The Parable of the Ten Virgins does not refer to the church
- Thread starter ZNP
- Start date
-
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.
The reason no one cares about this bozo Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum
The theory falls apart on both mechanical and methodological grounds, and the two failures reinforce each other.
Mechanically, the reading breaks its own source material before you even get to the theology. Virgins carrying lamps exist in the story to light the way for the wedding procession — that's the entire narrative function of a torch-bearing bridesmaid in a nighttime wedding. If the Bride has already been snatched away instantaneously at the midnight cry, the virgins' lamps become pointless props: there's no one left to illuminate a path for, no procession to lead, and no reason for the parable to spend its whole runtime on lamp oil if the lit path was never going anywhere. A parable's imagery is supposed to cohere; here it has to be explained away instead of explained.
Methodologically, that incoherence isn't an isolated glitch — it's produced by a repeatable pattern: assert an identification the text never states (virgins = Israel), treat silence and ambiguous words as if they were evidence (no "Bride" in Matthew, a neutral Greek verb), relocate hard sayings to more convenient passages elsewhere in the canon, and invent new categories on the spot whenever a direct apostolic statement (Ephesians 2, "no Jew or Greek") contradicts the system. Each move is defensible in isolation. Stacked together, they share one property: none of them is ever allowed to count against the theory.
That's why no one takes it seriously. It's not that the individual exegetical moves are unheard of — typology, silence, weighing a book's climax are all normal tools. It's that here they're used exclusively in one direction, propping up a conclusion that was decided in advance, and the resulting picture still doesn't hang together even on its own terms: a wedding party arriving after the wedding, carrying lamps for a road no one walks. A system that can absorb any objection and still produce a scene this awkward isn't showing flexibility — it's showing that the underlying identification was never load-bearing to begin with. People disengage from arguments like this not because the conclusion is heretical, but because there's no point at which the argument could have told you it was wrong.
"Virgins carrying lamps exist in the story to light the way for the wedding procession"
Evidently, you have failed the 12 step Hebrew betrothal wedding protocol comprehension test. Again.
The wedding FEAST does NOT occur immediately after the harpazo, rather 7 days (7 years) afterwards, when the now fully married Husband and Wife (she was only a betrothed virgin Bride 7 years earlier!) RETURN from the heavenly honeymoon Chuppah (noted below!) for the glorious WEDDING SUPPER on the earth. Attended by many guests, like John the Baptist and Moses and David and those who survived the tribulation judgement as sheep and tribulation saints.
[Rev 19:7 KJV] 7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.
[Rev 19:9 KJV] 9 And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed [are] they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.
These bridesmaids do NOT go to the Fathers house, they are supposed to busy themselves with INFORMING the world and PREPARING the world for the soon RETURN of the Husband and Wife.
In Arnold Fruchtenbaum’s prophetic framework (as detailed in *The Footsteps of the Messiah* and his studies on the Jewish wedding system), Revelation 19:7 is placed **in Heaven, immediately prior to the Second Coming of Christ**.
Fruchtenbaum maintains a strict distinction between the timing and location of the *Marriage* itself versus the *Marriage Supper*:
1. **The Timing of the Marriage (Revelation 19:7–8):**
Fruchtenbaum places the actual marriage ceremony (the *chuppah* in heaven) during the end of the seven-year Tribulation period, after the Rapture and after the Church has undergone the **Bema (Judgment Seat) of Christ**. Because Revelation 19:8 states that the bride is clothed in "fine linen, bright and clean," which represents the "righteous acts of the saints," Fruchtenbaum argues this requires the believers' works to have already been evaluated and rewarded in heaven. Thus, the marriage ceremony takes place in the heavenly realm just before Christ descends.
2. **The Transition to the Second Coming (Revelation 19:11–14):**
Because the bride has now been officially united with the Lamb under the heavenly chuppah, Fruchtenbaum notes that the newly married bride immediately participates in the next chronological step: she accompanies Christ *out* of heaven, riding on white horses, to execute judgment at the Second Advent.
3. **Distinction from the Marriage Supper (Revelation 19:9):**
Fruchtenbaum separates verse 7 (the ceremony/marriage) from verse 9 (the *Marriage Supper*). While the marriage happens **in heaven** right before the return, the Marriage Supper takes place **on earth** afterward, serving as the inaugural celebration banquet of the earthly Millennium (with Old Testament and Tribulation saints participating as invited guests).
What would prove the theory wrong? If there is no way to prove it wrong then it is just adding to a confusing pile of rubbish. There are a hundred interpretations, and unless you can prove it wrong, we simply have 100 different confusing theories with people endlessly arguing about them.
My theory can easily be proven wrong. I am asserting a 10 Virgin countdown from 2017 to 2026. Now either the 70th week begins on Rosh Hashanah in 2026 which would prove my interpretation right or it doesn't which would prove it wrong. That is what an honest interpretation does.
So what would prove his interpretation wrong?
So here is the fundamental problem with this interpretation by Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum.
His interpretation is that the ten virgins are not about the church, not about the believers, it is about Israel. Which means it isn't about us, so he just cut a chunk of the New Testament out and said "ignore this, it isn't about you, and it isn't about now". According to him this is about a seven year period after the rapture. But Paul said "all scripture is good for instruction". All scripture is for us.
So if his interpretation is right why would I even care about this parable, it has nothing to do with me.
The second problem is how does he come to this conclusion, where in the Parable does it say it is about Israel? It doesn't, he infers it because it was a practice for a Galilean wedding. By that reasoning I could easily say that many other portions of the gospels are also not for us. He is going through the New Testament and saying "this is not for you" and "this is not for you" and "this is not for you" because why? Because he says so. Paul said that we are the Israel of God and he also said there is no Jew nor Greek, but Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum says we can ignore all that. So not only do many parts of the New Testament not have anything to do with Christians, but now many other verses that do have to do with Christians have nothing to do with his interpretation. So ignore that as well.
So I have no basis on which to confirm that this interpretation is true, and I don't care, it has nothing to do with me, and there is no way to actually know if it is true or false, so why even bother examining it. The word of God is a lamp unto my feet, but this interpretation turns the light out. Now if the Old Testament was written for my example, surely the New Testament and gospels were also written for me. This is why I say he is a bozo.
His interpretation is that the ten virgins are not about the church, not about the believers, it is about Israel. Which means it isn't about us, so he just cut a chunk of the New Testament out and said "ignore this, it isn't about you, and it isn't about now". According to him this is about a seven year period after the rapture. But Paul said "all scripture is good for instruction". All scripture is for us.
So if his interpretation is right why would I even care about this parable, it has nothing to do with me.
The second problem is how does he come to this conclusion, where in the Parable does it say it is about Israel? It doesn't, he infers it because it was a practice for a Galilean wedding. By that reasoning I could easily say that many other portions of the gospels are also not for us. He is going through the New Testament and saying "this is not for you" and "this is not for you" and "this is not for you" because why? Because he says so. Paul said that we are the Israel of God and he also said there is no Jew nor Greek, but Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum says we can ignore all that. So not only do many parts of the New Testament not have anything to do with Christians, but now many other verses that do have to do with Christians have nothing to do with his interpretation. So ignore that as well.
So I have no basis on which to confirm that this interpretation is true, and I don't care, it has nothing to do with me, and there is no way to actually know if it is true or false, so why even bother examining it. The word of God is a lamp unto my feet, but this interpretation turns the light out. Now if the Old Testament was written for my example, surely the New Testament and gospels were also written for me. This is why I say he is a bozo.
Just because it can apply to the 70th week cannot possibly be the only interpretation because we can live by every word of God. This has to be applicable to believers for the entire church age.
But again, like I said before, who cares what this guy thinks. If the bible doesn't actually say it then it is just his own opinion and there are a thousand opinions out there. For him to say that the rapture is the midnight cry, that makes no sense. What is the point of having a midnight wedding procession lit with torches if the Bride has already been raptured. That is idiotic.
so yes, it can certainly apply to the 70th week, but if that is your only understanding then you are clearly wrong. This parable has applied to Christians for the entire church age.
I explained where it said this. Jesus begins saying "then" meaning at that time. For the entire church age up until 2017 this was applied generally to the kingdom of heaven, but in 2017 we realized that Jesus didn't say "kingdom of heaven" He said "the kingdom of the heavens". Then, at that time, in 2017, when the great sign in the heavens described in Revelation 12 was seen, that is when we likened the ten virgins to the constellation Virgo and a countdown of Ten Virgos to the beginning of the 70th week. I have also pointed out that the 144,000 can be directly linked to the ten Virgins, they are both "Virgins" and their function is the same, to serve the Lord by lighting the way for all those who are going to the wedding feast to walk in the dark of the midnight wedding procession.
My interpretation goes from the time Jesus said this, to 2017 when the Midnight cry took place, to the rapture, and then through the 70th week leading tribulation saints to the wedding feast as well.
"to 2017 when the Midnight cry took place"
You say that the harpazo happened in 2017? Might I ask: why then are you still here and not translated to the presence of the Groom in your new glorified body?
[2Ti 2:17-18 KJV]
17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.
[1Th 4:16-17 KJV]
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive [and] remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
[1Co 15:51-52 KJV]
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
said to eve, did God really said that?
No, it is pointless talking to you because you don't read anything I say. I am saying the Midnight cry is not the rapture and it is foolish to say it is. The midnight cry wakes up the sleeping virgins who are waiting for the Lord so they can light their lamps for the procession in the night to the wedding celebration. Yes, it is a seven day event, but it begins with a procession where everyone goes to this celebration. The Midnight cry wakes people up.
Think of the night that Jesus was arrested. The soldiers coming with Judas would be the "midnight cry". The disciples sleeping and unable to watch would be the virgins who all fall asleep. Then at sunrise you have the "rooster crow". That would be when everyone learns that Israel is going to resume the oblations and sacrifices on the temple mount. If you were not awake and watching at midnight you will not be ready for that rooster crow and like Peter you will be without any oil. Now that also is not the "rapture event". During the crucifixion Jesus cries out "My God, my God why have You forsaken me". That is the cry from the left behind saints.
Our job is to lead God's children to the wedding ceremony with lamps lit, speaking the word of God in the dark night to shine the way. Half of those responsible to do this were not prepared, they failed at their job. The other half represent the 144,000 who are half of the 288 orders of the priesthood. These are the ones who will assist the tribulation saints during the tribulation along with the Lord Jesus who has promised to not leave them orphans.
Of course the Matt 25:6 is not the harpazo shout for the Bride. I never said it was.
The Midnight Cry: The cry at midnight ("Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him") signals the sudden, disruptive arrival of the King at the culmination of the Tribulation. The wise are admitted into the wedding feast (the Messianic/Millennial Kingdom), while the foolish find the door shut because they lacked genuine preparedness, mirroring the separation of sheep and goats.
So since THIS midnight cry clearly occurs POST-RAPTURE (7 years later approximately), and you say that the harpazo happened in 2017, might I ask: why then are you still here and not translated to the presence of the Groom in your new glorified body?
So you think that you are at this present time IN THE TRIBULATION?
Actually, your math indicates that you think that you are at this present time IN THE MILLENNIUM!
I realize the discussion on this thread has been fast-paced, so let me clarify that the Scripture I provided was this:
All Christians are worthy of heaven via saving faith (per Rom. 3:20-5:11), so the five not permitted in can only be pseudo-Christians
(as in Matt. 7:21-23). The point of the reference to Noah is the same: be ready for the rapture/resurrection/judgment to occur at any time. The saved will go to heaven, leaving the lost in hell (Matt. 24:44-51, 25:13-14,30&46).
Regarding the rapture, I thought you would be familiar with the only Scripture that mentions it: 1Thes. 4:13-18 and 1Cor. 15:51-52.
Matthew 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple. 2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
This is a huge event, the destruction of the temple in 70 AD. It is a fulfillment of "the sign of Jonah". Yes, the sign of Jonah refers to Jesus being in the tomb for three days and three nights, and then rising from the dead. But Jonah preached for 40 days to repent or else the city would be destroyed, this foreshadowed Jesus and the Apostles preaching for forty years, Jerusalem refusing to repent and the city being utterly destroyed. The temple being cast down is also foreshadowed in Samson pushing out the pillars and the temple being destroyed. The failure of the Jewish leaders to repent and receive Jesus as the Messiah is due to their idolatry, the temple was no longer a temple to God, it was a temple to Dagon, the god of commerce. Jesus condemned them for turning His temple from a house of prayer into a house of commerce. This "Olivet discourse" begins with this picture of "every stone upon another" being cast down and concludes with the parable of the ten virgins with the virgins who were depending on other "stones" to supply them with oil being cast down.
All Christians are "living stones". All christians are likened to virgins, they all have lamps and they are all lit. They are all waiting for the Lord to return. They all go out to meet Him. And they all want to go to the wedding. The problem is that half of these Virgins depend on others to supply them with oil. Half the Virgins are like pillars who are not depending on other stones but rather have dug down to the rock and are resting directly on the rock of their salvation for their supply.
The stones cast down from the temple when it was destroyed are in fact stones that were part of the temple of God. These stones are what Paul refers to in 1 Corinthians, those that build with wood, hay and stubble, their work is consumed in the fire, they suffer loss, but they themselves shall be saved, but so as through fire. The saints saved out of the tribulation are likened to those standing on the glassy sea mingled with fire. They come out of the tribulation and they come out of the fire, just like the three friends of Daniel.
I agree with your commentary in the first paragraph, but not with viewing the foolish virgins not allowed into heaven as Christians.
As I have said, Matt. 7:21-23 & 25:10-12 indicate that they were pseudo-Christians, apparently because they failed to persevere in doing God's will, which is to love everyone (Rom. 5:5-8, 1John 3:6-4:12).
Regarding the rapture, I thought you would be familiar with the only Scripture that mentions it: 1Thes. 4:13-18 and 1Cor. 15:51-52.
There are many MANY more passages that speak to the rapture than just those.
And then there are the sweeping TYPES to be considered. Such as Ruth.
Removal / Translation TypesEnoch
Taken by God before the Flood; clear picture of removal prior to judgment.
Elijah
Caught up into heaven without death; another strong translation type.
Absence from Judgment SceneDaniel
Not present in Daniel 3; absent while the fiery judgment takes place.
Spared / Marked for DeliveranceRahab
Identified beforehand and preserved when Jericho falls; distinguished from those under wrath.
Bride / Union Before CrisisAsenath
Gentile bride given to Joseph before the famine; union before global distress.
Ruth
Redeemed and brought into covenant blessing prior to kingdom establishment.
Rebekah
Called out and united with Isaac before covenant continuation unfolds.
Zipporah
Joined to Moses before the judgments on Egypt.
Abigail
Aligns with David before he assumes kingship and executes judgment.
Positioned / Exalted Before CrisisJoseph
Elevated before the famine; placed above and ahead of the coming crisis.
Esther
Installed as queen prior to the destruction decree; positioned for deliverance.
Heavenly Call Before Judgment (NT Pattern)John the Apostle
“Come up here” (Rev 4:1) before the main sequence of judgments; often seen as a type of upward call before wrath unfolds.
Set Apart Before Redemptive EventsMary
Chosen vessel prior to the unfolding of redemption; set apart in advance.
Tight SummaryThis refined list highlights four consistent “no-wrath” patterns:
Removed beforehand → Enoch, Elijah
Absent from the scene → Daniel
Marked and spared → Rahab
United to the redeemer before crisis → Asenath, Ruth, Rebekah, Zipporah, Abigail
Positioned in advance → Joseph, Esther
Called upward before judgment → John
It is always amazing (and shocking) to me to hear the preterists, post-tribbers, mid-tribbers and historicists prattle on, all the while being biblically illiterate. Are they wrong? Yep, they are definitely wrong.
And the dispensationalist futurist premillennialists are always right.
Rebekah, Asenath, Ruth, and Esther — the four great Gentile Bride types.
Esther = The Bride Hidden While Judgment Falls
Esther’s story is one of the clearest pre-tribulation pictures in the entire Old Testament.
1. Esther Is Taken Into the King’s House
Esther is:
• A foreigner
• An orphan
• Unknown
• Living among Gentiles
She is chosen by grace and brought into the palace before the crisis begins.
“Esther was taken into the king’s house.” (Esther 2:16)
This is rapture imagery.
She doesn’t climb up — she is taken.
2. The Decree of Destruction Is Issued AFTER the Bride Is Secure
Only after Esther becomes queen does Haman issue the death decree:
“To destroy, to kill, and to annihilate all the Jews.” (Esther 3:13)
That is the Tribulation decree.
The Jews are marked for death.
The world enters crisis.
But Esther is not in danger.
Why?
Because she is already in the palace.
3. Esther Is Hidden During the Threat
Her Jewish identity is hidden.
The king does not know who she is.
That is exactly the Church:
• Known to Christ
• Hidden from the world
She lives inside royal protection while judgment approaches.
4. Esther Appears AFTER Judgment Is Set in Motion
Esther does not reveal herself until the decree is already written.
Likewise, Christ does not reveal Himself to Israel until after the Tribulation begins.
5. The King Breaks the Decree for the Bride’s People
When Esther appears:
• Haman is destroyed
• Israel is delivered
• The kingdom is preserved
Just as Christ destroys Antichrist and saves Israel.
Why Esther Is the Final Piece
Ruth shows the call of the Bride
Joseph shows the taking of the Bride
Esther shows the Bride hidden during wrath
She is not raptured during the crisis —
She was already inside before it began.
God Wrote This On Purpose
Four women:
• Rebekah (chosen before Isaac meets her)
• Asenath (married before famine)
• Ruth (taken from threshing floor at night)
• Esther (inside the palace before decree)
One message:
The Bride is secured before judgment falls.
It is written very very plain.
Unbelievably plain.
They are Believers .
They entered into the 7yr trib .
The AC killed them.
Billions, since the number can not be counted.
They are in heaven.
They are in the general population.
( remember, the martyrs were earlier confined UNDER THE ALTAR. )
Remember what was said.
They are committed to understand the altar, UNTIL THEIR NUMBER IS FULFILLED.
NOW, in about rev 7, THEY ARE IN THE GEN POPULATION of heaven.
NOT UNDER THE ALTAR.
So their number is fulfilled.
Facts matter in the pretrib doctrine.
facts .....Not so much in postrib doctrine. The shallowness is alarming, and investigation is hated.
I find that dynamic revolting, that i am talking to people that literally despise investigation.
Now the dots can be connected.
Facts gathered, those components connected.
The AC overcomes the saints....fact
The AC is given power over the saints...fact.
Billions of saints martyred and in heaven DURING THE TRIB.
We see HALF left behind pretrib in Jesus 2 separate analogies.( mat 24 and 25)
Think about it.
The postrib doctrine claims the wicked of mat 24 (one taken and one left behind) are raptured PRETRIB and taken away to some make believe pretrib judgement.
That is horrible dot connecting....horrible.
So why do they cling to such flat out nonsense?
The bible is such an offense to them.
Ask them for a verse pointing to a postrib rapture.
One verse.