The rapture? The comimg of Christ.

That's one view.

It's not.

“Then one of the elders answered, saying to me, “Who are these arrayed in white robes, and where did they come from?” And I said to him, “Sir, you know.” So he said to me, “These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭7‬:‭13‬-‭14‬ ‭NKJV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/114/rev.7.13-14.NKJV

seems to me it is.

It was added by that translation.

KJV Rev 7:14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

No, it's that the translation that @Stokie referred to actually acknowledges "the definite article ['THE']" that is indeed in the Greek text (in fact, twice in that text), in this Revelation 7:14 verse:



"... coming [participle] out-of THE [G3588] tribulation THE [G3588] great..." (Rev7:14)





Here's the interlinears showing this fact:

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/rev/7/14/t_concif_1174014


https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/7-14.htm







Also, three of my hardcopies (the ones I have within reach here at my desk) of Greek-English Interlinears also show the same.



The kjv rather often leaves off the definite article ('THE') in places where the Greek actually has it.

This is just one example of that.

John Fenton Hort said that they were only going to use the corrupted Alexandrian Text, "But no one will Know".

Life and letter of J.A. F. Hort volume I page 471. In a letter to A. Mackmillan dated Jan. 4, 1863 Hort lays out his method for revising the Bible.

"The Authorized Version follows the Latin arrangement; I should simply follow the Greek. My Greek text would be constructed almost entirely from the four great MSS.; of course it would not appear."

Looks like your lost that round buddy.
Perhaps you learned something of inestimable value?
You know.....the rapture is a Biblical fact beyond refutation?

It's all based on false premises.

Since when are marriage contracts warranted and guaranteed by Jesus God considered to be false premises?

No, that translation was not faithful to the text of the Received Text. The Received Text did not use the Vatican manuscript which had added the word "the". The NKJV was an enemy from within.

You know, its interesting to watch you show up on the battlefield only to be defeated time after time.

What's also interesting is that Satan also shows up on the battlefield only to be defeated time after time.
But the thing is......Satan has a motive. And this motive is to deceive as many as possible, regardless of him
knowing that defeat is inevitable. Time after time. Including the penultimate defeat at the time of the 70th week of Daniel.

I must have missed that marriage contract that includes a seven-year tribulation. You have to explain.

I doesn't.
See what I mean? You know.....what I said about being deceived and all.

I do not see what you mean.

Correct.

Then you agree a Seven year tribulation period is a fabrication that cannot be found in the Bible.

No, I do not agree with that at all.
I only agree with your statement: "I do not see".

What is it you don't see?

A false premise is believing that 70th week was all about Satan, when in reality it is all about Christ. Another false premise is believing that you can work with a translation that is a product of the Vatican manuscript and come up with truth.

Hi all,
Instead of getting into the yes and no's concerning a rapture, I would like to talk about how do we treat each other respectfully, without condemning, and without trying 'prove' our interpretation. And where and when do you draw a line, and what does that look like? As long as our differences are not on fundamental subjects, we can still have fellowship together. We may also choose to distance with one another (for instance leaving a congregation). I suppose there is a lot of things we can disagree on, and be a cause for separation (as church history has proven). In this context I believe verses on the subject of 'sacrificial meat' and freedom when convinced in your own mind apply, not causing offence, or another to lose faith, bickering over scriptural truths and I suspect, many more.
I am not being judgemental about things written in this post, I believe we should consider everything, and keep the good. Myself I have read, pondered and prayed long before I could come to a partial understanding on the subject of rapture and other subjects.
Still, I find it difficult at times to not find offense (feel hurt) when I encounter convictions that are not my own.
I do express my different understanding when the situation allows, but do not elaborate when nobody asks, when what is being said is not being forced upon me. I am curious how others handle situations like this or think we should.