When does the rapture occur?

[Elin]

Well, the NT teaches that Jesus does not return until the time to restore all things (Ac 3:21)
in the new creation, which is the new heavens and new earth,
which is eternity because there is no death (Rev 21:1, 4).

Jesus teaches that at the renewal of all things in eternity, when the Son of Man
sits on his glorious throne at the judgment, his followers (all God's people) will
be seated with him to judge the world and the angels (Mt 19:28; 1Co 6:2-3; Rev 2:26).

I don't think the NT presents the Final Judgment as lasting 1000 years.

I see at least two passages that refute your view (not counting Rev 20:1-6 which you spiritualize away).

Rev 14:1 Then I looked, and behold, a Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand, having His Father's name written on their foreheads.

13 Then I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, "Write: 'Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.' " "Yes," says the Spirit, "that they may rest from their labors, and their works follow them."

We see the above that the Lamb has returned and yet there are still those who die in Jesus and "their works follow them." Then Peter of course tells us in 2 Pet 3:

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.

So the works in the earth are burned up at the end but yet when Christ returns, faithful are still dying and works are still following them. Please explain.

You set the Scriptures against themselves
using your private and uncertain (not given in the Biblical text, as are
Da 2:37-45; Rev 17:9-18) interpretation of prophetic riddles, which can,
and are, validly interpreted by others to mean things entirely different,
to overturn what is certain in the NT teachings.

You have set your private and uncertain interpretation of prophetic riddles against
certain NT teaching.

Then we have this:

Isa 65:22 They shall not build and another inhabit; They shall not plant and another eat; For as the days of a tree, so shall be the days of My people, And My elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands.

The days of a tree are not eternity nor does the phrase "long enjoy" communicate eternity. Both hint of a finite period of time i.e., a millennium.

Then we have this:

Isa 65:22 They shall not build and another inhabit; They shall not plant and another eat; For as the days of a tree, so shall be the days of My people, And My elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands.

The days of a tree are not eternity nor does the phrase "long enjoy" communicate eternity. Both hint of a finite period of time i.e., a millennium.[/QUOTE]
Don't see your point here.

 

[PlainWord]

"For the Lord himself (not his "radiation") will come down from heaven (not "radiate"
from heaven) with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God,
(it will be neither a silent nor secret event),
and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be
caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord (himself, not his "radiation')
in the air." (1Th 4:16-17)

This LORD HIMSELF is NOT CHRIST but God the Father. It is God the Father identified in verse 14 as the one coming and doing the bringing. It is the Trumpet of God sounding. This event is at the end.

 

[PlainWord]

Don't see your point here.

You don't see a millennium. You only see the end. I have a pastor who is a dear and respected friend who also only sees the end with no millennium. I admire him because he is one of just a few pastors who doesn't teach this rapture nonsense. He and I go back and forth on the millennium. His wife agrees with me as does my wife but you and my pastor friend are on the same page. Both of you totally ignore Rev 20:1-6 as if it isn't there.

The point in the passage I provided is we see a period of time where the earth has been restored to pre-flood conditions but not to pre-sin conditions. Men are living as long as trees and long enjoying their work. This is unlike today but also unlike eternity. It is, however, consistent with pre-Flood earth where men lived into their 900s.

 

[Elin]

However, my question was are there two weddings or one? But more importantly, when is the wedding or weddings??

This is your private and uncertain interpretation of prophetic riddles.

However, certain NT teaching does not present union with Christ as a wedding.
The NT presents union with Christ as occuring when one is born again and comes to saving faith.
The wedding supper is a figure of our union with Christ in eternity.

I don't take my understanding of Scripture from prophetic riddles which are not
interepreted by the Bible itself (as in Da 2, Rev 17), because such riddles can,
and are, validly interpreted by others to mean things entirely different.
I take my understanding only from NT teaching.
And if it is not presented in NT teaching, then my view regarding it is that I have no view.

I believe there is a millennium, a period where Christ reigns and rules over the nations. I believe a select group of believers return with Christ to live and reign with Him as Priests/Teachers.
Those who return with Christ are resurrected into spiritual bodies and they rule over mortals.

I find absolutely no basis in the certain teachings of the NT for this private and uncertain
interpretation of prophetic riddles.

I likewise find the whole scenario of two bodies of Christ, one in glorified bodies and one in natural
bodies on earth at the same time, to be a bizarre Steven Spielberg concoction, whose novelty is so
pleasing to the fancy of man that he thinks it is from God himself.
God is not a celestial Steven Spielberg.

I find it absurd to think that the NT writers forgot to tell us about such a thing,
or even more absurd, that they didn't even know about it.

There is only one rule for God's truth.
Is it in agreement with the certain and unequivocal teaching of the NT?
This is not!

Hey Elin, I think you are correct on many things, especially that there is no pre-trib rapture nonsense.
I hope you are enjoying this spirited debate as I am. God Bless!!

Actually, it is not pleasant to me to see the certain and unequivocal teaching of the NT
so misunderstood for the sake of private, uncertain, novel and sensational interpretations
of prophetic riddles.

 

[Elin]

This LORD HIMSELF is NOT CHRIST but God the Father. It is God the Father identified in verse 14 as the one coming and doing the bringing. It is the Trumpet of God sounding. This event is at the end.

Nope. . .in the NT, the Lord is the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[Elin]

You don't see a millennium.

No, I don't see your point about the tree.

You only see the end. I have a pastor who is a dear and respected friend who also only sees the end with no millennium. I admire him because he is one of just a few pastors who doesn't teach this rapture nonsense. He and I go back and forth on the millennium. His wife agrees with me as does my wife but you and my pastor friend are on the same page.
Both of you totally ignore Rev 20:1-6 as if it isn't there.

No, it is a prophetic riddle which is subject to uncertain interpretation.
Others validly interpret it to mean things entirely different.

The point in the passage I provided is we see a period of time where the earth has been restored to pre-flood conditions but not to pre-sin conditions. Men are living as long as trees and long enjoying their work. This is unlike today but also unlike eternity. It is, however, consistent with pre-Flood earth where men lived into their 900s.

Two things:

1) The NT does not teach two different restorations, one of all things in the new creation, and some other restoration.
An extra-Biblical restoration is a creation of man's fancy.

2) Nor does Da 2:44 allow for a temporal Messianic kingdom after the one set up during the last Roman empire,
because it endures forever, it is never destroyed. . .unless you posit two temporal Messianic kingdoms at the same time. . .
again multiplying things which are the same.

 

[PlainWord]

This is your private and uncertain interpretation of prophetic riddles.

However, certain NT teaching does not present union with Christ as a wedding.
The NT presents union with Christ as occuring when one is born again and comes to saving faith.
The wedding supper is a figure of our union with Christ in eternity.

I don't take my understanding of Scripture from prophetic riddles which are not
interepreted by the Bible itself (as in Da 2, Rev 17), because such riddles can,
and are, validly interpreted by others to mean things entirely different.
I take my understanding only from NT teaching.
And if it is not presented in NT teaching, then my view regarding it is that I have no view.

I did not say I believe in two weddings, I asked if you did. I believe in one wedding and agree it is spiritual. I agree that our oneness with Christ happens upon our acceptance and that the "wedding supper" happens at eternity for all believers, Jews and Gentiles alike, OT and NT Saints alike.

I find absolutely no basis in the certain teachings of the NT for this private and uncertain
interpretation of prophetic riddles.

How can you say Rev 20:1-6 is uncertain? John was pretty darn specific about who rules and reigns with Christ and the length of time Christ reigns and Satan is confined. My interpretations, as you call it, are not private but rather they are taking the literal teaching we are given which certainly seems in unison with Paul's teaching in 1 Cor 15:24-28.

So tell me, how long do you see the period of time between Christ's return and the eternal state?? I see 1,000 + years. What do you see?

I likewise find the whole scenario of two bodies of Christ, one in glorified bodies and one in natural
bodies on earth at the same time, to be a bizarre Steven Spielberg concoction, whose novelty is so
pleasing to the fancy of man that he thinks it is from God himself.
God is not a celestial Steven Spielberg.

I find it absurd to think that the NT writers forgot to tell us about such a thing,
or even more absurd, that they didn't even know about it.

I'm sure it seemed like Spielberg to those on earth too at the time of Noah's Flood when the rain began. Things are going to be very different after Christ returns. Rules we thought were in place are gonna change big time.

 

[konroh]

Certain NT teaching: "I will build my church" Jesus says this in Matt. 16 as a future event, therefore there is a technical meaning to the word Church that does not include OT saints.

NT teaching made certain by interpretation: The Lord descending from heaven to take up saints who are asleep and saints who are alive occurs before the Day of the Lord, 1 Thess 4 Rapture, 1 Thess 5 Day of the Lord, which is called "destruction ... inescapable ... the wrath of God (5:9). The saints are not appointed unto this wrath, the Day of the Lord, (spoken of in context), but to obtain salvation. Salvation from what? Deliverance from the Day of the Lord, not spiritual salvation, not sanctification, since whether we are awake or asleep, (children living in the day, fellowship with God, or the night, disharmony with God in some way due to sin), we will live with Him.

Is this understood? Whether we are in fellowship with God or not (believers pleasing God or not) we will live together with Him, appointed to deliverance from the Day of the Lord.

 

[Hashe]

Certain NT teaching: "I will build my church" Jesus says this in Matt. 16 as a future event, therefore there is a technical meaning to the word Church that does not include OT saints.
.

I'm sorry but you show no understanding of the original languages.
Future tense can just mean, incomplete. Therefore it is not necessarily an event which is started in the future, but one which is finished in the future.
The idea of 'church' is drawn from the original Hebrew concept of the gathering of Israel. Therefore, there is no technical issue with the word church that means OT saints are excluded.

James 3:1 - learn before teaching or God will judge you.

 

[watcher2013]

Well, the NT teaches that Jesus does not return until the time to restore all things (Ac 3:21)
in the new creation, which is the new heavens and new earth,
which is eternity because there is no death (Rev 21:1, 4).

Jesus teaches that at the renewal of all things in eternity, when the Son of Man
sits on his glorious throne at the judgment, his followers (all God's people) will
be seated with him to judge the world and the angels (Mt 19:28; 1Co 6:2-3; Rev 2:26).

I don't think the NT presents the Final Judgment as lasting 1000 years.

since you reject the idea of 1000 years... HOW long Do you think it is? 3 days? 1 week? 1 month 100 years?

 

[PlainWord]

Actually, it is not pleasant to me to see the certain and unequivocal teaching of the NT
so misunderstood for the sake of private, uncertain, novel and sensational interpretations
of prophetic riddles.

"for the sake of private, uncertain interpretations?" How about you totally ignoring and throwing away the entire Chapter of Rev 14, the first 6 verses in Rev 20, all of Ezekiel Chapters 40-48 and half of Isaiah 65 into 66, just for starters?

 

[PlainWord]

No, I don't see your point about the tree.

Do men live as long as trees today? Will they live longer than a tree in eternity? Was there any period in history between the time Isaiah 65 was written and today that men were living as long as trees? If none, then what future period of time will this happen before eternity in your mind? Or do you just call this passage a private interpretation too and move on???

No, it is a prophetic riddle which is subject to uncertain interpretation.
Others validly interpret it to mean things entirely different.

So Rev 20:1-6 is a prophetic riddle and the 1,000 years is fiction? So that means Satan is not chained which means He is not loosed again at the end of the 1,000 years to again deceive the nations. So if Satan is not chained and not loosed than Rev 20:7-9 must also be fake. So the beloved city and Saints are not surrounded and God does not devour the enemies? This brings us to verse 10:

10 The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Do you see verse 10 as a prophetic riddle too? Does Satan not get cast into the Lake of Fire and tormented forever? How do you decide what is real and what is a prophetic riddle? Now we move to verse 11:

11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them.
Is there a Great White Throne where the world is judged? Does the heaven and earth flee away? Is this a riddle too? Where in Rev 20 does reality return???

John was very specific about who reigns with Christ and for how long.

Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.

What is your private and uncertain interpretation of the above passage Elin????

 

[Elin]

Do men live as long as trees today? Will they live longer than a tree in eternity?

The only tree I mention was the olive tree of the NT, showing God has only one people, composed of both OT and NT saints.

Your comments do not relate to it.

So Rev 20:1-6 is a prophetic riddle and the 1,000 years is fiction?
So that means Satan is not chained

No, it means your interpretation of the details of the riddle can be, and are, validly interpreted by others to mean things entirely different, such as symbols and figures of the church age.

What is your private and uncertain interpretation of the above passage Elin????

One that all agrees with certain and unequivocal NT teaching,
and that disagrees with certain NT teaching on no point.

 

[Elin]

I did not say I believe in two weddings, I asked if you did. I believe in one wedding and agree it is spiritual. I agree that our oneness with Christ happens upon our acceptance and that the "wedding supper" happens at eternity for all believers, Jews and Gentiles alike, OT and NT Saints alike.

It's good to know we are agreed here.

How can you say Rev 20:1-6 is uncertain?

Didn't say that. . .your interpretation is private and uncertain.

John was pretty darn specific about who rules and reigns with Christ and the length of time Christ reigns and Satan is confined. My interpretations, as you call it, are not private but rather they are taking the literal teaching we are given which certainly seems in unison with Paul's teaching in 1 Cor 15:24-28.

1Co 15:22-28 - "in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn:
1) Christ the firstfruits, then,
2) when he comes, those who belong to him.
3) Then the end will come, when
4) he hands over the kingdom to God the Father
5) after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power.
For he must reign until he has put all enemies under his feet.
The last enemy to be destroyed is death.
For he 'has put everything under his feet.' (Ps 8:6)

Now when it says that 'everything' has been put under him,
it is clear that it does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.
When he has done this, then the Son will be made subject to him
who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all."

Christ is reigning now (Eph 1:20-23).
He is putting all things under his feet now.

So tell me,
how long do you see the period of time between Christ's return and the eternal state??
I see 1,000 + years. What do you see?

The NT teaches that Christ does not come until the end of time (see OP).
That is what I believe.

Therefore, the eternal state will be soon after he comes, at the end of the Final Judgment
and renewal of the new heavens and new earth.
The NT does not allow for a 1000-year temporal interval between 2) and 3) above after he comes.

I'm sure it seemed like Spielberg to those on earth too at the time of Noah's Flood when the rain began.

Nope. . .
Those were not spiritual events.

I am referring to the revelation, counsel and nature of God.
His final works are according to his nature: sobering, staggering, silencing (Da 10:7-12); Rev 1:17-19),
not sensational, novel and entertaining.

And then there's the matter of
1) your private and uncertain interpretation of prophetic riddles
having absolutely no basis in certain and unequivocal NT teaching, while

2) other interpretations enjoy perfect agreement with certain and unequivocal NT teaching.

 

[Elin]

Certain NT teaching: "I will build my church" Jesus says this in Matt. 16 as a future event, therefore there is a technical meaning to the word Church that does not include OT saints.

There is no "technical" meaning of the Church apart from its NT meaning.

You need to take that up with Paul and his olive tree.
Both OT saints and NT saints are in the same body.

You need to take that up with Jesus.
There is only one fold, and one shepherd.

 

[Elin]

Well, the NT teaches that Jesus does not return until the time to restore all things (Ac 3:21)
in the new creation, which is the new heavens and new earth,
which is eternity because there is no death (Rev 21:1, 4).

Jesus teaches that at the renewal of all things in eternity, when the Son of Man
sits on his glorious throne at the judgment, his followers (all God's people) will
be seated with him to judge the world and the angels (Mt 19:28; 1Co 6:2-3; Rev 2:26).

I don't think the NT presents the Final Judgment as lasting 1000 years.

since you reject the idea of 1000 years... HOW long Do you think it is? 3 days? 1 week? 1 month 100 years?

It is the certain and unequivocal teaching of the NT that rejects 1000 years.

See post #154, above.

 

[Elin]

"for the sake of private, uncertain interpretations?" How about you totally ignoring and throwing away the entire Chapter of Rev 14, the first 6 verses in Rev 20, all of Ezekiel Chapters 40-48 and half of Isaiah 65 into 66, just for starters?

They can likewise be validly interpreted to mean things entirely different.

Your private interpretation is no more certain than other differing private intepretations.

 

[PlainWord]

The only tree I mention was the olive tree of the NT, showing God has only one people, composed of both OT and NT saints.

Your comments do not relate to it.

I mentioned a tree. Right here. Isa 65:

22 They shall not build and another inhabit; They shall not plant and another eat; For as the days of a tree, so shall be the days of My people, And My elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands.

Clearly, "God's people" shall live as long as a tree. This is not eternal state, because they "long enjoy" they don't "forever" enjoy.

This is millennial because if we step back two verses we see the wicked are still living on earth.

20 "No more shall an infant from there live but a few days, Nor an old man who has not fulfilled his days; For the child shall die one hundred years old, But the sinner being one hundred years old shall be accursed.

No, it means your interpretation of the details of the riddle can be, and are, validly interpreted by others to mean things entirely different, such as symbols and figures of the church age.

I'm not interpreting Rev 20:1-9. I am taking it literally. You are interpreting it. Why interpret anything if a literal reading is in harmony with the rest of scripture? You apparently are applying a symbolic meaning to this passage dealing with the church age. This is inappropriate because the church age is over by this point. The Church Age ends during the Great Tribulation. The Church is decimated before Christ returns. This passage deals with the 1,000 year reign of Christ on earth with the Tribulation Martyrs, the 48,000 of the 144K who are killed.

 

[Elin]

I'm not interpreting Rev 20:1-9. I am taking it literally. You are interpreting it. Why interpret anything if a literal reading is
in harmony with the rest of scripture?

Of course Rev 20:1-9 is in harmony with the rest of Scripture.

It is your interpretation that is not in harmony with certain and unequivocal NT teaching.

Satan is bound now in the church age (v.2).
Satan is released near the end of the church age (v.3) to deceive many.
Judgment by Jesus with believers follows the end of the church age (v.4).
Believers (their first resurrection being rebirth from spiritual death) reign with Christ
during the church age now (v. 4).
The second death (eternal death) has no power over those born again,
who reign with Christ during the church age now (v. 6).

Satan will be released for a short time to deceive the world,
and causing it to reject those in Christ (v. 7).
He will be destroyed by the fire of Jesus' second coming (v.9) at the end of time to judge the world.

The church is the fulfillment of the ages (1Co 10:11).
There is no temporal age after the Church.

All these are certain and unequivocal NT teaching.

You apparently are applying a symbolic meaning to this passage dealing with the church age. This is inappropriate because the church age is over by this point. The Church Age ends during the Great Tribulation.

Realizing, that this is all based on your private and uncertain interpretation of the riddle.

The Church is decimated before Christ returns. This passage deals with the 1,000 year reign of Christ on earth with the Tribulation Martyrs, the 48,000 of the 144K who are killed.

Realizing, of course, that this meaning is all based on your private and uncertain interpretation of the riddle, which others validly interpret to mean things entirely different.

Please address the certain and unequivocal NT teaching in the OP which shows Jesus' second coming is at the end of time when he judges the world.

 

[watcher2013]

how long do you think they will judge the twelve tribes, after Jesus comes?

Within the same time frame as all Final Judgment.

could it be a 1000 years?

Well, the NT teaches that Jesus does not return until the time to restore all things (Ac 3:21)
in the new creation, which is the new heavens and new earth,
which is eternity because there is no death (Rev 21:1, 4).

Jesus teaches that at the renewal of all things in eternity, when the Son of Man
sits on his glorious throne at the judgment, his followers (all God's people) will
be seated with him to judge the world and the angels (Mt 19:28; 1Co 6:2-3; Rev 2:26).

I don't think the NT presents the Final Judgment as lasting 1000 years.

since you reject the idea of 1000 years... HOW long Do you think it is? 3 days? 1 week? 1 month 100 years?

It is the certain and unequivocal teaching of the NT that rejects 1000 years.

See post #154, above.

despite the certain unequivocal teaching of the NT, you cannot tell how long it is do you????

because you are like everybody else...you are interpreting the verses...

From Jesus own word...those who follows him shall sit on their thrones...and judge the twelve tribes..(mat 19:28, Luke 22:20)

Here is the scene there are judges...and those who are going to be judged...

How LONG they will judge the twelve tribes???? a minute, an hour a day...HOW LONG?