How the Pre-Trib Rapture Became Popular in the Modern Church

Wrong. The beheadings happen in 13 when saints are overcome.

There are no mountains in heaven. Mt Sion is outside of Jerusalem. You don't have access to a map?



Wrong. Redeem means to pay for not "remove". They were on the Earth when they were redeemed or purchased and they remain on the Earth on a mountain outside of the city.

G59
ἀγοράζω
agorazō
ag-or-ad'-zo
From G58; properly to go to market, that is, (by implication) to purchase; specifically to redeem: - buy, redeem.
Total KJV occurrences: 31



So, you don't understand what Apostasia means. You don't understand what redeem means and you don't know where in Revelation the beheadings take place. You don't know where Mt Sion is and you don't understand there is only one of them and you don't understand heaven is not made up of dirt and rocks because that's what is in a mountain.

One of us understands these things and one does not and that's not me.

Present your case and we can take a look at it. Hopefully we won't be called out for "being off topic."

This could or could not be considered "on topic." I guess it's in the eye of the beholder.

Well let's just keep it low key and not become a rabbit trail.

i go back an dforth on the Five Foolish, as stated in Post #4,439

Here are two passages of scripture - one for they were saved and fell away and one for they were part of christianity but not Christ.

1.) Fell away - Jude 1:1-11

2.) christianity but not in CHRIST - 1 John 2:18-19

Jesus saying they were all virgins = i lean heavily to #1

Jesus saying to the five foolish "I do not know you" = lean heavily to 1 John 2:18-19

This is all i wanted to share with you from my heart as to what they could be and because it is a Parable.

Well, I see now that I need to adjust to the new reasonable David!

What I see in 1 John 2:18-19 is the True Church vs. the Laodicea Church.

The apostate church, pretending to be the Church is not with the True Church.

"They went out from us but they were not of us." I see this as never being of the faith as they claimed.

The difference as I see it is that these in 1 John have not been called saved as the "virgins" were.

Agree - and yet this is a parable so it seems contradictory to call them virgins, but then say "I don't know you".

Which takes us to focus on what the MAIN difference were in the two groups - running on empty vs filled.

The Holy Spirit is KEY and now that opens another discussion - another Thread which member Runningman started.

But then again, what is a parable? Is it not the symbol of a truth?

I would say the symbol of salvation is revealed in the word "virgin."

YES, when the LORD speaks a parable there is dynamic Truth within - Amen

Revelation has this dynamic weaving in and out throughout, some literal and some symbolic - Peace

John Wesley was ordained an Anglican minister but he was hardly Anglican. Darby left the Anglican ministry:

"Over the next five years, he developed the principles of his mature theology — most notably his conviction that the very notion of a clergyman was a sin against the Holy Spirit, because it limited the recognition that the Holy Spirit could speak through any member of the Church. During this time (1827–28) he joined an interdenominational meeting of believers (including Anthony Norris Groves, Edward Cronin, J. G. Bellett, and Francis Hutchinson) who met to "break bread" together in Dublin as a symbol of their unity in Christ.

This was easily googled. I knew this before Google was a thing from other stuff that I've read.

Plymouth Brethren was a movement, not a church. Recording him among the Anglicans is of little consequence although it seems he was a part of them when he came up with the pre-trib rapture and dispensationalism.

The point was it was popular among the Irish and then packaged and sold through Lindsey and DTS.

The 70th week of Daniel is for everyone on this great earth.....with emphasis on God bringing the non believing Jews to reality.

It says " before the flood"
Its says what life was like before the flood.
It says noah was gathered before the flood.
The " one taken" is in that same time frame.
Even the setting is peacetime and normal life.
" two in a bed, one taken, one left"

You guys need it to say that a wicked person with the mark of the beast, a satan worshipper,is in bed with a born again, saved believer.

Aren't you glad it said "2 will be in a bed, one taken, one left".

That ONLY FITS pretrib rapture.
"Before the flood"
Before judgement.
2 christians in a bed, one taken, one left.

You guys need a postrib example.

A postrib gathering of the church with an immediate uturn.
Lot= nope
Noah=nope
One taken= nope
10 virgins= nope.

All peacetime and normal life.

Fit pretrib rapture perfectly

that came out of nowhere.

Prove it.

You made the accusation.
Back it up

You might want to consider working on your manners--there's a lot of people reading these posts--some seekers and some too afraid to post because of people like you. You sound like the school yard bully.

Your post #4280 where you responded me saying "Christ is ruling and reigning NOW."

Your response:
This looks to be " kingdom now"

NAR.

No clue what NAR is.....

Let me guess --- what makes a saint "ready" is if he/she believes in a pre-trib rapture ["at the 'appointed' time"]...?

Which means he/she is a [born-again] saint the moment he/she believes in a pre-trib rapture.

All others cannot be a [born-again] saint unless-and-until they loose-their-head.

Is that what you are saying?

It sure seems like that is what you are saying.

Garsh - and I thought you became a [born-again] saint when you placed your full belief, faith, and trust in the Almighty Creator and His only begotten Son Jesus.

You mean - you have to believe in a pre-trib rapture to be saved???

Apostacy happens.

Don't tell me you found the phrase "SECOND Coming" in Scripture, did you??

Where?!
.

QUESTION: Which one of your two categories / options does the following "come / comes / cometh / came" fit into?


John 21:13 -

Berean Study Bible
Jesus came and took the bread and gave it to them, and He did the same with the fish.

Berean Literal Bible
Jesus comes and takes the bread and gives it to them, and the fish likewise.

King James Bible
Jesus then cometh, and taketh bread, and giveth them, and fish likewise.

New King James Version
Jesus then came and took the bread and gave it to them, and likewise the fish.

NASB 1995
Jesus came and took the bread and gave it to them, and the fish likewise.

Literal Standard Version
Jesus, therefore, comes and takes the bread and gives [it] to them, and the fish in like manner;

Young's Literal Translation
Jesus, therefore, doth come and take the bread and give to them, and the fish in like manner;



____________

^ this was after He'd already ascended to the Father on His Resurrection Day / ON Firstfruits (after He rose from the dead), per what He told Mary Magdalene in John 20:17... and per what He'd already said (shortly before the Cross) in John 16:16 -


"A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father." [and, after they inwardly questioned as to what He could have meant, says] "22 And ye now therefore have sorrow: but I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you."


So...

Which "category" (of your two options [man-supplied labels ]) does this "come/came" (at top) "fit" into, since He'd already ascended to Heaven in between (bodily), and had then come back to earth to spend "40 days" being seen of them and speaking to them about the things pertaining to the kingdom (Acts 1)?

He's just getting frustrated explaining his points and no one is trying to understand. The answer to many of the questions directed to him, he has already shown, but it seems the same questions keep coming back. It's frustrating! I know how he feels.

So give him some slack, it's only human to react this way after all the arguments.

No.

You are the only pretribber that denies the second coming is scriptural.