Less well-known Rapture verses. The case for the Rapture is compelling.

  • 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.
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
We agree Jesus "came to earth" and was "born"...

We agree Jesus will "RETURN" to the earth, as King of kings, to rule the earth.
All agreed, my friend!

--"our Rapture [IN THE AIR]" (by means of the "SNATCH!") is NOT His "RETURN" to the earth.
I fully agree that our 'rapture', or better, glorifidation, occurs in the air. But where we totally disagree is that this glorification is just before He finishes His descent to the earth, which is His Second Coming.

You've not yet proven that Jesus takes all the glorified believers back up to heaven. And there is no Scriptural evidence for that.

His "RETURN" to the earth, is: "when he will RETURN FROM the wedding"... THEN the meal [G347]... NOT: THEN "the MARRIAGE" (He will be "RETURNING" to the earth, as an ALREADY-WED Bridegroom, "WITH [G4862 - UNIONed-with]" His "Bride/Wife [singular]")
--and all those "big long posts" I just made about THAT part (His "RETURN" to the earth) are SHOWING that those passages are NOT ABOUT *US* ('the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY' to/of whom "our Rapture [IN THE AIR]" SOLELY pertains...)
Rev 19 details the COMING wedding. Just look at the wording. "Bride has made herself ready". This is said at the moment that Jesus comes to earth with His armies, at the Second Advent. If the wedding occurred 7 years earlier, this wording is just plain weird.

... and why then the "hast redeemed US" (said UP IN HEAVEN) pertains with regard to the overall CHRONOLOGY... they say this BEFORE the FIRST SEAL is opened (in that "IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]" time period, aka the TRIB YRS unfolding upon the earth); thus, how I am showing you the distinction...
But this doesn't support a U-turn back to heaven.

--"the day of the Lord" being ENTIRELY *EARTHLY-LOCATED* [time-period of MUCH DURATION, starting with SEAL #1 / the INITIAL "birth PANG [SINGULAR; Mt24:4/Mk13:5 , 1Th5:2-3, its ARRIVAL];
Point?

--whereas "the day of Christ / of OUR Lord Jesus Christ / etc"... is when WE [the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY *only*!!] are UP THERE *WITH [G4862 - UNIONed-with] HIM"
Since the "Lord" is the same "Christ", there is no difference.
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
FreeGrace2 said:
Maybe not so hard. If harder, I'd expect longer posts. Which would be harder to follow.

Don't you have anything simple that connects the dots that you are seeing?
Yeah, this: the verses you are pointing out, do not say what you are suggesting they say. = )
Gee, what were you waiting for? When I find verses that don't say what posters claim they say, I immediately point it out.

[back later tonight, when I get another break... ]
OK. I'm very interested in these verses that you claim don't say what I claim.
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
18,143
7,208
113
I disagree, in that, I believe the Subject of verse 1 is SOLELY about "our Rapture" and its timing (that is, when we are "SNATCHED UP" to "our episynagoges UNTO HIM" [IN THE AIR])


Okay... so we're up to POINT #3... whoo! :D


Hmmm... I covered that in past posts (somewhere)... that even in what we call Jesus' FIRST advent, there was:

--Micah 5:2 speaks of the COMING FORTH at Bethlehem,

--and Zechariah 9:9 speaks of the COMING UNTO Jerusalem.

...which one of these two passages speak of it (coming/advent)?

Or do both of them speak of His "First Advent" happenings?

--one being His "BIRTH" ['[out of you (Bethlehem) to Me] SHALL COME FORTH'];

--the other being what took place on the very day that the "69 Weeks" CONCLUDED [on Palm Sunday and what is commonly called 'the Triumphal Entry'],
when He SAID the Lk19:41-44 thing [parallel the wording in both Lk21:20,23 and Matt22:7 (re: the 70ad events)],
and when He DID the Zech9:9 thing ['thy King COMETH UNTO *thee* [speaking of Jerusalem / the city]'])



--Micah 5:2 -
"But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee SHALL HE COME FORTH unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."


--Zechariah 9:9 - [see also Lk19:41-44 and context]
"Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King COMETH UNTO thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass."


____________

As for your other idea (about "there are 2 of them" and "SECOND"), I'm going to guess you've gotten this idea from Hebrews 9:28, right?

Well, I made a post about that, some time back:


[quoting old post]

[Response to the idea that Heb9:28 refers to how Jesus only comes at His Second Coming to the earth, not a separate time for our Rapture ('IN THE AIR')--But Heb9:28 refers to neither of these, as I see it, when we consider the following...]

From Hebrews 9:28 (where the "passive" form of G3708 ['appear'] is used)... out of the 684 occurrences of "G3708," TEN times that "[G3708] appear [PASSIVE]" is used regarding Jesus, and ALL TEN of them refer events taking place AFTER His death/resurrection (and it was only to carefully chosen witnesses, not to every person everywhere).

Of those 10x, 5x it refers to the 40-day interval between His resurrection and His later "VISIBLE" ascension [specifically, "he was taken up"] in Acts 1 [note: however, His earlier "[active] I ascend" having taken place ON Firstfruit His Resurrection Day, after speaking with Mary Magdalene, in John 20:17, where He had said to her, "Touch Me not; for I am not yet ascended to My Father: but go to My brethren, and SAY UNTO THEM [i.e verbal testimony], I ascend [active] unto My Father and your Father; and to My God, and your God."

Whereas later that SAME EVENING (per Lk24:33,36,39 and context), He tells the disciples who were gathered together, in v.39 (something now the opposite from what He'd earlier-in-the-day said to MM), now "HANDLE ME, and see...". And preceding this late evening setting, an earlier scene (approaching "toward evening" per v.29) reports Him to have "VANISHED out from their sight" (<--speaking of the "2 walkers on the road to Emmaus" when they had "sat at meat" together, per vv.29-31);

...so (without listing them) these 5x where "G3708 passive" is used of Him, all 5 of these are shown to be speaking of His "post-resurrection appearances" ON THE EARTH (over the course of some "40 days") in the presence of carefully chosen witnesses, in His resurrected Body:

--(and even the word "appeared [G5316] FIRST unto MM," per Mark 16:9, is not one of these "G3708" mentions [like Heb9:28 is speaking of in particular], so this is not among the 5 occurrences "G3708 passive" is speaking of, there);

--the main thing I want to point out here, is that, within those "40 days" [during which, the "5 mentions of G3708 passive" took place, re: Jesus], John 21:14 informs us "This is now the THIRD TIME that Jesus showed Himself to His disciples, after that He was risen from the dead." So MULTIPLE times, over the course of a "40-day period" was this the case.


--the OTHER 5 occurrences (of "G3708 passive" when speaking of Jesus) ALL took place AFTER HIS "VISIBLE" ascension took place in Acts 1;

--so ALL 5 of *THESE* mentions took place [whilst in His position] "FROM HEAVEN" (AFTER His visible ascension, thus some time AFTER the 40-day period; ALL of *THESE* 5 mentions are speaking of when He appeared unto Paul from His position "FROM HEAVEN" after having visibly ascended before His disciples in Acts 1);

--so my main overall point being:

...NOT ONE of those "10 occurrences of 'G3708 passive' [re: Jesus]" speaks of ANYTHING regarding the events BEFORE His death on the Cross, during the time of His earthly ministry (of 3.5 yrs or however long that was). NONE of those TEN "mentions" speak OF THAT.

...ALL TEN speak of what took place FOLLOWING His resurrection (and FIVE of them speak of events occurring FOLLOWING His visible ascension in Acts 1, AFTER those "40 days" and "FROM HEAVEN"); AND this "G3708 passive" (re: Jesus) was NOT LIMITED to only "ONE TIME" ONLY, but MULTIPLE times, thus I believe the argument being put forth falls flat, as I see it.

Hebrews 9:28 [and note, this is the epistle to the Hebrews] -

"so also Christ, having been offered once in order to bear the sins of [the] many,

will appear [G3708 passive] for a second time apart from sin[/I],...

[the FIRST time "He appeared apart from sin" was spoken of in those 10 mentions, ALL FOLLOWING His death/resurrection; at least one version puts it like, "a second time apart from a sin-offering shall appear [G3708 passive]" (note: the FIRST time "apart from a sin-offering" that He "appeared [G3708 passive (like Heb9:28 is speaking of)]" was ALL FOLLOWING His death/resurrection, and five of those 10 "mentions" was FOLLOWING His ascension in Acts 1, so "FROM HEAVEN" (these 5 mentions in particular are found in Paul's epistles, speaking of his/Paul's own experience)]

...to those awaiting Him for salvation."


[again, 5x (mentions) was referring to His post-resurrection tangible appearances to His disciples/carefully-chosen-witnesses (and not speaking of merely a "ONE TIME" happening);...
...5x (mentions) was referring to His post-ascension (Acts1 later ascension), the "FROM HEAVEN" one (so a separate one still, from the others)]


That particular "argument" remains wholly unconvincing to me, for these reasons.

[end quoting old post]

__________

[try harder??]
I am THRILLED to be part of this dialogue. Now...this gem of yours is worth its weight in gold....
That would be the FIRST TIME that I have realized the meaning of these verses. Much obliged!
:D(y):giggle:

<<<[the FIRST time "He appeared apart from sin" was spoken of in those 10 mentions, ALL FOLLOWING His death/resurrection; at least one version puts it like, "a second time apart from a sin-offering shall appear [G3708 passive]" (note: the FIRST time "apart from a sin-offering">>>
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
FreeGrace2 said:
Ok, so let's just count all the times the Lord comes to earth:
1. First Advent as a baby.
2. All the preIncarnate times He visited OT figures. Theophanies.
3. Paul on the road to Damascus.
4. the fabricated pre-trib theory.
5. Second Advent, when He comes as King of kings, and sets up His Millennial rule.
Hm. Lots of visits, but ONLY two are numbered. Why is that?
--"unto *you* FIRST" Acts 3:26 (Peter speaking of Jesus' earthly ministry BEFORE the Cross/Death)... finishes the verse by saying, "[unto *you* FIRST] God, having RAISED UP [to a position of prominence] His SERVANT Jesus, SENT Him to bless *you*, in turning away every one of *you* from his iniquities"

Okay... I can see how that qualifies as a text concerning His "FIRST" advent/parousia/arrival/presence/coming (though not using that other underlined word in this particular context)... are there others you could point out which say this?

And what about the phrase "SECOND advent"...?

Or, are you just assuming that ALL occurrences of the word "advent/parousia/arrival/presence/coming" are NECESSARILY "located ON THE EARTH" (and not happening "IN THE AIR"--where no one else [i.e. the lost / unsaved] PARTICIPATES!!;) ])??
Of course Jesus "comes in the clouds". And Acts 1 NAILS that fact, when 2 angels told the 11 that He would return IN THE SAME WAY He left, which was "in the clouds".

So, when the angels said, "He would return", were they just referring to the clouds above the earth? That seems quite unlikely, since Jesus left the 11 disciples from the earth itself.

So their saying "He would return in the same way" it should be obvious that they meant reach the ground IN THE SAME WAY He left the ground.

Or prove me wrong from Scripture.

The 2 angels were explaining HOW Jesus would return to earth. In the same way He left the earth. Acts 1 actually says that.
 
Jul 23, 2018
12,199
2,775
113
Really
I dare say I do know what you guys believe. My pastor is a pre-tribber! I know you believe He comes in a rapture to take people to heaven instead of "touching down" on earth. That is taught IN ORDER TO explain away the verse(s) that say Jesus must stay in heaven until the restoration AND the verse that says Jesus stays on the Father's right side until His enemies are made a footstool.

That had to be made up in order for the pre-trib package to work. Just as it is the case with the 2 Thessalonians 1&2.

I know all the arguments and doctrines, granted not all pre-tribbers agree. Some like you think the Matthew 25 lamps, oil thing is a "vivid picture of the rapture". Yet some pre-tribbers think its not, as it was a 'mystery only revealed to Paul'.

If you ask me the whole eschatology debate is a wild west of differing opinions and doctrines all claiming to be biblical while ignoring a bunch of verses. I've spoken about this in the past. Here is what I had to say about these different eschatology views, my HONEST OPINION I have noticed as I watched and listened to the debates:


ALL eschatological positions got some MAJOR problems with them, by MAJOR i mean they have to CHANGE what verses mean, or water down the verses to not mean what they plainly say.

I can demonstrate this quickly for ALL common views:

Dispensational premillennialism - You have to imagine that 1 Thess 4:15 is a DIFFERENT COMING than the second coming that everyone was waiting for, EVEN THOUGH its clear when compared to with rest of Scripture that there is only one time Jesus is coming again (Acts 1:11, Acts 3:21) Its also clear that even in the midst of the vials in Revelation 16:15 Jesus is still saying "I am COMING" so He still has not COME! Paul says Christians get rest at the same time as Jesus returns in flaming fire, so clearly not a rapture separate coming: 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9. To their credit: This view is the best of both worlds in the sense that it accounts for the verses that seem to say Jesus could come at any moment, while also taking seriously the many signs preceding the Lord's return concluding yeah these cant be the same event, they are usually taking scripture very seriously and literally (except for interpreting revelation 4:1 :D ) and a big bonus: the MOST righteous living, Spirit filled, on fire for God Christians I know are in this camp. My church also teaches this. All my favorite preachers teach this.

Historical premillennialism - You have the problem who populates the millennium? 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 proves to be a stumbling stone here too, because all the saved are given rest, glorified bodies, resurrected, and the lost are destroyed, leaving no one left in the flesh the populate the millennium. How do they get around it? They go to Zechariah 14, say some people are left, or try to otherwise twist 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 to say only SOME lost are destroyed, those who WILLINGLY dont know Him and so on. The other problem is, the Rapture seems largely meaningless because Jesus is coming to this very same earth, so why do a U-turn to begin with. To their credit: I believe this view is the one you end up with when just reading the entire book of Revelation and/or bible from cover to cover, which is why it was the most popular view in the early early early church!

Amillennialism - You have to completely re-imagine Revelation 20 and jump all over the Bible to make the claim that satan is bound already. First resurrection is spiritual, yet rest of the dead also live after the millennium, and thats a physical resurrection. Well that means all the saved are part of it too! Making the first spiritual resurrection, being born again spiritually kind of POINTLESS. They also have to ignore Revelation 19 and Revelation 20 are clearly in chronological order, beast and false prophet taken out first, satan then bound, released and then thrown into the lake of fire where the beast and the false prophet ARE (already ARE, cause they was thrown in there in Revelation 19)! To their credit: This view fits the New Testament the best OUTSIDE OF the book of Revelation. Many reformers believed this and its the most SIMPLE view to explain to everyone. (OCCAMS RAZOR)
Really?
Jesus is the firstfruits.

Not a spiritual resurrection.

That pretty much clouds up your assertion.

And yes rev 19 and 20 are in order.

You just proved you don't know what we believe.
 

ewq1938

Well-known member
Oct 18, 2018
4,809
1,229
113
FreeGrace2 said:
Ok, so let's just count all the times the Lord comes to earth:
1. First Advent as a baby.
2. All the preIncarnate times He visited OT figures. Theophanies.
3. Paul on the road to Damascus.
4. the fabricated pre-trib theory.
5. Second Advent, when He comes as King of kings, and sets up His Millennial rule.
Hm. Lots of visits, but ONLY two are numbered. Why is that?
The first and only second coming are physical arrivals. The others are not, number 4 not included since it is fabricated.

Also, another false coming is the so called coming in Judgment in AD70, which did not happen but is oft claimed by Preterists of all forms.
 
Mar 4, 2020
8,614
3,678
113
Dispensationalism skews the way the Bible is viewed making it impossible to come up with consistent sound doctrine. The error is pre-trib rapture, but the root cause is reading the Bible wrong.

Since the Bible says Jesus is literally returning after the great tribulation to gather His elect then we need to go with that.
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,110
1,962
113
Good grief! Really? Pretrib rapture has Jesus making a hard U-turn after glorification of all believers.
That's not the "PRE-trib" view... you're simply blurring all passages into one big lump, by your inserting the phrase "of ALL believers"... No.

"RAPTURE [IN THE AIR]" pertains SOLELY TO "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY" (Eph1:20-23 WHEN [as to its existence]); not to all other saints of all OTHER time periods (i.e. no one thinks that ppl who are "saved/believers/saints/righteous" mortals who've been BORN during the MK will be "RAPTURED," for example--the "RAPTURE" event is long past, say, at the 3/4 mark of the MK age ;) )

There are those who will BECOME believers FOLLOWING "our Rapture [IN THE AIR]"--when they find themselves existing IN / WITHIN / DURING the trib years (<--on the earth--the EARTHLY-located "DOTL" time-period's ARRIVAL and whole "IN THE NIGHT" [i.e. 7-yr trib] aspect)

(and I just posted at length about them, so you could discern the differences)
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,110
1,962
113
The first and only second coming are physical arrivals.
Yet, Jesus was raised from the dead on His Resurrection Day (Firstfruit - Lev23:10-12), and then did His "[active] I ASCEND" that very same day (John 20:17) and then came back down and did things with His disciples late that same evening... are we calling THAT the "SECOND" time [His] "advent/ARRIVAL/parousia/presence/coming"??

I mean, since you DID say this ONLY happens (physically) TWICE [His FIRST, when "born"; His "SECOND," when returning to reign as King of kings, according to you]...



I would say, no, to that idea.



[again, that is ASIDE from the fact that His "presence" at the MEETING of the Lord IN THE AIR will have NO unsaved/lost/unbelievers present UP THERE *WITH* Him! at all!--BTW, no one is calling this [the "IN THE AIR" MEETING] "His Second Coming to the earth" / "RETURN" to the earth...(FOR the promised and prophesied earthly Millennial Kingdom age)... there are passages and passages covering that, but they are entirely distinct from this (in every way)]
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,110
1,962
113
Of course Jesus "comes in the clouds". And Acts 1 NAILS that fact, when 2 angels told the 11 that He would return IN THE SAME WAY He left, which was "in the clouds".
So, when the angels said, "He would return", were they just referring to the clouds above the earth? That seems quite unlikely, since Jesus left the 11 disciples from the earth itself.

So their saying "He would return in the same way" it should be obvious that they meant reach the ground IN THE SAME WAY He left the ground.
Or prove me wrong from Scripture.

The 2 angels were explaining HOW Jesus would return to earth. In the same way He left the earth. Acts 1 actually says that.
I've said it... how many times now :D ... Acts 1, His VISIBLE ascension (some "40 days" AFTER His FIRST ascension... His "[active] I ASCEND" [Jn20:17] ON "FIRSTFRUIT"...the VERY DAY of His Resurrection)... the LATER Acts 1 VISIBLE "ascension" is what they were telling them He shall so come IN LIKE MANNER as ye have SEEN Him going [/traveling] into heaven" is INDEED HOW He will "RETURN" to the earth (no one is arguing that He will NOT! HE WILL!)

But they were NOT covering the Subject of "our Rapture [IN THE AIR]"... it is only a figment of your imagination to say they were speaking of it. They were not. Their message has to do with His return TO THE EARTH (the manner in which THAT will take place--no one is arguing against THAT--we all AGREE He will "so come"... VISIBLY TO ALL EYES STILL EXISTING ON THE EARTH, at that point in the chronology! His Second Coming to the earth Rev 19).




But the "pattern" holds. There's still that "40-days" EARLIER thing He did, that one must deal with.
 

ewq1938

Well-known member
Oct 18, 2018
4,809
1,229
113
Yet, Jesus was raised from the dead on His Resurrection Day (Firstfruit - Lev23:10-12), and then did His "[active] I ASCEND" that very same day (John 20:17) and then came back down and did things with His disciples late that same evening... are we calling THAT the "SECOND" time [His] "advent/ARRIVAL/parousia/presence/coming"??

You are wrong he ascended before meeting with his disciples. His only ascension is here:

Mar 16:19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
FreeGrace2 said:
Good grief! Really? Pretrib rapture has Jesus making a hard U-turn after glorification of all believers.
That's not the "PRE-trib" view... you're simply blurring all passages into one big lump, by your inserting the phrase "of ALL believers"... No.
What? Of course the pre-trib view is that Jesus glorifies all believers and then takes them back to heaven. That is most certainly a U-turn. Jesus comes down "in the clouds", resurrects/changes all believers, and then takes them back to heaven.

Jesus makes a 180, if you don't like the word U-turn. That IS the pre-trib view.

"RAPTURE [IN THE AIR]" pertains SOLELY TO "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY" (Eph1:20-23 WHEN [as to its existence]); not to all other saints of all OTHER time periods (i.e. no one thinks that ppl who are "saved/believers/saints/righteous" mortals who've been BORN during the MK will be "RAPTURED," for example--the "RAPTURE" event is long past, say, at the 3/4 mark of the MK age ;) )
This is your opinion. There are NO verses that say the the "rapture" is SOLELY for the Church. 1 These 4 is clear that dead believers from heaven will accompany Him back to earth. The passage doesn't say "only the Church". This kinda feels like arguing about the scope of Christ's death. Was it for "all", or simply "all the elect". I am going with what the Bible says. All believers currently in heaven will accompany Him. You have no evidence of less than that.

There are those who will BECOME believers FOLLOWING "our Rapture [IN THE AIR]"--when they find themselves existing IN / WITHIN / DURING the trib years (<--on the earth--the EARTHLY-located "DOTL" time-period's ARRIVAL and whole "IN THE NIGHT" [i.e. 7-yr trib] aspect)
The easier understandihg is that these who will become believers will be among those who are "alive and remain", just as Paul wrote in 1 Thess and 1 Cor 15. No problem at all.

(and I just posted at length about them, so you could discern the differences)
I see no differences. As I said before.
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,110
1,962
113
You are wrong he ascended before meeting with his disciples. His only ascension is here:

Mar 16:19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.
His "[ACTIVE] I ASCEND" that He told Mary Magdalene to "SAY UNTO them" took place ON FIRSTFRUIT (thus fulfilling Lev23:10-12 [1Cor15:20])...



His later VISIBLE ascension (as I recall) is always stated in the "passive" (as your example above: "He was received up [/taken up - PASSIVE] into heaven..." Mark 16:19 Greek Text Analysis (biblehub.com) ] ).
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
I've said it... how many times now :D ... Acts 1, His VISIBLE ascension (some "40 days" AFTER His FIRST ascension... His "[active] I ASCEND" [Jn20:17] ON "FIRSTFRUIT"...the VERY DAY of His Resurrection)...
Oops. Wrong. When Jesus rose from the dead, the FIRST place He went wasn't an ascension. He went to Hades (hell) to "preach to the spirits in prison", per 1 Peter 3:19.

What verse mentions specifically that He "ascended" the VERY FIRST day of His resurrection?

the LATER Acts 1 VISIBLE "ascension" is what they were telling them He shall so come IN LIKE MANNER as ye have SEEN Him going [/traveling] into heaven" is INDEED HOW He will "RETURN" to the earth (no one is arguing that He will NOT! HE WILL!)
The Acts 1 account is His "official" (I can't think of another word) ascension.

But they were NOT covering the Subject of "our Rapture [IN THE AIR]"... it is only a figment of your imagination to say they were speaking of it. They were not.
How can you prove that? Your claim sounds like an opinion. Jesus was leaving the earth until the Second Advent. And the angles were explaining that His SECOND RETURN to earth would be JUST like He left earth. With clouds.

Their message has to do with His return TO THE EARTH (the manner in which THAT will take place--no one is arguing against THAT--we all AGREE He will "so come"... VISIBLY TO ALL EYES STILL EXISTING ON THE EARTH, at that point in the chronology! His Second Coming to the earth Rev 19).
Which just happens to be when He glorifes all believers.

But the "pattern" holds. There's still that "40-days" EARLIER thing He did, that one must deal with.
I'll deal with it when I have some evidence from the Bible. Why haven't you been more clear and specific?
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
You are wrong he ascended before meeting with his disciples. His only ascension is here:

Mar 16:19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.
In this context, it is clear that what the Lord had spoken to them was the Great Commission. Fast forward to Acts 1, for the same event. :)
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,110
1,962
113
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
His "[ACTIVE] I ASCEND" that He told Mary Magdalene to "SAY UNTO them" took place ON FIRSTFRUIT (thus fulfilling Lev23:10-12 [1Cor15:20])...
This is an example of how difficult it is to follow your posts.

Where did Jesus say to Mary "I ascend" when He told her what to say to the disciples. And what do you mean by "took place on firstfruit"?

1 Cor 15:20 - But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.
Lev 23-
10 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘When you enter the land I am going to give you and you reap its harvest, bring to the priest a sheaf of the first grain you harvest.
11 He is to wave the sheaf before the LORD so it will be accepted on your behalf; the priest is to wave it on the day after the Sabbath.
12 On the day you wave the sheaf, you must sacrifice as a burnt offering to the LORD a lamb a year old without defect,

I fail to see any relevance between 1 Cor 15:20 and Lev 23. What point are you trying to make?
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
FreeGrace2 said:
Oops. Wrong. When Jesus rose from the dead, the FIRST place He went wasn't an ascension. He went to Hades (hell) to "preach to the spirits in prison", per 1 Peter 3:19.
No.

And I covered that in my Post #1274 (page 64):
Do you not read any of the verses I post? 1 Peter 3:19 STATES that Jesus preached to the spirits in prison.

How can you just up and deny what the Bible very plainly states??

Please see that post. Will save me some typing.
Rather, please read 1 Peter 3:19.