The rapture? The comimg of Christ.

Are men dead before they become saved. Yes or no.

John 10:28
28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

Does it say there I will give?

That ^ would be the Greek word "G3498 - nekros - adj."... as is used in John 5:25a - "Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead [G3498] shall hear the voice of the Son of God: ..."

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/jhn/5/25/t_concif_1002025 (so, in THIS CONTEXT, "yes!"... as THAT is its CONTEXT).




Note that it does NOT say, "die-off / pass-away [G599 - v.]" (as in Jn11:25)... a different concept, see.

Are men dead first then saved before they die? Yes or no

^ @Saul-toPaul , did you not see my answer in that post of mine you've quoted? I answered, there.









[P.S. Not 100% of believers will "DIE"... example: 1Th4:17... 2Cor5:4... Jn11:26... Enoch in Gen5:24 / Heb11:5...]

A large number of Christians have been exposed to this "dispensationalist" or "futurist" interpretation of prophecy called the secret rapture, and have been hopelessly confused.

According to this view, the coming of Jesus will be in two separate events. First, He will come secretly to take the church to heaven, and then, seven years later, He will come in an open demonstration of power and glory. In between those two events, the Antichrist is supposed to come into power and the great tribulation period takes place.

But the truth is that the Bible nowhere speaks of these two separate comings of Jesus. There is no second stage of His second coming that occurs seven years after the socalled "rapture." By the way, that word "rapture" is also an invention of theologians. It can't be found in the Bible in even a single instance. It is a word coined for the second advent of Jesus.

Now here is what we find in the Scriptures: Christ's coming, the resurrection, and catching up of the saints to meet Jesus in the air, all take place at the same time, at the end of the world. This is why Jesus said, "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world" (Matthew 28:20). Now why would Jesus promise to be with the church until the end of the world if He intended to come seven years before the end to take them out of the world? The promise would have no meaning.

^ @Saul-to-Paul ... DIFFERENT CONTEXT!


Recall, in Jn11 Martha was speaking to Jesus about how her BODILY-DEAD brother will live again ("IN the LAST DAY" / "IN the LAST MILLENNUIM")... and the first part of Jesus' response (v.25b) PERTAINS TO THAT (i.e. "resurrection").


____________

Secondly, I said (regarding your phrase "before THEY DIE")...

[I mentioned...] "Not 100% of believers will "DIE"... example: 1Th4:17... 2Cor5:4... 1Cor15:51... Jn11:26... Enoch in Gen5:24 / Heb11:5... "

TheDivineWatermark, was you dead before you became saved? Yes or No.

(I assuming you believe someone has to be saved before they die to go to heaven.)

Not in the sense that LAZARUS (a believer / saint) was PHYSICALLY / BODILY DEAD (which was the CONTEXT of what Jesus is talking about in His response to Martha in His words of v.25!)





Yes, of course a person has to be saved IN THEIR LIFETIME (that's what "he that BELIEVETH in Me" means)... it is TOO LATE "after they DIE" (IOW, that is NOT when a person is "converted" to Salvation / to Faith in Christ... as it seems "DavyP" was saying in one of his posts, it seemed to me he was suggesting--No. It is TOO LATE, at that point. No second chances AFTER DEATH.)

Does that help you see my perspective?





I do not agree with the "Amill-teaching's" notion that John 11:25 is referring to the same thing that John 5:25 speaks to. No!

Good. Are you still dead? (not in the context of Lazarus)

Good. Are you still dead? (not in the context of Lazarus)

John 11:25
25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

You have partaken in the 1st resurrection. 😁

Except THAT is not the CONTEXT of Jesus' words in v.25... (which was about the KIND of DEATH [passed-away] that LAZARUS had just DIED / EXPERIENCED... which was NOT a "spiritual death" kind of death! )



You've been swayed by the "Amill-teachings" on this verse (v.25)! LOL

^ In Rev20:5b (speaking specifically of those in v.4b [SECOND-HALF-TRIB martyrs]), where it says, "THIS is the resurrection the first [ADJ]," it is speaking of their BODILY RESURRECTION after they'd been bodily BEHEADED [/physically DEAD]. lol

But this text is NOT saying these are the first believers to have been resurrected. (That is to MIS-read this text and what it is conveying... not to mention what v.6 conveys along with this verse.)

John saw the souls. No mention of resurrected spiritual bodies.

A large number of Christians have been exposed to this "dispensationalist" or "futurist" interpretation of prophecy called the secret rapture, and have been hopelessly confused.

According to this view, the coming of Jesus will be in two separate events. First, He will come secretly to take the church to heaven, and then, seven years later, He will come in an open demonstration of power and glory. In between those two events, the Antichrist is supposed to come into power and the great tribulation period takes place.

But the truth is that the Bible nowhere speaks of these two separate comings of Jesus. There is no second stage of His second coming that occurs seven years after the socalled "rapture." By the way, that word "rapture" is also an invention of theologians. It can't be found in the Bible in even a single instance. It is a word coined for the second advent of Jesus.

Now here is what we find in the Scriptures: Christ's coming, the resurrection, and catching up of the saints to meet Jesus in the air, all take place at the same time, at the end of the world. This is why Jesus said, "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world" (Matthew 28:20). Now why would Jesus promise to be with the church until the end of the world if He intended to come seven years before the end to take them out of the world? The promise would have no meaning.

"Exposed?" I am not sure what you mean by that. There are plenty of good authors who are well educated in all the interpretations of prophesy scriptures in the past 500 years that have present their case using the rules of heremeneutics for their views on pre-tribulation rapture, mid-tribulation or post-tribulation rapture. Many have done a good job and those who study the texts in question and read these different presentations from scholarly authors have decided for themselves which view they believe is the one intended by the authors of scripture or by the Spirit that inspired these authors. Those that believe they are standing on correct interpretation and can present a case for it, are not "ignorant" if they did not come up with the same view as yours.

If you want to present a case for a post tribulation view, just present it. The pre-tribulation view can be presented with scriptures as well. I lean toward a pre-tribulation view. Howbeit not a "secret one." I do agree that there is nothing in the text to suggest anyone dissappears from view. As a matter of fact the bodily resurrection of the dead in Christ must be a visible one or it would not be a resurrection of the body. Those that are alive at that time that are changed are changed in a glorification kind of way and shine like the stars and are bright like the firmament and rise and meet the Lord in the clouds, all of which are visible descriptions not invisible.
The fact that they shine like the stars (Dan 12) and rise is to the praise of the Glory of God's Grace and the manifestation (visible) of the sons of God. A vindication if you will.

One of the main reasons that scholars who lean toward the pre-tribulation view (other than that we are not appointed to wrath and because Jesus said to pray to escape these judgments that will come upon the earth) is that the doctrine of watching and waiting and being ready for the coming of the Lord at any time suggests a pre-tribulation rapture and this doctrine of the imminent return of Christ is violated by a mid-trib or post trib view. So in order that all of the scriptures agree the pre-trib view is still a strong one among scholars, and it's popularity is not due to ignorant unlearned Christians as you suppose. Yes, some are pre-tribulation in their view simply because their church or pastor tells them so, but that is not the reason that it is the prevailing view. It is a prevailing view because in a scholarly article presented in theological academic circles for review using the rules of hermeneutics it continiues to convince the intellectually honest that it is a stronger case than the other views. But there is room for differences of opinions on this. Lets not dismiss those that do not see it the way we do as being "unlearned", deceived, or ignorant becuase that is not the case at all and to suggest so would indicate that you might not have been "exposed" to scholarly books on this subject. Dwight Pentecost does a good job of presenting a scholarly view in his book Things to Come a Study in Biblical Eschatology. And though I do not agree with everything he writes, there is no question that he presents a good case and there are many others like him. Read some of these books and many of your questions will be answered as to other interpretations. You might still be convinced that your view is the correct one but you will probably learn some things, and discover other texts you were not aware of on this subject.

I do agree that the doctrine of watching and praying and being ready for the return of Christ should not be weakened by any view of eschatology. If one begins to look for the Antichrist to be revealed first, before the Christ is revealed from heaven they may have misunderstood something they read and dismissed all of the admonitions to look for his coming for one verse they are misunderstanding. When we put the return of Christ off for other prophesies to be fulfilled first we dismiss everything Jesus taught about living ready for that moment to occur without warning.