Thief in the Night-- Pretrib or Second Coming?

[TheDivineWatermark]

Granted the text certainly does not say that these particular "saints" ascended to heaven.

But if they were all of them resurrected OT saints......where in the world did they go post egeirō anyways? They certainly did not hang around on the planet for too long or this would have been recorded.

Well, let's consider that this is the same word used regarding Lazarus (and I also do not believe he went to heaven after he was raised... not even at the point when Jesus did His first "I ascend" ascension [John 20:17] on His Resurrection Day / ON Firstfruit, which would have been well-after Lazarus had been raised from the dead):


G1453 - used re: Lazarus (this was well before Jesus' death on the Cross)

John 12:1 V-AIA-3S
GRK: Λάζαρος ὃν ἤγειρεν ἐκ νεκρῶν
NAS: Jesus had raised from the dead.
KJV: whom he raised from
INT: Lazarus whom raised from among [the] dead

--"Therefore six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, whom Jesus had raised out from the dead."- John 12:1

John 12:9 V-AIA-3S
GRK: ἴδωσιν ὃν ἤγειρεν ἐκ νεκρῶν
NAS: Lazarus, whom He raised from the dead.
KJV: whom he had raised from
INT: they might see whom he raised from among [the] dead

John 12:17 V-AIA-3S
GRK: μνημείου καὶ ἤγειρεν αὐτὸν ἐκ
NAS: out of the tomb and raised him from the dead,
KJV: his grave, and raised him from
INT: tomb and raised him from among

or this would have been recorded.

Not necessarily.

I think the Holy Spirit had them record (in Scripture) only what He wanted written, for His purposes...

...and that basically entails the fact that Jesus went vertical, they went horizontal ( ).


Another thing, I don't see anywhere that OT saints are ever considered/called "firstfruit" (whereas the "144,000 are, and "the Church which is His body" are, too--distinctly--as in, "a KIND of firstfruit" James 1:18)




Beyond that, if they did go to heaven at that point (esp. in glorified bodies, as you are seeming to suggest), then why wouldn't you think THEY are the "24 elders," instead of the 24 elders identified as "the Church which is His body" having been raptured prior to the start of the Trib aspect [7yrs] of the DOTL time-period, as others often suggest. After all, some do [mistakenly] believe "the seals" started back in the first century rather than [what Scripture says of them] being "things which must come to pass IN QUICKNESS" in the "future" lead-up to [i.e. the 7-yrs / 2520 days immediately preceding] Christ's RETURN to the earth FOR the promised and prophesied earthly Millennial Kingdom Rev19.

Furthermore, the text states that they "appeared" emphanizō (g1718). Seem far more like a resurrection to a state like the resurrected Christ than any other possibility IMO.

G1718 - emphanizō - Strong's Greek Lexicon (kjv) (blueletterbible.org)

Sounds to me ^ as though the Holy Spirit wanted to make a specific point. ( )

I think that they MUST have been resurrected to a glorified state and "taken up" (sooner or not much later). If for no other reason than there being few reasonable alternatives.

I think it's reasonable that we're not told (in Scripture) because the "important point" the Holy Spirit wants us [and possibly even those to whom they "appeared" before] to know / grasp (or "hone in on" if you will), pertained to that, and only that (nothing else about them), which thing seems in contrast to that which Jesus Himself did that very day per John 20:17 "I ascend" (b/f He later showed up "the same day at evening... where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews" when Jesus came and "stood in the midst..." and said "handled me and see"...);

Also, whereas the "144,000" as "firstfruit" (Rev14:4) correspond with the SECOND mention of "firstfruit" in Lev23:17 (re: the WHEAT), Jesus Himself (alone) is seen in the FIRST mention of "firstfruit" (etc) in that chapter, vv.10-12 ("and ye shall offer that day when ye wave THE SHEAF an he lamb without blemish of the first year...")... but we know from other passages in Paul's epistles that we (the Church which is His body) was taken with Him at that point, positionally / legally (and which is said of no one else)

 

[presidente]

What the bible DOESN'T SAY (aka: "show me the verse that says" copyright @FG2) about the Leviticus 14 cleansing ritual for lepers is that it is a OT type of Jesus' atonement, cleansing from sin and gift of the indwelling Spirit.

But the reality is there beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Despierta y huele al compañero de café.....

So is this an analogy to pre-trib? You can't show scripture that says that the rapture occurs pre-trib, but you accept it 'beyond a shadow of a doubt' without having any real scripture you can show to support the idea? Is that an accurate sumation?

 

[presidente]

Other than Rev 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 11, Matt 27 and parallel passages, John 14 and a ton of epistles that is. And that is just the tip of the iceberg.

So tell us....who do you think the 24 Elders represent? Let me guess......you haven't the foggiest idea. Do I have that right?

And the saints risen from the tombs in Matt 27. You have no idea where they went post-resurrection?

So let me ask you, are these your strongest evidences of the pre-trib rapture? Individuals not being able to identify the 24 elders, and not knowing where the resurrected saints went at the resurrection?

Are those your strongest proofs of pre-trib? Is that right?

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

So you go off hafl cocked about whether "the" is in the verse or not. Again, completely missing the point.

You missed my point, from what I can tell of the following part of your post, where you wrote:

Since you've seen the 3 verses that speak of A resurrection of the saved and A resurrection of the unsaved, we know there will be ONLY 2 resurrections total.

I said there is no "A" (-word) in Greek language / grammar. It doesn't exist in that language.





I said, read it without the "A" since Greek language doesn't use "A" (the word "A" which is an "article" not a "definite article"--I wasn't saying remove the "the" in verses that may or may not have it in the Greek; I was saying, read the verses which have "A" in the English WITHOUT the "A" coz Greek doesn't use that word)

...and see if it still means "ONE AND ONLY" like you think it means, here.







[It doesn't mean "one and only" just b/c in English they add the word "A"--try again, regarding what I suggested you do when reading these verses that have the "A" in the English, as I remain unconvinced of your point regarding this, based on this fact]

 

[cv5]

Well, let's consider that this is the same word used regarding Lazarus (and I also do not believe he went to heaven after he was raised... not even at the point when Jesus did His first "I ascend" ascension [John 20:17] on His Resurrection Day / ON Firstfruit, which would have been well-after Lazarus had been raised from the dead):


G1453 - used re: Lazarus (this was well before Jesus' death on the Cross)

John 12:1 V-AIA-3S
GRK: Λάζαρος ὃν ἤγειρεν ἐκ νεκρῶν
NAS: Jesus had raised from the dead.
KJV: whom he raised from
INT: Lazarus whom raised from among [the] dead

--"Therefore six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, whom Jesus had raised out from the dead."- John 12:1

John 12:9 V-AIA-3S
GRK: ἴδωσιν ὃν ἤγειρεν ἐκ νεκρῶν
NAS: Lazarus, whom He raised from the dead.
KJV: whom he had raised from
INT: they might see whom he raised from among [the] dead

John 12:17 V-AIA-3S
GRK: μνημείου καὶ ἤγειρεν αὐτὸν ἐκ
NAS: out of the tomb and raised him from the dead,
KJV: his grave, and raised him from
INT: tomb and raised him from among



Not necessarily.

I think the Holy Spirit had them record (in Scripture) only what He wanted written, for His purposes...

...and that basically entails the fact that Jesus went vertical, they went horizontal ( ).


Another thing, I don't see anywhere that OT saints are ever considered/called "firstfruit" (whereas the "144,000 are, and "the Church which is His body" are, too--distinctly--as in, "a KIND of firstfruit" James 1:18)




Beyond that, if they did go to heaven at that point (esp. in glorified bodies, as you are seeming to suggest), then why wouldn't you think THEY are the "24 elders," instead of the 24 elders identified as "the Church which is His body" having been raptured prior to the start of the Trib aspect [7yrs] of the DOTL time-period, as others often suggest. After all, some do [mistakenly] believe "the seals" started back in the first century rather than [what Scripture says of them] being "things which must come to pass IN QUICKNESS" in the "future" lead-up to [i.e. the 7-yrs / 2520 days immediately preceding] Christ's RETURN to the earth FOR the promised and prophesied earthly Millennial Kingdom Rev19.




Sounds to me ^ as though the Holy Spirit wanted to make a specific point. ( )




I think it's reasonable that we're not told (in Scripture) because the "important point" the Holy Spirit wants us [and possibly even those to whom they "appeared" before] to know / grasp (or "hone in on" if you will), pertained to that, and only that (nothing else about them), which thing seems in contrast to that which Jesus Himself did that very day per John 20:17 "I ascend" (b/f He later showed up "the same day at evening... where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews" when Jesus came and "stood in the midst..." and said "handled me and see"...);

Also, whereas the "144,000" as "firstfruit" (Rev14:4) correspond with the SECOND mention of "firstfruit" in Lev23:17 (re: the WHEAT), Jesus Himself (alone) is seen in the FIRST mention of "firstfruit" (etc) in that chapter, vv.10-12 ("and ye shall offer that day when ye wave THE SHEAF an he lamb without blemish of the first year...")... but we know from other passages in Paul's epistles that we (the Church which is His body) was taken with Him at that point, positionally / legally (and which is said of no one else)

Sure, I can see that as a possibility. But as for me, I would not limit God in taking any type of sheaf He wants when He wants for whatever purpose He wants, be it wheat or barley. And the timing of this egeirō is, shall we say.......extremely suspicious

What I do NOT see is an earthquake then immediately risen saints yawning, stretching, and doing jumping jacks in their exposed tombs for three days while they wait for Jesus to be resurrected so that they can COME OUT of their tombs. Presidente and FG2 can't figure that one out it seems.

 

[cv5]

Well, let's consider that this is the same word used regarding Lazarus (and I also do not believe he went to heaven after he was raised... not even at the point when Jesus did His first "I ascend" ascension [John 20:17] on His Resurrection Day / ON Firstfruit, which would have been well-after Lazarus had been raised from the dead):


G1453 - used re: Lazarus (this was well before Jesus' death on the Cross)

John 12:1 V-AIA-3S
GRK: Λάζαρος ὃν ἤγειρεν ἐκ νεκρῶν
NAS: Jesus had raised from the dead.
KJV: whom he raised from
INT: Lazarus whom raised from among [the] dead

--"Therefore six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, whom Jesus had raised out from the dead."- John 12:1

John 12:9 V-AIA-3S
GRK: ἴδωσιν ὃν ἤγειρεν ἐκ νεκρῶν
NAS: Lazarus, whom He raised from the dead.
KJV: whom he had raised from
INT: they might see whom he raised from among [the] dead

John 12:17 V-AIA-3S
GRK: μνημείου καὶ ἤγειρεν αὐτὸν ἐκ
NAS: out of the tomb and raised him from the dead,
KJV: his grave, and raised him from
INT: tomb and raised him from among



Not necessarily.

I think the Holy Spirit had them record (in Scripture) only what He wanted written, for His purposes...

...and that basically entails the fact that Jesus went vertical, they went horizontal ( ).


Another thing, I don't see anywhere that OT saints are ever considered/called "firstfruit" (whereas the "144,000 are, and "the Church which is His body" are, too--distinctly--as in, "a KIND of firstfruit" James 1:18)




Beyond that, if they did go to heaven at that point (esp. in glorified bodies, as you are seeming to suggest), then why wouldn't you think THEY are the "24 elders," instead of the 24 elders identified as "the Church which is His body" having been raptured prior to the start of the Trib aspect [7yrs] of the DOTL time-period, as others often suggest. After all, some do [mistakenly] believe "the seals" started back in the first century rather than [what Scripture says of them] being "things which must come to pass IN QUICKNESS" in the "future" lead-up to [i.e. the 7-yrs / 2520 days immediately preceding] Christ's RETURN to the earth FOR the promised and prophesied earthly Millennial Kingdom Rev19.




Sounds to me ^ as though the Holy Spirit wanted to make a specific point. ( )




I think it's reasonable that we're not told (in Scripture) because the "important point" the Holy Spirit wants us [and possibly even those to whom they "appeared" before] to know / grasp (or "hone in on" if you will), pertained to that, and only that (nothing else about them), which thing seems in contrast to that which Jesus Himself did that very day per John 20:17 "I ascend" (b/f He later showed up "the same day at evening... where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews" when Jesus came and "stood in the midst..." and said "handled me and see"...);

Also, whereas the "144,000" as "firstfruit" (Rev14:4) correspond with the SECOND mention of "firstfruit" in Lev23:17 (re: the WHEAT), Jesus Himself (alone) is seen in the FIRST mention of "firstfruit" (etc) in that chapter, vv.10-12 ("and ye shall offer that day when ye wave THE SHEAF an he lamb without blemish of the first year...")... but we know from other passages in Paul's epistles that we (the Church which is His body) was taken with Him at that point, positionally / legally (and which is said of no one else)

Something else to consider: if in fact this was a Lazarus-type resurrection, then this group would have had to die again, which would break the Dan 12 OT saints resurrection model, where there is an eternal glorified resurrection.

These tomb-saints are not around today this we know.

 

[Runningman]

So let me ask you, are these your strongest evidences of the pre-trib rapture? Individuals not being able to identify the 24 elders, and not knowing where the resurrected saints went at the resurrection?

Are those your strongest proofs of pre-trib? Is that right?

Yes.

That's because the bottom line is there isn't any plain text reference to a pre-trib gathering of the church. Through semantics and interpretation the pre-trib can be created, but I don't see that it is actually inferred or able to be deduced from the Bible. All of the gatherings of the church, at the return of Christ, are in a post-trib context.

 

[presidente]

Something else to consider: if in fact this was a Lazarus-type resurrection, then this group would have had to die again, which would break the Dan 12 OT saints resurrection model, where there is an eternal glorified resurrection.

These tomb-saints are not around today this we know.

It doesn't break anything.

Daniel 12
1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Do you think the time of trouble resurrection Daniel 12 tells about happened right after the crucifixion?

Tabitha/Dorcas was raised from the dead. Is she still around? Does the Bible say she ascended to heaven? If she died a normal death, what would that violate?

Btw, is this your strongest evidence for pre-trib?

 

[presidente]

Sure, I can see that as a possibility. But as for me, I would not limit God in taking any type of sheaf He wants when He wants for whatever purpose He wants, be it wheat or barley. And the timing of this egeirō is, shall we say.......extremely suspicious

What I do NOT see is an earthquake then immediately risen saints yawning, stretching, and doing jumping jacks in their exposed tombs for three days while they wait for Jesus to be resurrected so that they can COME OUT of their tombs. Presidente and FG2 can't figure that one out it seems.

If you think they were resurrected immortal, then sitting in a tomb for three days wouldn't hurt them. The appearing to others happened after the resurrection, whatever they were doing between their resurrection and the appearing to others.

I can't tell you what they were doing because the Bible doesn't say. Just like I can't say they were resurrected immortal, because the Bible doesn't say they were.

Is this question that the Bible gives little evidence for somehow evidence for pre-trib? Revelation doesn't tell us the names of the elders. Is that your big evidence for the pretrib rapture?

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
You are believing what the Bible DOESN'T SAY.

What the bible DOESN'T SAY (aka: "show me the verse that says" copyright @FG2) about the Leviticus 14 cleansing ritual for lepers is that it is a OT type of Jesus' atonement, cleansing from sin and gift of the indwelling Spirit.

What does this have to do with your theory of rapture, that being glorified believers are taken to heaven? Please explain.

But the reality is there beyond a shadow of a doubt.

You do a lot of bragging and boasting about something that the Bible doesn't even mention.

So my statement stands: you are believing what the Bible DOESN'T SAY.

otoh, I am believing what the Bible DOES SAY.

Despierta y huele al compañero de café.....

Speaking in tongues benefits no one other than the babbler.

 

[FreeGrace2]

You missed my point, from what I can tell of the following part of your post, where you wrote:

I said there is no "A" (-word) in Greek language / grammar. It doesn't exist in that language.

I said, read it without the "A" since Greek language doesn't use "A" (the word "A" which is an "article" not a "definite article"--I wasn't saying remove the "the" in verses that may or may not have it in the Greek; I was saying, read the verses which have "A" in the English WITHOUT the "A" coz Greek doesn't use that word)

...and see if it still means "ONE AND ONLY" like you think it means, here.

Seems you go to great lengths to not make a point.

[It doesn't mean "one and only" just b/c in English they add the word "A"--try again, regarding what I suggested you do when reading these verses that have the "A" in the English, as I remain unconvinced of your point regarding this, based on this fact]

Since there is no evidence in the Bible of several resurrections, you have no point. I showed a count of the singular 'resurrection' in several translations, and there are NO translations have even have resurrection in the plural.

So, why should anyone believe there will be more than 1 resurrection of the saved?

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Something else to consider: if in fact this was a Lazarus-type resurrection, then this group would have had to die again, which would break the Dan 12 OT saints resurrection model, where there is an eternal glorified resurrection.

Well, as I mentioned in a previous post in this thread, Daniel 12:1-4 (distinct from v.13) is not about a physical / bodily resurrection from having formerly been physically / bodily DEAD; Rather, it is about Israel [future] coming up out of the graveyard of nations, where SCATTERED, (i.e. what is LIKENED UNTO a resurrection) just like other passages carrying this idea: Ezekiel 37:12-14,20-23 (dry bones prophecy); Hosea 5:14-6:3 (after two days, IN the third day); Romans 11:15 [25-29 / v.26 = Isa27:9(,12-13)] where it says of them in v.15 "what shall the receiving of them be but LIFE FROM THE DEAD"; John6:39 (distinct from v.40); Isa26:14-21 (esp. v.19); etc.
(these [the "WISE" OF THEM anyway] GO ON to DO the Dan12:3[,10a,d] thing, not to mention the v.4b thing--They are "still-living" persons, not ones who've been previously physically / bodily DEAD... remember, this is LIKENED UNTO a resurrection)




Whereas 12:13 speaks of Daniel (OT saint), "thou shalt rest [in death] and STAND IN THY LOT [be resurrected ('to stand again' on the earth)] at the END of the DAYS" (at the END of the "days" being referred to in that chpt, vv1,6-7, aka at the END of the second half of the future Trib period. No OT saint was promised "SNATCH / harpazo [IN THE AIR]"... They were promised "resurrection" ('to stand again' on the earth)... for those reading along (I think you, cv5, grasp that...)

 

[Runningman]

FreeGrace2 said:
This is as silly as the posts of Absolutely.

where’s he at anyway? Not seeing him in this thread for some reason.

 

[presidente]

@cv5 and @TheDivineWatermark

I am still waiting to see if either of you can show some Biblical support for pre-trib where the Bible actually teaches that there is a rapture _before_ the tribulation, a resurrection before the tribulation. Or else if you could show that Christ returns more than once, feel free to post scriptures.

Arguing that some passage could be interpreted so that the coming of the Lord could refer to a stretched out period of time isn't what I am talking about. I am talking about scriptures that lead one to want to come up with these stretched interpretations of passages to make them fit with some other passage of scripture that actually exists. Where are those passages of scripture? Can you show us one?


Also, @TheDivineWatermark, I am still waiting to hear back from you whether you have actually studied Greek and learned to read it and how far along you are and if your comments about Greek come from your own exposure to Greek manuscripts, if you rely on commentaries, or if it's uneducated guesswork. I have asked that numerous times, and your not answering causes me to suspect that yo u are dodging the question.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said:
This is as silly as the posts of Absolutely.

where’s he at anyway? Not seeing him in this thread for some reason.

The word "banned" appears below his name on his posts.

 

[GaryA]

The Bible tells us plainly that there will be A resurrection of the saved and A resurrection of the unsaved. Dan 12:2, Acts 24:15.

Do you realize that both of those verses indicate a single occurance - with both saved and unsaved in the same occurance?

Daniel 12:

2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Acts 24:

15 And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.

 

[GaryA]

So Rev 20:5 shows that the resurrection of the unsaved will be 1,000 years after the FIRST resurrection, which will be for believers only.

I agree that the resurrection referred to in Revelation 20:5 is 'believers only'.

 

[GaryA]

I use an eye-friendly add-on to my browser which changes the light-bulb color background many computer users use, but which also filters out a lot of color coding.

Web page backgrounds used to be gray. For some reason, Microsoft decided we all needed to stare at a lightbulb and did away with our ability to easily change background colors after XP.

Two words - consider linux...

 

[GaryA]

I am looking at the Greek and also the interlinear text. I am a student of Greek, but I am hesitant to make pronouncements about verb meanings at my level of study. But if we look at the text the earth was shaken, the rocks were split, and many bodies of those who had slept arose.

The verbs translated 'shaken,' 'split', and 'arose' are all aorist indicative passive. There isn't some verb tense shift that puts one before the other here. They had risen from, but their going into the holy city and appearing to many occurred after Christ rose.

Whether it is grammatically possible that they rose after the rocks split, etc. rather than at the same time, I do not know.

Either way, I don't get why you are making an issue of this. The passage doesn't say that they were resurrected immortal or that they ascended to heaven. I know some pre-tribbers speculate along those lines. That's just guesswork.

I do notice a pattern here. You can't show scripture that shows these people ascended to heaven, and you can't show any scripture to show a rapture of the church occurring before the tribulation in scripture. You seem content to base scripture on speculation. I am not.

Before you get into the Greek - what do you see in the English that it was translated into?

Matthew 27:

50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. 51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; 52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, 53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. 54 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.

If we take away the verse numbers and separate this passage at '.' and ';':

Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.

And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom;

and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

And the graves were opened;

and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.

"Start here..."

Look at each of these lines as an 'occurance' in time - with no two of them happening [together] at the [very] same [exact] time.

But - 'earth quake' and 'rocks rent' go together in the same 'occurance'. (See what I am getting at? The punctuation tells the story.)

Notice the phrases - between the commas - between the semicolons. The separation significance is greater for a semicolon than a comma.

Do you see that the 5th line is not necessarily a direct result of the 4th line? (Connected - yes - but, not with direct sequence timing.)

They are not 100% chronological - do you see that? (The centurion et al. did not see that which is described in the previous line.)

 

[GaryA]

They are not 100% chronological - do you see that? (The centurion et al. did not see that which is described in the previous line.)

I am not going to be dogmatic about this - it just seems that the sense of timing of the various phrases in that last line points to a more immediate response on the crucifixion day - and, obviously, would not include events from three days later on the resurrection day.