If we are talking about timeframes prior to judgement day, Moses could certainly be interpreted as someone that was raptured in the OT (
Jude 1:9). Abraham and Lazarus in the NT could be interpreted as people that were raptured prior to Jesus' death (parable of the rich man in Hades). Any moment of an angel carrying away someone could be seen as a rapture. Each of those examples would be post-humous raptures.
The concept brought forth by the new age rapture interpretation is that all of the living righteous are raptured away before the wine of wrath described in Revelation. You could interpret this to be the case, but I don't see any scripture that would suggest this is a necessary interpretation.
This interpretation requires us to see Mat 3:10 as achronological. It also requires us to interpret "chaff" as wicked people as opposed to removed impurities of the righteous. When compared to Mat 13, there is an explicit statement that the tares (the wicked) are gathered first. Either the metaphor for wheat is used differently between Mat 3 and Mat 13 or the "chaff" doesn't mean wicked people. It makes more sense from the perspective of consistency that "chaff" does not mean wicked people.
The righteous are spoken to first but the description of the wick ones' fate is addressed first. The description of fates could be achronological. Achronological description is required in order to interpret this to be consistent with "righteous gathered first" but there is nothing in Mat 25 itself that indicates that as the case.
"earth was reaped" could be interpreted as a rapturing of the righteous, and this would require "henceforth" in Rev 14:13 to refer to the "now" of John the Revelator's time as opposed to the "now" pertaining to the events shown in his vision.
"And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them." - Rev 14:13 KJV
"earth was reaped" could also be interpreted as a gathering of the grapes of wrath from the earth for the winepress. There are different interpretations that could be made from Revelation 14. Are there passages in Revelation 14 that point directly to the two righteous raptures you have suggested?
Noah and Lot were certainly given the opportunity to escape wrath but I would assume that rapture has some element of physically being taken into heaven as described in 2 Thes "into cloud". Otherwise we could describe Jesus hiding in the crowd as a "rapture" by that definition.
The parable of the tares in Matthew is on the judgement day and explicitly says the wicked are gathered first. In Revelation 20, on judgement day everyone is pulled out of Hades, death, and the sea. Those without their name in the book of life are cast into the lake of fire and then the chapter changes and begins talking about New Jerusalem. I agree that Revelation 20 could be achronological and could be interpreted as "gathered together", but when interpreted in cross reference to Mat 13:30, the wicked are gathered first and presumably meet their fate first (gathered and bound first, but perhaps the time that they are burned is in no necessary order relative to the wheat being taken to the barn).
There is a "smoking gun" for the wicked being gathered first in Mat 13:30 on the Day of the Lord (gwtj) but no "smoking gun" for the righteous being gathered first on the Day of the Lord. We can look at times prior to the Day of the Lord and speculate, but the judgement day has scriptural evidence that the wicked are specifically gathered and bound first, before the righteous are gathered.
If bud62 suggested this, I agree with you that what he said was incorrect.
My interpretation so far is that there isn't a compelling reason to interpret a righteous-saved-from-wrath rapture event in any particular part of Revelation (maybe an "into cloud" moment at the end of Rev 20 after the book of life is pulled out). I see parts that may be loosely interpreted to include a rapture doctrine, but I don't see the "smoking gun" that points to a righteous-saved-from-wrath rapture. Whether there is a righteous-saved-from-wrath rapture or not doesn't seem to effect the rest of scripture. It would be like someone arguing that Jesus' eyes were blue. Or that Moses's staff was exactly 4 ft 2.5 inches. I mean... you could. But whether or not that speculation is correct, does it have any real implication on the study of scripture? Does righteous-saved-from-wrath rapture have any bearing on scripture? Does it fulfil a prophesy or bring greater consistency with a promise or teaching? Does it instruct a philosophy on how best to live our lives?
Why would it matter if God spares the righteous from the pain of wrath? Would it be terrible if the saved spent time in torment? What does bodily pain matter if the end result is salvation without living memory of sorrow, sadness and pain?
"And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away." - Revelation 21:4 KJV