (That is, the Day of the Lord, or the Day of His wrath.)

Where can we see this on a timeline of end-time events? In Revelation John starts the Day of the Lord or the Day of His wrath at the 6th seal. The way Revelation is written, it is IMPOSSIBLE that the 6th seal can be moved anywhere else in Revelation. It is just before the 7th seal 30 minutes of silence as the official start of the 70th week of Daniel or "the trib" as many say. Therefore, since Paul's catching up comes before wrath and before the Trib, we are justified in saying the rapture is PRE-trib.

As further proof, John then saw the church IN HEAVEN shortly after that and wrote it in Rev. chapter 7. But according to your false theory, that large crowd too large to count should be in chapter 19.

It is an absolute FACT, clear and unambiguous, that John wrote of the marriage and supper taking place BEFORE Jesus gets onto His white horse to descend to Armageddon. Can you deny this? What this is saying, IN CONTEXT, is that posttrib theory is a MYTH. The church is already in heaven when the marriage and supper take place.

Oh, not a problem for posttribbers! They just move the marriage to a different time and a different place!

 

[Absolutely]

Just so you know, NO ONE in the posttrib camp has ever proven with scripture that the gathering in Matthew 24 is Paul's rapture. And don't say there is no such thing. First Thes. 4:17 is "Paul's rapture" because Paul received a revelation on the rapture and wrote of it. NO ONE in the posttrib came has proven that all the righteous will be resurrected at the same time. Many have tried, as you have tried, but when posttrib verses are studied and exegeted IN CONTEST, they really don't say what posttribbers believe they say, and the first on the "first" or chief or primary resurrection is no exception.

Can you refute this? Just three verses after Paul's classic rapture verse, the alive in Christ being caught up, Paul tells us of the Day of the Lord. It is ambiguous because Paul did not say word for word, "the Day of the Lord" will come just after the rapture." But did Paul HAVE to say it word for word for us to understand?

It is the same for God's wrath: Paul did not say word for word, "the rapture will come JUST before God's wrath begins." Again, did Paul HAVE to write it word for word for us to understand it? Why would Paul mention the Day of the Lord and the wrath of God (that we have no appointments with) in a rapture passage - UNLESS the rapture would be the trigger for the start of the Day of the Lord and the start of God's wrath? In a previous verse in his same epistle, Paul wrote, "which delivered us from the wrath to come." I say there can be no doubt that Paul is telling us—WRATH—God's wrath—will follow hard after the rapture. A prewrath writer put it this way: they are back to back events—no time between. I say it this way: Jesus' coming will trigger (start) the resurrection of the dead in Christ. Then those alive in Christ: the catching up. And the catching up will trigger the start of the DAY. (That is, the Day of the Lord, or the Day of His wrath.)

Where can we see this on a timeline of end-time events? In Revelation John starts the Day of the Lord or the Day of His wrath at the 6th seal. The way Revelation is written, it is IMPOSSIBLE that the 6th seal can be moved anywhere else in Revelation. It is just before the 7th seal 30 minutes of silence as the official start of the 70th week of Daniel or "the trib" as many say. Therefore, since Paul's catching up comes before wrath and before the Trib, we are justified in saying the rapture is PRE-trib.

As further proof, John then saw the church IN HEAVEN shortly after that and wrote it in Rev. chapter 7. But according to your false theory, that large crowd too large to count should be in chapter 19.

It is an absolute FACT, clear and unambiguous, that John wrote of the marriage and supper taking place BEFORE Jesus gets onto His white horse to descend to Armageddon. Can you deny this? What this is saying, IN CONTEXT, is that posttrib theory is a MYTH. The church is already in heaven when the marriage and supper take place.

Oh, not a problem for posttribbers! They just move the marriage to a different time and a different place!

Yes
It specifically says that they came out of the Great Tribulation. They are the innumerable number with palm branches in their hands. This indicates they're not disembodied spirits. They are in fact martyrs. Also note that before this the martyrs were kept under the altar in heaven, and were told to stay there until their number is fulfilled. So these Martyrs, the innumerable number are not under the altar but in the general population of Heaven. Yes you are correct I don't know how in the world post tribs would be able to reconcile all that. Keep in mind that the Antichrist is commissioned and empowered to kill believers. I believe he Institutes the mark almost as soon as he takes power. This is design specifically to kill Christians. I think the result of that is the innumerable number in heaven possibly billions of believers.

In fact rev 20 indicated those on thrones refused the mark and were martyred.
It does not say how long they were seated.

 

[lamad]

Well, thank you for so noting.


....

I will add more scriptures to help prove your point:

• 
  Matthew 22:23
  The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,
  
  
• Matthew 22:28
  Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her.
  
  
• Matthew 22:30
  For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
  
  
• Matthew 22:31
  But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,

In every case, it seems to tell us that there will be only ONE resurrection. Is that your point?

Which is better, to form doctrine from a single verse on a subject, or from a passage that has several verses? Or, let me say it this way: Daniel has ONE VERSE on the 70th week: Daniel 9:27. On the other hand, Revelation has from chapter 8 to chapter 16 or 9 chapters on the 70th week. Which then would be the best place to form doctrine on the 70th week? Of course, the answer is, the most complete treatise on a subject is the best place.

Considering these verses in Matthew 22, let's back up a few hundred passes so we can see the entire forest, versus looking at one tree. During Jesus life, the church of today, bringing in the fullness of the Gentiles, was still a MYSTERY hidden in the Father. Paul TOLD us that God in the Gentiles was a mystery. Why then would you or anyone else imagine verses in the gospels would have ANYTHING to do with the Gentile church of today? All those Sadducees (and the Pharisees too for that matter) knew was there would be a resurrection of the righteous OF THE JEWS. They did not know Jesus was be put to death, raise again from the dead, and be rejected by the nation of Israel as their long awaited Messiah. As an aside, WHY didn't God leave clear and unambiguous verses on the OLD Testament TELLING them that their Messiah would come first only to die on a cross? Did you ever wonder? We will have to ask God why. It is the same for the rapture - NO clear verses telling us WHEN. Again, we will have to ask God WHY?

We have what we have in the scriptures: it is up to us to understand them. Mary and Martha knew that one day there would be a resurrection. But their knowledge was that it would be of the JEWS. The Gentiles were heathens: salvation was of the Jews and for the Jews. That is what they believed.

Where you miss it: You pull verses OUT of their OLD TESTAMENT context, apply them to the Gentile church of today, and imagine you have good, straight doctrine. The truth is, GOD WAITED after He rose from the dead and presented Himself - once to a crowd of 500 people - to see if Israel as a nation would accept Him as their Messiah. They refused so God chose to send Paul to the Gentiles:

Acts 15:14
Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.

Posttribbers in general IGNORE all these things and imagine the church of today fits right in with all the scriptures pointed to the Jews. NO WONDER we disagree on so many point.

I am convinced beyond all doubt that Jesus Christ will come back at the Second Advent, to end the Tribulation, and give resurrecrtion bodies to ALL believers, from Adam on. And you will be proven wrong at the moment Jesus comes pretrib for His church. You are almost half right: the resurrection of the Old Covenant people, and those before the flood, PLUS the beheaded, PLUS the Two Witnesses, will all take place on the last day - the last 24 hour day of the 70th week that will wrap up and END Jewish time—FINISH Daniel's 70 weeks.

Where you miss it: that will happen as the 70th week ends, at the 7th vial. Jesus WILL NOT RETURN then. If He did, many could count 1260 days from the abomination and KNOW what day He would come. But it is written that NO ONE will know. And Revelation shows us that Jesus does not return at the 7th vial. The events of chapters 17, 18 and 19 before the white horses all will take place after the 70th week has finished before Jesus comes to Armageddon.

Are you really trying to negate all the verses I've shared about the single saved resurrection? Yes, because your theory is myth.

But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. Did you not notice? WHO is this pointing to? Paul was clear in his rapture verses that it was involving ONLY those "in Christ." This is speaking of those who are born again, with a regenerated human spirit. Here in this verse is says "they that are Christ's." My friend, this is not speaking of Old Testament saints.

There can be no doubt, we read these scriptures differently so end up with very different theories. Did you not know, the Pauline Epistles are pointed to the Gentile church of today. The gospels and what is written in them is in general pointed to the Jews. The New covenant did not begin until after Jesus rose from the dead.

The 2 witnesses AREN'T resurrected until Christ returns, just as 1 Cor 15:23 says. The truth is, you did not properly exegete verse 23, ignoring some of the words and keeping track of WHO this verse was pointed to. To form doctrine, go to the passage is is the most thorough treatise of the Two Witnesses: Rev. 11. If you really understood that passage, you would know that these two men (Old Testament saints: without much doubt, the two men that did not die a physical death, suddenly show up and begin their testimony just 3.5 days before the man of sin will enter the temple and thus divide the week into two halves. So only 3 1/2 days of their 1260 days will be in the first half of the week. The rest of their testimony will take them to just 3.5 days before the week ends (at the 7th vial). They are then killed and lay dead those 3.5 days, so what John is really showing us is that they will be resurrected with the REST of the Old Testament saints: at the Resurrection Jesus spoke often of and that Mary and Martha believed. The truth then from scripture is that Jesus' resurrection happened first, then the elders of the Old Testament (Matthew 27), then the church, then the Old Testament saints, and with them, the Two witnesses and the beheaded.

Where you miss it: all this is BEFORE Jesus descends to Armageddon. If you can find a resurrection written in Rev. 19, I will change my mind. However, you and I both know John did not write of a resurrection. How strange! That would be a HUGE event and if it really will happen as Jesus descends, God certainly would have shown John and John would have written it. Instead, Jesus gets on the white Horse and descends: NO resurrection mentioned. Why? Because it happened (for the OT saints) at the 7th vial.

However, that being said, we both agree that Jesus coming as described by Matthew is he SAME coming as John describes in Rev. 19. Agreed? Matthew gives us more information that John did not see so did not write: Jesus will send out angels to gather together (and bring to Israel) all the dispersed Jews and Hebrews who will survive the 70th week. But we are not done yet: Jesus gave us the parable of the tares. That at the end of the age, angels would be sent to take out all those who are lawless. I suspect that too will happen as Jesus descends. One thing I cannot find anywhere is of a resurrection as Jesus descends on the white horse to Armageddon. Sorry, but I just cannot find a posttrib resurrection in scripture.

 

[lamad]

Yes
It specifically says that they came out of the Great Tribulation. They are the innumerable number with palm branches in their hands. This indicates they're not disembodied spirits. They are in fact martyrs. Also note that before this the martyrs were kept under the altar in heaven, and were told to stay there until their number is fulfilled. So these Martyrs, the innumerable number are not under the altar but in the general population of Heaven. Yes you are correct I don't know how in the world post tribs would be able to reconcile all that. Keep in mind that the Antichrist is commissioned and empowered to kill believers. I believe he Institutes the mark almost as soon as he takes power. This is design specifically to kill Christians. I think the result of that is the innumerable number in heaven possibly billions of believers.

In fact rev 20 indicated those on thrones refused the mark and were martyred.
It does not say how long they were seated.

Sorry, but I have to disagree. There is not one word in their description that would hint they are martyrs. Neither is their one word in their description that tells us they have resurrection bodies. However, when we take their passage IN CONTEXT, they were seen in heaven shortly after Paul's rapture will take place, which is just before the start of wrath. Next, they are a group too large to number. Nowhere does John tell us the martyrs will be such a large group. Certainly those NOT martyred will be larger than those who are martyred. Therefore, considering all these points, I am convinced this is the church, in heaven, just after the rapture. I believe God is calling life on earth as a sinner, added together that many times (uncountable times) adds up to great tribulation. This is not the days of GT Jesus spoke of, it is all the lives of these uncountable crowd before they were born again. But each one of them JOINED the body of Christ by washing their robes in Jesus' blood: by being born again. Then left a world of tribulation and eternal death to enter eternal life, infinitely better!

 

[lamad]

Good grief, of course He did. Twice, in fact.

1 Cor 15:23 - But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.

2 Thess 2:1 - Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters,

Paul's words are unambiguous.


Don't forget that the Bible says the devil "deceives the whole world" and "leads the whole world astray".

Jut look across the expanse of evangelicalism. There is hardly agreement on a whole host of doctrines and principles.


And that isn't end times.


I have been, all along. 1 Cor 15:23 and 2 Thess 2:1 both say the same thing.


Well, you can't use that excuse any longer.

Unless you can prove unambiguously that neither 1 Cor 15:23 and 2 Thess 2:1 refer to Christ's Second Coming, you have no case.

These are clear and unambiguous verses. You can call them whatever you want.

Finally, you said something I can agree with: there is VAST disagreement on many doctrines in the church today.

Indeed, 1 Cor. 15:23, 1 Thes. 4, and 2 Thes 2 ALL refer to Jesus' second coming, which will be PRETRIB and just before the start of Wrath. In contrast, His coming to Armageddon will be His THIRD coming.

OF, since some people get bent out of shape hearing "third" coming, He comes the second time ONLY TO THE AIR, and that is not counted as a coming to earth. So they call His coming to Armageddon as His second coming to touch down. Either way, He will come to the air and call up those in Christ, before the start of God's wrath. In Revelation that is just before the 6th seal start of the DAY of His wrath.

That fits perfectly because John wrote that judgment would not come until the final martyr is killed as the rest of them were killed - and how is that? As church age martyrs. The pretrib rapture will end the church age and the last martyr before the rapture will be the FINAL martyr and then Judgment (God's wrath) will begin.