There will be no Rapture!!!

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Musicmaster

Active member
Feb 8, 2021
365
76
28
Lexicon's are someone's "PERSONAL" translation.

Afraid to use a General translation from the Scholars, but rather use someone's own personal translation.

I bet you also use Expositor Bibles of your favorite preacher that matches your personal beliefs as well.
Actually, no. I use no expositional sourcing. The reason I say that is because they all disagree with one another on various points, which, logically, means that they can all be incorrect.

If you reject sources that push only into the realm of lingual translation derived from historic and lingual authority, then that's on you, not me. English translations and extra-biblical writings are of more distant proximity to being authorities in than lingual authorities in translational mechanics.

MM
 

FollowerofShiloh

Well-known member
Jan 24, 2024
2,909
489
83
Yeah, yeah. We've all been hearing all that for some time now, and what you seem to be missing is that I don't give a rat's petoot what Clement wrote! You presonally, along with however many others, placing such great emphasis upon Clement and others is nothing but jangling and clamoring of writings that are NOT INSPIRED! Why can't you seem to grasp that? You can argue proximity and historicity all you want, but it all is nothing but logical fallacies and hermeneutic slaughter.

You follow Clement and his seeming authority, and I will follow the scriptures since scripture itself declares that the very word of God is what is good for teaching, reproof, correction and rebuke. Clement and gang...nothing!

MM
I actually only mentioned Clement's name but quoted nothing of him like you attempted to do.
 

Musicmaster

Active member
Feb 8, 2021
365
76
28
Matthew 24:30
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven, and all the tribes of the land shall wail, and shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Mark 13:26
26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in clouds with great power and glory.

Luke 22:27
27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming on a cloud with power and great glory.


The Bible is in perfect Harmony.

When does Matthew, Mark, and Luke say Jesus/Son of Man comes on the CLOUDS?

The verse before them...29Immediately after the tribulation of those days..."

Paul has to match Jesus, not the other way around!
The only departure in all those verses is the forced dichotomy YOU have injected into the text.

Nice try, but no dice.

MM
 

Musicmaster

Active member
Feb 8, 2021
365
76
28
I actually only mentioned Clement's name but quoted nothing of him like you attempted to do.
Why invoke him at all? Yes, I quoted him, showing that he may not have been as pre-wrath as many out there seem to think he was.

MM
 

FollowerofShiloh

Well-known member
Jan 24, 2024
2,909
489
83
The only departure in all those verses is the forced dichotomy YOU have injected into the text.

Nice try, but no dice.

MM
I mentioned the verses that verify why Paul said in the clouds and provided the verse before to show when it happens but if you know your Bible as you tend to claim the FOLLOWING verses in Matthew, Mark, and Luke show the gathering.
 

Musicmaster

Active member
Feb 8, 2021
365
76
28
Lexicon's are someone's "PERSONAL" translation.

Afraid to use a General translation from the Scholars, but rather use someone's own personal translation.

I bet you also use Expositor Bibles of your favorite preacher that matches your personal beliefs as well.
You know, given that you and I don't derive our beliefs from the same authority(s), there really is nothing left to discuss about our differences, given that our differences are actually at the root level rather than at some other upper, leaf-level by which we may debate the finer points. I adhere to scripture and language scholars, and you seem to appeal at various levels to the more ancient writings and commentaries of those who are seemingly closer to the apostles in proximity of time. Roman Catholic writers and historians make appeals to some of the same writers and commentators, and look at what they have. Still nothing of any great import.

I've been accused of being a biblicist, and I willingly accept that label.

MM
 

Musicmaster

Active member
Feb 8, 2021
365
76
28
Matthew 24:30
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven, and all the tribes of the land shall wail, and shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Mark 13:26
26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in clouds with great power and glory.

Luke 22:27
27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming on a cloud with power and great glory.


The Bible is in perfect Harmony.

When does Matthew, Mark, and Luke say Jesus/Son of Man comes on the CLOUDS?

The verse before them...29Immediately after the tribulation of those days..."

Paul has to match Jesus, not the other way around!
(sigh) Ok, I'll respond to this for now:

Matthew 24 coincides with Zechariah 12, which points to the very ending of the tribulation immediately prior to ALL the Jews being wiped out by all the armies of the world, and where the Lord wipes out all those armies before the last 1/3rd of all the Jews are destroyed from the face of this earth.

Apples to oranges. The rapture and the second coming of Christ are not at all the same event, with which I'm sure we can both agree, so I don't understand your harangue about this.

MM
 

FollowerofShiloh

Well-known member
Jan 24, 2024
2,909
489
83
You know, given that you and I don't derive our beliefs from the same authority(s), there really is nothing left to discuss about our differences, given that our differences are actually at the root level rather than at some other upper, leaf-level by which we may debate the finer points. I adhere to scripture and language scholars, and you seem to appeal at various levels to the more ancient writings and commentaries of those who are seemingly closer to the apostles in proximity of time. Roman Catholic writers and historians make appeals to some of the same writers and commentators, and look at what they have. Still nothing of any great import.

I've been accused of being a biblicist, and I willingly accept that label.

MM
You claim to get yours from the Bible but use a personal viewpoint Lexicon to confirm them.
I get mine from the Bible but use what we factually have called Church History and Church Fathers.
My Source is closest to the source (John).
Of course you would make excuse and run off.
 

FollowerofShiloh

Well-known member
Jan 24, 2024
2,909
489
83
(sigh) Ok, I'll respond to this for now:

Matthew 24 coincides with Zechariah 12, which points to the very ending of the tribulation immediately prior to ALL the Jews being wiped out by all the armies of the world, and where the Lord wipes out all those armies before the last 1/3rd of all the Jews are destroyed from the face of this earth.

Apples to oranges. The rapture and the second coming of Christ are not at all the same event, with which I'm sure we can both agree, so I don't understand your harangue about this.

MM
Zechariah only confirms the first portion of Matthew 24.
I am using when Jesus speaks about the End Time Tribulation.
Days of Lot and Noah like the world TODAY matches and did not match in 70 AD.
 

Musicmaster

Active member
Feb 8, 2021
365
76
28
I mentioned him as being John's Disciple to show who John's Disciples were.
That still doesn't prove anything in relation to authority. Paul instructed us to follow THEM, the actual apostles who had actually seen Jesus, and been instructed by Him personally. We're not instructed anywhere in scripture to follow ANYONE who does not exactly match conformance to Christ Himself. That's good 'nuff for me.

MM
 

FollowerofShiloh

Well-known member
Jan 24, 2024
2,909
489
83
When did Jesus send His Angels at the Last Trump to gather His Elect in 70 AD?
Never happened.
That's what I am quoting because it happens specifically as Jesus said, AFTER TRIBULATION.
 

FollowerofShiloh

Well-known member
Jan 24, 2024
2,909
489
83
That still doesn't prove anything in relation to authority. Paul instructed us to follow THEM, the actual apostles who had actually seen Jesus, and been instructed by Him personally. We're not instructed anywhere in scripture to follow ANYONE who does not exactly match conformance to Christ Himself. That's good 'nuff for me.

MM
I presented Clement as those who John placed over the 7 Churches mentioned in first 3 Chapters of Revelation. I presented quotes from other of John's Disciples but I would have no doubt he (Clement) would make the same claim as the other Disciples.
 

Musicmaster

Active member
Feb 8, 2021
365
76
28
You claim to get yours from the Bible but use a personal viewpoint Lexicon to confirm them.
I get mine from the Bible but use what we factually have called Church History and Church Fathers.
My Source is closest to the source (John).
Of course you would make excuse and run off.
See? Where it's true that one must settle on SOMETHING outside of themselves, anything someone else uses that's outside your personal choices for acceptance are just not at all acceptable, which is fine. I don't mind; the only difference being that I have chosen a Lexicon that is applauded for the massive scholarship foundations upon which it rests, analyzed purely on the basis of lingual continuity with known translational standards, grammatical construct rules, historic audience considerations; all divorced from any specific hermeneutical trappings.

So, bottom line, we simply agree to disagree. You remain unconvinced, and I remain unconvinced, which leads to absolutely no consequences whatsoever in the whole scheme of theology.

I'm cool with that. I don't feel that I have to win at all costs, even to that of my own integrity.

Love you, brother.

MM
 

Musicmaster

Active member
Feb 8, 2021
365
76
28
When did Jesus send His Angels at the Last Trump to gather His Elect in 70 AD?
Never happened.
That's what I am quoting because it happens specifically as Jesus said, AFTER TRIBULATION.
That's a straw man argument, because I never said that apart from it apparently rubbing up against one of your own pet peeves for interpretation.

I simply differentiated between the trumpet blast of the seventh angel, which some seem to think equates with the "trump of God" at the rapture coming of Christ.

MM
 

FollowerofShiloh

Well-known member
Jan 24, 2024
2,909
489
83
See? Where it's true that one must settle on SOMETHING outside of themselves, anything someone else uses that's outside your personal choices for acceptance are just not at all acceptable, which is fine. I don't mind; the only difference being that I have chosen a Lexicon that is applauded for the massive scholarship foundations upon which it rests, analyzed purely on the basis of lingual continuity with known translational standards.

So, bottom line, we simply agree to disagree. You remain unconvinced, and I remain unconvinced, which leads to absolutely no consequences whatsoever in the whole scheme of theology.

I'm cool with that. I don't feel that I have to win at all costs, even to that of my own integrity.

Love you, brother.

MM
To be perfectly transparent here, the Church Fathers began with John's Disciples. Much of a lot of the decisions made in the Nicene Creed and others come from them including which Books were Inspired. Most of the Churches staple beliefs are explained and practiced because the Church Fathers confirmed what the Bible was claiming. We even see the Reformers following the same line of instruction that Todays denominations are founded upon.

So for 1800 years we followed the same understanding but ONE thing has changed out of everything established. 200 years ago a known Heretic wrote about pre-trib Rapture. And look at the masses that have ignored Truth for Heresy?
 

FollowerofShiloh

Well-known member
Jan 24, 2024
2,909
489
83
So, bottom line, we simply agree to disagree. You remain unconvinced, and I remain unconvinced, which leads to absolutely no consequences whatsoever in the whole scheme of theology.

I'm cool with that. I don't feel that I have to win at all costs, even to that of my own integrity.

Love you, brother.

MM
Agreed!

Love You Too, Brother.
 

GRACE_ambassador

Well-known member
Feb 22, 2021
2,985
1,415
113
Midwest
200 years ago a known Heretic wrote about pre-trib Rapture. And look at the masses that have ignored Truth for Heresy?
Judgmental much? Some of "us masses" have, in Biblical Fact, Rightly Divided
God's Word Of Truth, not ignored It, but prayerfully and Carefully studied It,
and Concluded It Is The Truth!:

God's Great GRACE Departure!

Amen.
 

FollowerofShiloh

Well-known member
Jan 24, 2024
2,909
489
83
Judgmental much? Some of "us masses" have, in Biblical Fact, Rightly Divided
God's Word Of Truth, not ignored It, but prayerfully and Carefully studied It,
and Concluded It Is The Truth!:

God's Great GRACE Departure!

Amen.
If you think John, who wrote and taught his own Disciples about Revelation is wrong in what they said about the teaching of John compared to your rightly division, enjoy!
 

Musicmaster

Active member
Feb 8, 2021
365
76
28
Generally speaking, Ignatius I reject for what I consider to be good reason, with one good reason being his seeming Amillennial "replacement theology" stance:

“He also died,
and rose again, and ascended into the heavens to Him that sent Him, and is sat down at His right hand, and shall come at the end of the world, with His Father’s glory, to judge the living and the dead, and to render to every one according to his works.


That has the distinct ring of the Amillennialism nonsense we hear from popular personalities like Hank Hanagraaff (sp) and others of that mindset.

In addition, Ignatius knew nothing of any special covenant with Christ-rejecting Jews. In the same Epistle, Ignatius writes:

“It is absurd to speak of Jesus Christ with the tongue, and to cherish in the mind a Judaism which has now come to an end. For where there is Christianity there cannot be Judaism.” (Epistle to the Magnesians, Chapter X).

Suffice it to say that we have more than enough from scripture to have no real use for this or any other early writer's thoughts on the matter. Paul explained it well enough for all the see and understand where the nation of Israel is concerned, and the important role to play in the end times given that the Lord is concerned enough about their being grafted back in to try and provoke them to jealousy:

Romans 11:1-2, 7-8, 11-24
1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, [of] the tribe of Benjamin.
2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying, ...
7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day. ...
11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but [rather] through their fall salvation [is come] unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
12 Now if the fall of them [be] the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?
13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation [them which are] my flesh, and might save some of them.
15 For if the casting away of them [be] the reconciling of the world, what [shall] the receiving [of them be], but life from the dead?
16 For if the firstfruit [be] holy, the lump [is] also [holy]: and if the root [be] holy, so [are] the branches.
17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, [take heed] lest he also spare not thee.
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 graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural [branches], be graffed into their own olive tree?

So, scripture speaks for itself, no matter what others have written who may lay claim to be first or second generation disciples of John, I don't give a tinkers patoot! The Lord inspired what we have in scripture, and the Lord gave us direct access to His Spirit for us to know the Truth in all His glory.

My brethren who are Christ-rejecting Jews WILL come to faith in Yahshuah, and we have that on good authority from scripture.

MM