The Tribulation and the Church, WHEN?

22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.
24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?

They,the ORIGINAL TREE shall be restored.

COVENANT.
It has to do with COVENANT.

I still don’t see what those verses have to do with replacement theology.

Basically those verses are saying that anybody, Jews or Gentiles can be grafted into the olive tree.

The olive tree never went away, it’s always been there. Some of the branches (those that didn’t believe) were cut off.

Israel is the fig tree, it’s not the olive tree. The olive tree is the word of God.

Rev 11:4 (KJV) These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth.

Some folks seems fixated on Matt 24 as the only chaper pertaining to the end times.

It isn't. Not by a longshot. And if you fail to receive the whole Counsel of God you will suffer to become mired in error.

Well, it is what it is. When I provide the scriptures that reveals the answer to something that is very clear and concise and the person just shoots it down, it tells me that they're not interested in the truth, but in the teachings that they have adopted. Nothing that you present to them will matter.

What I provided for KJV1611 was a perfect scriptural answer to who the woman of Revelation 12 is by pointing out the same symbolisms (sun, moon and stars) that God used for Joseph's dream and which identifies Jacob as the sun, his wife(s) as the moon and the stars representing the twelve tribes of Israel. Not only did he shoot it down, but he did so without a reason why, which means that he's only concerned about protecting the teaching that he adopted no matter how much sense my scriptural answer makes.

Regarding someone claiming that their interpretation is the word of God, there has to be somewhere where that is true. Otherwise you just have a bunch of people, like myself, who have and continue to do deep studies on scripture but are deemed as worthless by others. The other side of that coin is that there people in the background who are reading these posts and the Spirit is revealing the truth to them.

If nobody has the interpretations that the Spirit reveals through constant study and prayer, then who does? The people who are doing this are being shot down! However, I also understand that this is the result of the following prophecy:

"For the time will come when men will not tolerate sound doctrine, but with itching ears they will gather around themselves teachers to suit their own desires. So they will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

You Sir are absolutely correct.

Zero scriptural support for that view.

If I reply with:

"There are no pre-trib verses."

- then, it's not going to be very useful to a productive discussion.

So, instead, I will say:

"Let's just be very honest, shall we...?"

In truth, there are no pre-trib, mid-trib, or post-trib verses.

There are only conclusions made from the examination and interpretation of many verses of scripture.

There is not a single stand-alone verse anywhere in scripture that with absolute certainty proves pre/mid/post-trib.

Many verses, each in their respective passage and context, must be examined.

And -- ALL verses that have any bearing on the topic must be considered.

"All scripture must agree."

The scriptures do tell us the truth about the End Times Scenario; however, we must properly discern between what the scriptures actually say and wisdom-of-men conjecture and wishful thinking.

My own personal conclusions come from years of Bible study utilizing a study method whereby verses are compared within context based on the following:

~ "What happens before what?"
~ "What happens after what?"
~ "What happens at the same time as what?"
~ "What details are uniquely matched or similar enough to draw a particular conclusion with more-than-reasonable certainty?"

If, in my studying, I encountered a phrase like:

"Immediately after the tribulation of those days..."

- then, I "took the Bible's word for it" and accepted the words for what they really actually said, determined exactly what "the tribulation of those days" was referring to in the context of the passage, and examined what it was telling me actually occurred after "the tribulation of those days"...

The results of my study of different aspects of the End Times Scenario are compiled in such a way and presented with the intent that the reader would be able to see those results as direct-from-the-scriptures as possible.

Instead of writing perhaps several pages of explanation describing my interpretation of the various verses, I have chosen to simply arrange the verses according to the associations between them from the study of the verses in context with regard to the study topic.

Anyone may view the current state of each of my End Times Scenario study topics on my website. I invite everyone to take a closer look at what scripture really actually says about the End Times Scenario.

Hello Bluto,

Those "believers on the earth mentioned in Matt.24:15 will not be the church, but is referring to the remnant of Israel and the great tribulation saints (Gentiles) revealed in Rev.7:9-17.

If you will notice, throughout Revelation chapters 1 thru 3, the word "ekklesia" translated as "church" is used 19 times. Within those chapters you will not find the word "hagios" translated as "Saints." Then from chapter 4 onward, you never see the word ekklesia/church, but only the hagios/Saints. That is not a coincidence, but is just one of the breadcrumbs that God left us in his word for those who do in-depth studies on these subjects.

Rev.1:19 is the key to understanding the chronological order of Revelation in relation to the last days. Regarding this John was told to write:

What you have seen = Everything written from Rev.1:1 to Rev.1:19

What is now = Represented by the letters to the seven churches, which also represents the entire church period

What will take place later = Everything which takes place after the "what is now," i.e. what takes place after the church period

Then in Rev.4:1 you have John saying that he heard the same voice that sounded like a trumpet that he heard in Rev.1:10 who is identified as the Lord Jesus, saying "come up here and I will show you what must take place after this," which is synonymous with the "what will take place later."

This is what I call a prophetic allusion to where the church is gathered. I also believe that the voice that sounds like a trumpet is synonymous with the "trumpet of God" found in 1 Thessalonians 4:16 where Paul is describing the dead and living in Christ being called up.

But getting back to the abomination, this is specifically directed to Israel, which is supported by the fact that the abomination is said to be set up in the Jewish temple. We also have the fact that when that abomination is set up, those in Judea are told to flee out into the wilderness, which again pointing to Israel. The other supportive scripture pointing to Israel, is that when they are fleeing Jesus says "pray that your flight not be on the Sabbath," which would be indicative of Israel who is under the law.

Matthew 24, the Olivet Discourse, is not about the church, but about Israel and those who will be present on the earth during the tribulation period. The problem is that you are applying to the church what is meant for Israel. The gathering of the church will have taken place prior to that time period.

The biggest problem in putting the church as those being told to flee, is that the wrath of God will be going on during that entire time which believer's are not appointed to suffer. The underlying principle is that Jesus took upon himself the wrath of God on behalf of ever believer. Therefore, the wrath of God no longer rests upon those in Christ, ergo, the church cannot and will not be on the earth during the time of God's wrath.

Also, John never said for believers to watch for the antichrist, but said "you have heard that the antichrist is coming." That doesn't mean that believers are going to be here when he revealed. On the contrary, the church will be removed from the earth and we will never see him.

Your view of the woman in Rev 12 is absolutely wrong. The woman that gave birth to the man child (Christ) is not the BOND WOMAN.

I believe the above quoted post has quite a bit of balony in it...

In the context of the discussion in this thread, it is referring to the End Times Scenario.

Thanks for the info about the video.

My bologna has a first name it's O.s.c.a.r.,My bologna has a second name it's M.a.y.e.r.. I love to eat it every day and if you ask me why I'll say "Oscar Mayer has a way with B.O.L.O.G.N.A."

This is the kind of simple answer I was looking for but don't remember seeing in the first post.

Who exactly is falling away - the church?

Didn't you say somewhere earlier in this thread that there would be an apostasy after the church was taken out?

Who exactly would be falling away from what?

Will there be an apostasy [or not] - and the man of sin revealed - after the church has been raptured?

Nope. Sorry. Wrong.

Correct up to '167 B.C.'; wrong after that.

Yes.

This I can agree with...

Here it is -- the last part of post #102.

Please explain in detail the nature of the apostasy that will occur after the church, the Holy Spirit, and all faith in God is removed from the earth.

Who exactly will be falling away from what exactly?