This is a question that has "ALWAYS" bothered me and "NEVER" made sense. How can it be that the supper is before or even during the Tribulation when all "hell" is breaking loose the church is celebrating a marriage supper.
Hi Bluto!
Why would it not make sense for the wedding of the Lamb to be taking place while the tribulation is taking place? Does not the entire universe and creation run by the word of God?
In the chronological order of Revelation, the wedding of the Lamb takes place in heaven during the tribulation period and prior to the Lord's return to the earth, as revealed in Rev.19:6-8
========================
"Hallelujah!
For our Lord God, the Almighty, reigns. Let us rejoice and be glad and give Him the glory.
For the marriage of the Lamb has come, and His bride has made herself ready. Fine linen, bright and clean, was given her to wear.”
=========================
Following that, in Revelation 19:14, we see the armies of heaven riding on white horses following the Lord out of heaven to the earth to end the age. The fact that those armies are said to be wearing the same fine linen, white and clean that the bride/church received in Rev.19:8 demonstrates that the armies is the bride/church and the wedding of the Lamb is taking place in heaven prior to the Lord's return to the earth.
It just does not make any sense. Also notice that this event is explained at Revelation 19:7-10. Now look at Revelation 20:4-5 which is the tribulation period and it says at vs5, "The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. "THIS IS THE FIRST RESURRECTION."
First of all, the verse is not stating that those who come to life at the end of the thousand years as being the first resurrection. It is those who John saw as beheaded who come to life and reign with Christ during that thousand years. In support of this, if those who were beheaded come to life and rule with Christ during the thousand years, how can they possibly be resurrected at the end of the thousand years? The problem is with the translation. The context demonstrates that they were beheaded during the tribulation because of their testimony about Jesus and the word of God and because they would not worship the beast, his image nor receive his mark. These are the great tribulation saints. Based on the context, the following is the correct translation:
================================================================
"And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years."
==============================================================
Since those who were beheaded are those who will resurrect and rule with Christ during that thousand years, then the first resurrection must be referring to them and not to those who come to life at the end of the thousand years. The rest of the dead who come to life at the end of the thousand years is enclosed in parenthesis, which means that the first resurrection is referring to those referred to prior to the parenthesis, i.e. those who were beheaded and who kept the testimony of Christ. In further support of this, those who are resurrected at the end of the thousand years are identified as the unrighteous dead in Revelation 20:11-15, which is why they cannot and will be worthy to take part in the first resurrection. Also, those who are resurrected at the end of the thousand years are those who the second death will have power over, which is the lake of fire.
In addition, the term "first resurrection" dose not mean "only resurrection." The misunderstanding of this term is a common mistake made by many expositors. The "first resurrection" could be better understood as any of the resurrections which takes place prior to the one at the end of the thousand years as stages/phases of the first resurrection. Below is a list of the stages of the first resurrection:
Resurrection of the righteous:
* Jesus the first fruits (I Cor. 15:23)
* The Church at the Lord's appearing (John 14:1-3, I Cor.15:51-53, I Thess.4:13-17)
* The male child/144,000 (changed and caught up in Rev.12:5)
* The two witnesses (Rev.11:11)
* The great tribulation saints (Rev.20:4-6)
All of the above resurrections take place at different times, but all are apart of the first resurrection. Those who resurrect at the end of the thousand years, do not take part in the first resurrection, but the second death has power over them:
=================================================
Resurrection of the unrighteous dead:
"Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them.
12And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books.
13The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done.
14Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death.
15Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire."
================================================
This is why I'm a post-tribulationist. Btw, this is only one reason and I could give you a dozen more why there is no so-called rapture and in fact the word "rapture" does not appear in the Bible, there is only one second coming.
IN GOD THE SON,
bluto
The word "rapture" comes from the Latin "raptus" meaning to "carry off." "While it is true that the word "rapture" does not appear in the Bible, the Greek word "harpazo" does, which is translated as "caught up." Below is the definition of harpazo:
===================================
Strong's Concordance
harpazó: to seize, catch up, snatch away
Original Word: ἁρπάζω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: harpazó
Phonetic Spelling: (har-pad'-zo)
Definition: to seize, catch up, snatch away
Usage: I seize, snatch, obtain by robbery.
HELPS Word-studies
726 harpázō – properly, seize by force;
snatch up, suddenly and decisively – like someone seizing bounty (spoil, a prize); to take by an
open display of force
====================================
"After that, we who are alive and remain will be
caught up (harpazo) together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will always be with the Lord."
You are correct in that there is only one "second coming." However, it is important to understand that the gathering of the church is a separate event from the Lord's return to end the age. When the church is gathered, the Lord does not return to the earth, but appears in the atmosphere and calls up the dead and the living believers. Where the second coming is when Christ visually and physically returns to the earth to end the age, with the church following behind Him on white horses.
Another major problem with the post tribulation belief, is that the Lord returns to the earth to end the age after the tribulation period, that is, after God's wrath via the seals, trumpets and bowl judgments is completed, which would put the living church through the entire wrath of God, which we are not appointed to suffer. By the time the Lord returns to the earth the majority of the population will have been decimated and all human government dismantled, which is supported by when Jesus said "If those days (of tribulation) had not be shorten, no one would be saved."
The Lord is not going to build His church and then put it through the same wrath that the wicked will experience.
