50 Reasons For a Pretribulational Rapture By Dr. John F. Walvoord

  • 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.

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,495
113
So, you do realize that v.2 is speaking of what the false conveyors were saying: "the day of the Lord is here/is present [perfect indicative]"

...which is something DISTINCT FROM...

v.1's Subject ("our episynagoges UNTO HIM") that PAUL is supplying the corrective toward...


...so that, when Paul says (in v.3a) "that day will NOT be present [<--THIS PART] if not shall have come the..."


...that he is speaking to what the false conveyors were saying, by responding ABOUT THAT "day" (the one they were DECEIVING / falsely conveying about) and proceeding to explain how THAT "fits" in relation to the other.




IOW, what people TEND to do is EQUATE in their minds the Subject of v.1 and the Subject of v.2 (which are DISTINCT ITEMS), so that when they proceed to read v.3a, they read "that day will NOT be present if not shall..." and INCORRECTLY attach that to the Subject OF VERSE 1', by completely jumping clear BACK OVER v.2 (IGNORING IT) to grab v.1's Subject to explain what v.3a is starting out saying (but they are DISTINCT ITEMS!)...

...just like what Subject PAUL is bringing to the fore ['our gathering UNTO HIM' v.1 (our 'noun-event' IN THE AIR)], is COMPLETELY DISTINCT from the Subject that the false conveyors had been expressing (v.2 'the day of the Lord IS HERE,' playing out on the earth in our present experience / 'a time-period' unfolding ON THE EARTH)


Don't jump back OVER v.2 (completely BYPASSING IT) when ascertaining WHAT v.3a ('that day') is speaking about... or you'll come to a completely INCORRECT conclusion about what Paul is actually conveying in v.3.


[MAJOR GRAMMAR PROBLEM ;) ]
You do realize the Greek (Apostasia) isn't a pre-trib rapture to heaven :)

The Greek "Apostasia" (Departure/Falling Away) isn't a Pre-Trib Rapture Of The Church To Heaven, it's that simple :giggle:

Apostasia: (Defection From Truth) (Apostasy) (Falling Away) (Forsake) :giggle:

Lexicon :: Strong's G646 - apostasia

Strong’s Definitions
ἀποστασία apostasía, ap-os-tas-ee'-ah; feminine of the same as G647; defection from truth (properly, the state) ("apostasy"):—falling away, forsake.

KJV Translation Count — Total: 2x
The KJV translates Strong's G646 in the following manner: to forsake (with G575) (1x), falling away (1x).

2 Thessalonians 2:3KJV
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,887
2,113
113
So, you're suggesting that the Thessalonians were "SHAKEN IN MIND" and "TROUBLED" by the false conveyors telling them "THE RAPTURE is HERE / is PRESENT [perfect indicative]" (absolutely no evidence in sight anywhere... which they could simply "look around" and witness the fact, if true... which would be a very lame claim to be making, and very difficult to be "DECEIVED" by... [how long does one usually mistakenly believe such a thing has taken place... not long! Just LOOK AROUND, it HASN'T HAPPENED, ppl are STILL HERE, and the 'aftermath' of such an event is NON-EXISTENT!])



No, they were "SHAKEN IN MIND" and "TROUBLED" by the false conveyors' claim that "the day of the Lord IS HERE / IS PRESENT" unfolding upon the earth in their experience, which MATCHED their 1:4 current existence exactly ('persecutionS and tribulationS ye ENDURE' [NOW and ONGOINGLY and VERY NEGATIVE]), which made it PERFECTLY REASONABLE for them to BELIEVE [/be DECEIVED was TRUE]... b/c "the DOTL" (always an EARTHLY-located time-period unfolding) consists of:
"a-period-of-time-of-JUDGMENTs-unfolding-upon-the-earth [FOLLOWED BY a-period-of-time-of-BLESSINGs-unfolding-upon-the-earth]" (<--ALL of that)


[they incorrectly believed they were IN IT and EXPERIENCING IT]
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,495
113
So, you're suggesting that the Thessalonians were "SHAKEN IN MIND" and "TROUBLED" by the false conveyors telling them "THE RAPTURE is HERE / is PRESENT [perfect indicative]" (absolutely no evidence in sight anywhere... which they could simply "look around" and witness the fact, if true... which would be a very lame claim to be making, and very difficult to be "DECEIVED" by... [how long does one usually mistakenly believe such a thing has taken place... not long! Just LOOK AROUND, it HASN'T HAPPENED, ppl are STILL HERE, and the 'aftermath' of such an event is NON-EXISTENT!])



No, they were "SHAKEN IN MIND" and "TROUBLED" by the false conveyors' claim that "the day of the Lord IS HERE / IS PRESENT" unfolding upon the earth in their experience, which MATCHED their 1:4 current existence exactly ('persecutionS and tribulationS ye ENDURE' [NOW and ONGOINGLY and VERY NEGATIVE]), which made it PERFECTLY REASONABLE for them to BELIEVE [/be DECEIVED was TRUE]... b/c "the DOTL" (always an EARTHLY-located time-period unfolding) consists of:
"a-period-of-time-of-JUDGMENTs-unfolding-upon-the-earth [FOLLOWED BY a-period-of-time-of-BLESSINGs-unfolding-upon-the-earth]" (<--ALL of that)


[they incorrectly believed they were IN IT and EXPERIENCING IT]
They weren't conveying the pre-trib rapture as you falsely claim

Paul warned about conditions that must be met, before the (Second Coming) of Jesus Christ

1. A Falling Away "First"

2. "Then" The Man Of Sin Is Revealed
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,887
2,113
113
They weren't conveying the pre-trib rapture as you falsely claim
T7t7: "They weren't conveying the pre-trib rapture as you falsely claim"


I didn't say they were.

Read again.



EXACTLY!... they (v.2) were NOT claiming such a thing!


NOWHERE did I *ever* claim THEY DID! :rolleyes:






[read again v.2... https://biblehub.com/text/2_thessalonians/2-2.htm ]



The Subject of v.1 [Paul's] and the Subject of v.2 [the false conveyors'] are COMPLETELY *DISTINCT*
 

GaryA

Truth, Honesty, Love, Courage
Aug 10, 2019
9,835
4,321
113
mywebsite.us
2 Thessalonians 2:

1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

'coming of our Lord Jesus Christ' ===> Second Coming of Christ

'our gathering together unto him' ===> rapture

(In 'event' terms, the above two statements go togerher.)

'day of Christ' ===> Second Coming of Christ
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,495
113
So, you're suggesting that the Thessalonians were "SHAKEN IN MIND" and "TROUBLED" by the false conveyors telling them "THE RAPTURE is HERE / is PRESENT [perfect indicative]" (absolutely no evidence in sight anywhere... which they could simply "look around" and witness the fact, if true... which would be a very lame claim to be making, and very difficult to be "DECEIVED" by... [how long does one usually mistakenly believe such a thing has taken place... not long! Just LOOK AROUND, it HASN'T HAPPENED, ppl are STILL HERE, and the 'aftermath' of such an event is NON-EXISTENT!])



No, they were "SHAKEN IN MIND" and "TROUBLED" by the false conveyors' claim that "the day of the Lord IS HERE / IS PRESENT" unfolding upon the earth in their experience, which MATCHED their 1:4 current existence exactly ('persecutionS and tribulationS ye ENDURE' [NOW and ONGOINGLY and VERY NEGATIVE]), which made it PERFECTLY REASONABLE for them to BELIEVE [/be DECEIVED was TRUE]... b/c "the DOTL" (always an EARTHLY-located time-period unfolding) consists of:
"a-period-of-time-of-JUDGMENTs-unfolding-upon-the-earth [FOLLOWED BY a-period-of-time-of-BLESSINGs-unfolding-upon-the-earth]" (<--ALL of that)


[they incorrectly believed they were IN IT and EXPERIENCING IT]
Please Explain Your Definition Of "Falling Away First" Below?

2 Thessalonians 2:3KJV
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,887
2,113
113
'coming of our Lord Jesus Christ' ===> Second Coming of Christ

'our gathering together unto him' ===> rapture
In v.1, Paul is covering ONE SUBJECT (the event of "OUR Rapture"... involving "OUR Lord Jesus".... that is, "OUR episynagoges UNTO HIM" at ONE POINT IN TIME

[i.e. "the meeting [noun] of the Lord IN THE AIR"--NO ONE else is involved / present THERE... in His "presence" THERE])



Verse 2 is NOT covering THAT ^ Subject (the false conveyors were NOT speaking OF THAT ^ )... Paul is BRINGING a "corrective" to what they (the false conveyors) were saying (re: a TIME-PERIOD).
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
As in my challenge for postribs to post a verse pointing to a postrib rapture.
Nobody ever has produced a single one.
Apparently you have not been paying attention.

2 Thess 2:1-3 clearly speaks of the rapture as post trib.

1 Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters,
2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come.
3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.

The red words refer to the Second Coming (post-trib).
The blue words refer to the rapture (gathering up).
The black words refer to the Trib itself. Not the sequence of events: Second Advent, the gathering.

Should be a ton of them.
Only takes 1. Where are your "tons" of verses that Jesus makes a pre-trib U-turn with all the resurrected/raptured believers?

Instead you guys stand in ashes. In ruination from the accuracy of Gods word obliterating false notions with no basis of scripture.
I just refuted your sputterings.

We have laid out SYSTEMATICALLY, with ease what we believe.
You have NO verses that speak of Jesus returning to heaven with resurrected/raptured believers.

You guys have not one verse to counter our position.
No, actually more. v.1 and 3 clearly refute your position.

Then there is 1 Cor 15:23 that clearly indicates 2 "groups" in the resurrection. Christ the firstfruits, and then "those who belong to Him" Sounds like a single group in "those who belong to Him".

Then there's Rev 20:5 which speaks of tribulational martyrs who are in "the FIRST resurrection".

So, with all that "ease" that you talk about, explain how they are in "the first resurrection" when you believe there is another one that is 7 years BEFORE theirs.

This should be interesting.

I'll wait.
 

lamad

Well-known member
Apr 14, 2021
1,293
107
63
2 Thessalonians 2:

1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

'coming of our Lord Jesus Christ' ===> Second Coming of Christ

'our gathering together unto him' ===> rapture

(In 'event' terms, the above two statements go togerher.)

'day of Christ' ===> Second Coming of Christ
Perhaps the Day of Christ will be His THIRD coming: when He comes to Armageddon.
 

lamad

Well-known member
Apr 14, 2021
1,293
107
63
So, you're suggesting that the Thessalonians were "SHAKEN IN MIND" and "TROUBLED" by the false conveyors telling them "THE RAPTURE is HERE / is PRESENT [perfect indicative]" (absolutely no evidence in sight anywhere... which they could simply "look around" and witness the fact, if true... which would be a very lame claim to be making, and very difficult to be "DECEIVED" by... [how long does one usually mistakenly believe such a thing has taken place... not long! Just LOOK AROUND, it HASN'T HAPPENED, ppl are STILL HERE, and the 'aftermath' of such an event is NON-EXISTENT!])



No, they were "SHAKEN IN MIND" and "TROUBLED" by the false conveyors' claim that "the day of the Lord IS HERE / IS PRESENT" unfolding upon the earth in their experience, which MATCHED their 1:4 current existence exactly ('persecutionS and tribulationS ye ENDURE' [NOW and ONGOINGLY and VERY NEGATIVE]), which made it PERFECTLY REASONABLE for them to BELIEVE [/be DECEIVED was TRUE]... b/c "the DOTL" (always an EARTHLY-located time-period unfolding) consists of:
"a-period-of-time-of-JUDGMENTs-unfolding-upon-the-earth [FOLLOWED BY a-period-of-time-of-BLESSINGs-unfolding-upon-the-earth]" (<--ALL of that)


[they incorrectly believed they were IN IT and EXPERIENCING IT]
EXACTLY! Well said!
 

lamad

Well-known member
Apr 14, 2021
1,293
107
63
You do realize the Greek (Apostasia) isn't a pre-trib rapture to heaven :)
How do you know it isn't?

Strong's definitions for each word in this compound word:

The question is, CAN this word mean something else? It is a compound word - "apo" and "stasia."

Here is what Strong's says about "apo:

of separation... ...of local separation,
...after verbs of motion from a place i.e. of departing, of fleeing,...

of separation of a part from the whole......where of a whole some part is taken

of any kind of separation of one thing from another by which the union or fellowship of the two is destroyed

of a state of separation, that is of distance...physical, of distance of place



At the rapture, will some part of the entire population be taken? You know the answer is YES.
Will those taken be separated by DISTANCE? Again the answer is YES.
The other part of the compound word 'stasia" is where we get "stationary" or "not moving" from.

Putting these two words together then can certainly mean a part of a whole group suddenly moved from where they were to a new location, and it happen so fast, the rest of the whole group seems stationary - not moving.

But we cannot and should not form doctrine from one word, as in pulling it out of its context. We must determine its meaning IN its context.

Paul wrote this passage with parallels:

Verse 3: Apostasisa - the man of sin revealed
Verse 6: Something restraining - might be revealed
Verses 7-8: restraining force removed - the man of sin revealed

There can be NO DOUBT that Paul's intent in "Apostasia" has to do with the man of sin being revealed. Therefore it has to do with the restraining force being "taken out of the way.

Then Paul wrote: "And now you know what is restraining him [from being revealed at this time " (AMP)

Why would Paul write this UNLESS He had just told us what or who this restraining power was? In fact, Paul DID tell us, but did it in a cloaked manner, then wrote "now you know" so people would go back and read again and discover his meaning. Just guessing, because Paul did not tell us, but is it possible he wrote this in a manner that the only people who would really understand would be those who had read his first letter?

It is an absolute truth that in verse 3b, Paul shows us the man of sin revealed.
It is just as much truth that in verses 6-8 he explains the only way that could happen: the power restraining - that power we are suppose to know now - has been taken out of the way.

A good student of the bible should then ask: HOW Paul" HOW or WHERE do you show this restraining power "taken out of the way" somewhere in verse 3a?

Is a "falling away" (from what we can't tell) equal to "taken out of the way?"
Could a "falling away" possibly in any way be a restraining force preventing the man of sin from being revealed too soon?

I don't see how either of these is possible. Yet it seems that Paul's intent is that hidden in "apostasia" must be that power restraining being "taken out of the way" so that in 3b the man of sin is revealed.
 

lamad

Well-known member
Apr 14, 2021
1,293
107
63
Sure it's not the 5th coming? :giggle:
Speaking of what is in scripture:
He came once, and was nailed to a cross.
He will come the second time but only to the air as shown in 1 Thes. 4 and in 1 Cor. 15.
He will come the third time to Armageddon as shown in Rev. 19.

Yes, I am quite sure! ;-)
 
Mar 4, 2020
8,614
3,691
113
How do you know it isn't?

Strong's definitions for each word in this compound word:

The question is, CAN this word mean something else? It is a compound word - "apo" and "stasia."

Here is what Strong's says about "apo:

of separation... ...of local separation,
...after verbs of motion from a place i.e. of departing, of fleeing,...

of separation of a part from the whole......where of a whole some part is taken

of any kind of separation of one thing from another by which the union or fellowship of the two is destroyed

of a state of separation, that is of distance...physical, of distance of place



At the rapture, will some part of the entire population be taken? You know the answer is YES.
Will those taken be separated by DISTANCE? Again the answer is YES.
The other part of the compound word 'stasia" is where we get "stationary" or "not moving" from.

Putting these two words together then can certainly mean a part of a whole group suddenly moved from where they were to a new location, and it happen so fast, the rest of the whole group seems stationary - not moving.
The way you rendered the word apostasia isn't the way it is defined in the text so it isn't admissable as a sound interpretation. Nor does it fit with the narrative in 2 Thess. 2:1-3.

You're suggesting the church departs, then the man of sin is revealed, then the day of Christ and our gathering (rapture) to Him.

If that's the way the verses were written it would create a contradiction in the scripture. A big no no.

The way apostasia is defined is a defection from the truth and not a moving of people from one location to another.

The word used for "our gathering to him" is an entirely different words than apo or stasia. Your rendering doesn't fit contextually or linguistically.

The scriptures were translated into english by a large number of experts. All of the translations I've seen use apostasia. Quit trying to redefine words to shoehorn your pre-trib doctrine in.
 
Mar 4, 2020
8,614
3,691
113
Speaking of what is in scripture:
He came once, and was nailed to a cross.
He will come the second time but only to the air as shown in 1 Thes. 4 and in 1 Cor. 15.
He will come the third time to Armageddon as shown in Rev. 19.

Yes, I am quite sure! ;-)
Now you have a resurrection order problem that contradicts pre-trib rapture.

"Then there is 1 Cor 15:23 that clearly indicates 2 "groups" in the resurrection. Christ the firstfruits, and then "those who belong to Him" Sounds like a single group in "those who belong to Him".

Then there's Rev 20:5 which speaks of tribulational martyrs who are in "the FIRST resurrection".

Please explain how they are in "the first resurrection" when you believe there is another one that is 7 years BEFORE theirs."
Thanks @FreeGrace2
 
Jul 23, 2018
12,199
2,775
113
Now you have a resurrection order problem that contradicts pre-trib rapture.

"Then there is 1 Cor 15:23 that clearly indicates 2 "groups" in the resurrection. Christ the firstfruits, and then "those who belong to Him" Sounds like a single group in "those who belong to Him".

Then there's Rev 20:5 which speaks of tribulational martyrs who are in "the FIRST resurrection".

Please explain how they are in "the first resurrection" when you believe there is another one that is 7 years BEFORE theirs."
Thanks @FreeGrace2
Thats sure a lot of working around other verses.

Force fitting weak dynamics.

Bad exegesis.
 
Mar 4, 2020
8,614
3,691
113
Thats sure a lot of working around other verses.

Force fitting weak dynamics.

Bad exegesis.
Oh, good morning Mr. Absolutely. I hope you have a great day and thanks for unblocking me. Good to see you want to talk with me again.

But seriously, how do you address that resurrection dillema?
 

cv5

Well-known member
Nov 20, 2018
23,045
8,376
113
How do you know it isn't?

Strong's definitions for each word in this compound word:

The question is, CAN this word mean something else? It is a compound word - "apo" and "stasia."

Here is what Strong's says about "apo:

of separation... ...of local separation,
...after verbs of motion from a place i.e. of departing, of fleeing,...

of separation of a part from the whole......where of a whole some part is taken

of any kind of separation of one thing from another by which the union or fellowship of the two is destroyed

of a state of separation, that is of distance...physical, of distance of place



At the rapture, will some part of the entire population be taken? You know the answer is YES.
Will those taken be separated by DISTANCE? Again the answer is YES.
The other part of the compound word 'stasia" is where we get "stationary" or "not moving" from.

Putting these two words together then can certainly mean a part of a whole group suddenly moved from where they were to a new location, and it happen so fast, the rest of the whole group seems stationary - not moving.

But we cannot and should not form doctrine from one word, as in pulling it out of its context. We must determine its meaning IN its context.

Paul wrote this passage with parallels:

Verse 3: Apostasisa - the man of sin revealed
Verse 6: Something restraining - might be revealed
Verses 7-8: restraining force removed - the man of sin revealed

There can be NO DOUBT that Paul's intent in "Apostasia" has to do with the man of sin being revealed. Therefore it has to do with the restraining force being "taken out of the way.

Then Paul wrote: "And now you know what is restraining him [from being revealed at this time " (AMP)

Why would Paul write this UNLESS He had just told us what or who this restraining power was? In fact, Paul DID tell us, but did it in a cloaked manner, then wrote "now you know" so people would go back and read again and discover his meaning. Just guessing, because Paul did not tell us, but is it possible he wrote this in a manner that the only people who would really understand would be those who had read his first letter?

It is an absolute truth that in verse 3b, Paul shows us the man of sin revealed.
It is just as much truth that in verses 6-8 he explains the only way that could happen: the power restraining - that power we are suppose to know now - has been taken out of the way.

A good student of the bible should then ask: HOW Paul" HOW or WHERE do you show this restraining power "taken out of the way" somewhere in verse 3a?

Is a "falling away" (from what we can't tell) equal to "taken out of the way?"
Could a "falling away" possibly in any way be a restraining force preventing the man of sin from being revealed too soon?

I don't see how either of these is possible. Yet it seems that Paul's intent is that hidden in "apostasia" must be that power restraining being "taken out of the way" so that in 3b the man of sin is revealed.
Indeed the parallelism is both intentional and inescapable. And obvious. And purposeful.
 

TheDivineWatermark

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2018
10,887
2,113
113
"Then there is 1 Cor 15:23 that clearly indicates 2 "groups" in the resurrection. Christ the firstfruits, and then "those who belong to Him" Sounds like a single group in "those who belong to Him".
I've been over that verse about a thousand times... but y'all keep ignore what I've put:

v.23 "[re: resurrection] but EACH [a word that means 'of more than TWO'] IN HIS OWN ORDER / RANK" (there doesn't remain only ONE)


--"firstfruit Christ" (1st "RANK")


--"[THEN - G1899 - epeita - 'properly, only then (emphasizing what precedes is a necessary precursor).'] ONLY THEN those [plural] OF Christ [/ 'ARE Christ's'] at/in the coming of Him" (OT saints-Daniel was told this; Job well-knew this; Martha well-knew this; all OT saints grasped this; AND Trib saints who will have DIED in the trib, Rev20:4b [20:4a speaking of "still-living" saints at the time being referenced--His Second Coming to the earth (and of which the "144,000" [not necessarily DYING] are "FIRSTFRUIT" (the SECOND mention of "FIRSTFRUIT" in Lev23, in v.17 "TWO [PLURAL] loaves" and "baken WITH LEAVEN" [<--(NOTE!!!)THAT ain't US/'the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY'/'we are ONE BREAD'/'ye are UNLEAVENED')]--so this category is the 2nd "RANK")


--"[THEN - G1534 - eita (SEQUENCE word only, NO time-element involved)] THEN the end... " (when the last enemy, death, is destroyed... after all the "DEAD [/unsaved]" OF ALL TIMES will be "death and hell delivered up" [and "the sea gave up"] to stand before the GWTj--3rd "RANK")


____________

THEN, recall all of my posts about:

--1Cor15:51-54 "THIS corruptible" ('the DEAD IN Christ') and "THIS mortal" (the part "IN Christ" being the 'we which are ALIVE and remain') (with the word "THIS" meaning, "A CERTAIN ONE"--which pertains to Paul having just said, "Behold, I *SHEW* you a mystery..." [i.e. what Paul was given to "shew"])

--"IN Christ" designation re: "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY" (ALL those saved "in this present age [singular]" [Eph1:20-23 WHEN (as to its existence); Eph1:10 not speaking of "NOW" as all other parts of this epistle ARE speaking of]

--"God hath chosen [G138 - heilato / haireó (related to G142 - airo - 'raise, lift up, take away, remove'); a DIFFERENT "chose/chosen" word from OTHER passages] you [corporate 'you'] firstfruit [aparche or ap' arche, depending on manuscript]"

--James 1:18 saying "A KIND of firstfruit / A CERTAIN firstfruit" (i.e. more than ONE KIND--which KIND are WE/the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY" ?? Paul makes this abundantly clear throughout his epistles [his task to disclose this info TO "the Church WHICH IS HIS [Christ's] BODY"... the "ONE BODY" (ALL those saved "in this present age [singular]")])

--"quickened-together-with Him," that is, WHEN HE was! And having to do with His "BODY" [resurrected] (this idea is repeated over and over throughout what the Spirit wrote via Paul's pen--TO/FOR/ABOUT "the Church WHICH IS HIS BODY"); thus, having been, WHEN HE WAS, this means that when He did the John 20:17 thing ON FIRSTFRUIT (His resurrection day), fulfilling Lev23:10-12, WE were taken there WITH HIM, positionally/legally and were "SEATED [G4776 - synekathisen ]" there (in the heavenlies) "IN Christ Jesus"--can you tell by now that (as I've said) I do NOT believe it was the "many who rose" on that same day that he took up to Heaven with Him on that day (His FIRST ascension ['I [ACTIVE] ASCEND']... I believe Scripture PURPOSELY informs us of WHERE THEY WENT, that day, INSTEAD (also as a 'picture / pattern' [an earthly-located one]) "into the holy city, and appeared unto many"

--the Rev20:6 "BLESSED and holy is the one HAVING A PART IN the resurrection, the first" (i.e. resurrection OF LIFE); this is NOT saying this is the FIRST TIME anyone will have been resurrected, for the 2W will have already been (at a time-slot DISTINCT from when all others will be: "6th Trumpet / 2nd Woe" time-slot !!)

--MUCH, much more... but I've already made TONS of posts concerning this issue, over and over and over again...