Matthew 24:40 Is the rapture secret?

[Psalm1]

Not to mention they reverse who is taken and who inherits the earth. In the times of Noah, it was the righteous who were left behind and the wicked who were taken away. Why do they flip this with no reason at all?

Nobody at the actual flood was taken preflood.
IN Jesus analogy he frames HIS ANALOGY pre flood.
Postib rapture doctrine reverses this.
Jesus tells us of a group that half are taken....PRETRIB...PREFLOOD.
No postribber I have encountered HAS EVER ACKNOWLEDGED THAT DYNAMIC.
They completely omit it.
Run from it.

They tell us every wicked sinner is destroyed at the rapture!
Nope..not even possible.

So at this brief examination of mat 24 how many changes do we have applying postrib rapture doctrine?

I can tell you what is being protected.
The "one coming theory"
Matt 24 has 2 DISTINCT Comings.
1 thes 4 has a distinct coming.
Rev 19 has a distinct coming
Rev 14 has 2 gatherings that are neither the rapture of the church, nor the second coming.
Acts 1 has a distinct coming.


3 of those are the same pretrib coming.

Rev 19 and the postrib coming of mat 24 are the same postrib coming "IN GLORY AND POWER"

REV 14 has 2 JEWISH gatherings.
Fulfilling romans 11.

Postrib rapture dynamics are 100% void of that simple exegesis.
No postrib rapture teacher can explain it away honestly.

 

[Psalm1]

Not to mention they reverse who is taken and who inherits the earth. In the times of Noah, it was the righteous who were left behind and the wicked who were taken away. Why do they flip this with no reason at all?

It is also apparent that the fact that the church goes to heaven would also be forbidden ground to the postrb rapture doctrine.
In that doctrine the church is forbidden heaven.

So that demands a " one coming OUTCOME"
See the folly?
Outcome surpasses exegesis.

In studying end times doctrine, one must have a starting place. In my studies, I study both sides of the equation.
That gives me a slight advantage over those that only study their doctrine with such a limited scope.
Then, when challenged, they have no where to go because of A huge investment.
This bad starting place bites them in the posterior badly.
Their remedy is to destroy the messenger.
( A legal carnal tactic)
That maneuver is targeted to "win via default "
The postribber adherents defeat is obvious, but they purpose in their minds that if the opponent is in the ditch, doctrine illusion survives.
Yep, it works amoung themselves with a CHANGED BIBLE.

They sadly lose in reality.
Nobody that is a bible hound would celebrate that air castle "victory"

 

[rrcn]

Sorry but from my point of veiw this is just adding your ideas TO scripture, or ADDING to His word. This is not the proper way to handle scriptue, we don't come to the scripture with an idea and "find it", we read scripture and draw from it. With all due respect, I couldn't just read His word and "draw" what you posted as your conclusion to it. You're doing it backwards.

To be painfully honest and VERY unpopular, I feel the same way about the whole "pre-trib rapture" thing as a whole. If you just read the bible without ever having heard this belief, you'd never in a thousand years draw this idea from it. I dare say that you HAVE to add the timelines, charts, rearranging of scripture, and gurus for this to been seen at all or have any legs like it has. This is by far the most deceptive belief amoungst true believers I can think of that has found such a strong foothold while it contridicts Jesus words in SO many ways, in my viewpoint.

To put this in perspective can you take a look at my post #217 and evaluate it as well? I don’t believe that I have deviated from from the Bible at all.

 

[Mem]

There's the "all eyes will see Him" verse that suggests no secret and there's the parable of the wheat and tares that is explicitly explained as "so shall it be..." as the tares are gathered and bundled up for the furnace, and then the wheat will be brought into the barn. Some would view it as the bundles are gathered and bundle in preparation for the furnace (before the millennium, so bundled and left drying and cast into the lake of fire as final judgment) while others see it as an immediate burning (so that would necessitate this parable is speaking of the GWT). And some regard the barn as the wheat's gathering as for safekeeping and other might (and some not just might but definitely) view the barn as the millennial in preparation of going into the actual house.

I'm certain the correct perception of this parable in defining exactly what the barn is, considering the tares are bundled before the wheat is gathered into it, should solve the question of whether the rapture is pre, mid, or post along with the question whether believers stay or go.

 

[sawdust]

Lol
Just pretend the analogy has no gathering preflood.
Is English your first language?
TWO GATHERINGS.
NONE AFTER THE FLOOD.
THE 2 WERE PREFLOOD. (both pretrib)
YOU CAN WIGGLE ALL YOU WANT.
IT AIN'T GOING AWAY.
Your doctrine is literally making you look bad.
Your doctrine has "normal life setting"
CHANGED INTO 1/3 of the population destroyed, no commerce for believers, and believers running from cave to cave to escape the AC.
But it Gets worse for you because in the analogy of Jesus ,post trib rapture doctrine has a believer in bed with an unbelieving satanic worshipper that has the mark of the beast tattooed on him.
( two in a bed, one taken one left.)
Total fail.

All post tribber doctrine that I have encountered, completely eliminates the setting that was before the flood!!!
... and it's a no brainer.
The setting is PREFLOOD.
Normal LIFE, and commerce ,and normal daily activities

And the passage of scripture is making you look bad. I'm not even a post-tribber so I have no clue what you are rambling on about. There is nothing in the passage about being in bed or caves or 1/3 of the population. I find your thinking to be quite incoherent and nonsensical.

The setting is leading up to the flood (people doing daily living, ignoring Noah's preaching) and what happens to those people at the time of the flood, ie. they get taken away.

It is to this, the Second Coming of Christ is likened. It is a very simple analogy. I've underlined the key points to make it even simpler for your understanding.

Matthew 24:38-39
38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.

The day the Son returns is the day the remaining unbelievers on Earth are removed so that the Millennium rule of Christ is begun. Why would Christ remove believers from the Earth, they've just made it through the Tribulation, holding on to the end for their salvation, not destruction. This is the Day all Israel has longed for, when they are made the head and not the tail (Deuteronomy 28:13).

 

[ewq1938]

Not to mention they reverse who is taken and who inherits the earth. In the times of Noah, it was the righteous who were left behind and the wicked who were taken away. Why do they flip this with no reason at all?

You have flipped it. "left" means to be rejected and left to die according to the Greek word used. You spin it into something positive, going against the Greek meaning of the word.

The taken are the ones taken in the rapture and the ones left are left to suffer and die in the wrath of God.

 

[Psalm1]

And the passage of scripture is making you look bad. I'm not even a post-tribber so I have no clue what you are rambling on about. There is nothing in the passage about being in bed or caves or 1/3 of the population. I find your thinking to be quite incoherent and nonsensical.

The setting is leading up to the flood (people doing daily living, ignoring Noah's preaching) and what happens to those people at the time of the flood, ie. they get taken away.

It is to this, the Second Coming of Christ is likened. It is a very simple analogy. I've underlined the key points to make it even simpler for your understanding.

Matthew 24:38-39
38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.

The day the Son returns is the day the remaining unbelievers on Earth are removed so that the Millennium rule of Christ is begun. Why would Christ remove believers from the Earth, they've just made it through the Tribulation, holding on to the end for their salvation, not destruction. This is the Day all Israel has longed for, when they are made the head and not the tail (Deuteronomy 28:13).

So where was earth's population gathered preflood?

The Son returns in Rev 19.
That is postrib return.

You are trying to place the rapture there.

All rapture verses are normal life and commerce....which is opposite your chaos, horror and murder setting.
But the AC kills all refusing the mark.

Are you thinking the rapture is Jesus coming for 20 people in bunkers?

 

[Psalm1]

There's the "all eyes will see Him" verse that suggests no secret and there's the parable of the wheat and tares that is explicitly explained as "so shall it be..." as the tares are gathered and bundled up for the furnace, and then the wheat will be brought into the barn. Some would view it as the bundles are gathered and bundle in preparation for the furnace (before the millennium, so bundled and left drying and cast into the lake of fire as final judgment) while others see it as an immediate burning (so that would necessitate this parable is speaking of the GWT). And some regard the barn as the wheat's gathering as for safekeeping and other might (and some not just might but definitely) view the barn as the millennial in preparation of going into the actual house.

I'm certain the correct perception of this parable in defining exactly what the barn is, considering the tares are bundled before the wheat is gathered into it, should solve the question of whether the rapture is pre, mid, or post along with the question whether believers stay or go.

That passage is the end of the world.
After the mil.
LOF
No church rapture there at all.

 

[Psalm1]

Sarcasm noted.

For those more serious, I've explained elsewhere that this is not a U Turn. This is an instant glorification event that operates from heaven, where Christ is prepared to return and establish his Kingdom.

We instantly join him as he begins his descent, which is virtually timeless. It is a re-working of the world by means of angelic judgments. These judgments transform the world by putting millions to death who have served the Beast and by removing Satan, the cause of so much international trouble.

The dead in Christ are already with Christ in heaven. Those alive and remaining will *instantly* join them. I wouldn't call this a "caravan" or even a "trip to heaven." We are "snatched up" suddenly, in a timeless way, in a "twinkling of an eye."

Is that a journey? No. Pretrib depictions of human bodies floating up to the clouds is not a correct depiction.

The actual event will not require any time at all, since the "twinkling of an eye" is basically something more akin to light speed. It doesn't take even a second at light speed, 186,000 miles per second. From earth to high clouds is between 3,000 and 18,000 miles. So no--we aren't talking about a "trip" and as such, saying it is a "U Turn" is a joke.

...and yet your theory is exactly a uturn in the sky.

 

[Psalm1]

I believe we come back with Jesus in a unified witness of Christian righteousness. I think God has wished to add our testimony as Christians to the testimony of His Son in order to condemn those on earth who have rejected our testimony.

This testimony, when we come back with Jesus, will bring judgment to the whole world and will be carried out, I think, by angels.

Our testimony, added to that of Jesus, demonstrating his grace, is what God uses as a testimony against the nations of the earth who reject that grace. It is this testimony that will "trample the wicked," as I see it.

Pre and postribbers believe we come back with Jesus.

The church is raptured pretrib, assembles in heaven with Jesus, and returns to earth after the 7 yr trib.
Rev 19 depicts it.

 

[Psalm1]

That is incorrect, and you should know it. I've been a Postribber for many, many years, and I've always believed that when Christ comes again, he will have his angels seize the saints still alive in the midst of Armageddon, and glorify them in the clouds in an instant. At the same instant, we will return with Christ to set up God's heavenly Kingdom on earth in the form of a Millennial Kingdom, which is preliminary to the establishment of New Jerusalem permanently on earth.

1) the AC kills all refusing the mark.
No saint "goes through" the trib.
2) angels gather after the trib..not Jesus.
3) all rapture verses are normal life, normal Activities, Commerce, and peace time. So the setting that Jesus gave for the rapture is exactly opposite you're setting.
4) Revelation, 14 has 3 gatherings. 2 of them are during the tribulation. So I don't know how in the world any such theory of a post Trib rapture can possibly happen
( unless the dead in christ do not rise first).
Your doctrine has the dead in christ rising at the white horses.
(100% impossible due to rev 14)

It falls like a house of cards.
A Precarious corner that post trib rapture doctrine has painted itself into. I think one of the main things, that destroys any hope of a post trib rapture is where they painted themselves into the "one coming" corner
If you take away the "one coming" invention, the whole Post trib rapture doctrine is completely destroyed.
Rev 14 TOTALLY DESTROYS a postrib rapture theory.

 

[Cameron143]

1) the AC kills all refusing the mark.
No saint "goes through" the trib.
2) angels gather after the trib..not Jesus.
3) all rapture verses are normal life, normal Activities, Commerce, and peace time. So the setting that Jesus gave for the rapture is exactly opposite you're setting.
4) Revelation, 14 has 3 gatherings. 2 of them are during the tribulation. So I don't know how in the world any such theory of a post Trib rapture can possibly happen
( unless the dead in christ do not rise first).
Your doctrine has the dead in christ rising at the white horses.
(100% impossible due to rev 14)

It falls like a house of cards.
A Precarious corner that post trib rapture doctrine has painted itself into. I think one of the main things, that destroys any hope of a post trib rapture is where they painted themselves into the "one coming" corner
If you take away the "one coming" invention, the whole Post trib rapture doctrine is completely destroyed.
Rev 14 TOTALLY DESTROYS a postrib rapture theory.

If no saint goes through the trib, who is being killed?

 

[randyk]

Matthew 24:

27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Luke 17:

24 For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day.

Matthew 28:

3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:

Luke 9:

29 And as he prayed, the fashion of his countenance was altered, and his raiment was white and glistering.

Zechariah 9:

14 And the LORD shall be seen over them, and his arrow shall go forth as the lightning: and the Lord GOD shall blow the trumpet, and shall go with whirlwinds of the south.

None of these verses are describing the quickness of or the speed at which Jesus will appear.

Sorry, I think when Jesus' Return is depicted like lightning, it is taking on the various characteristics of lightning, which involves things like its suddenness, or speed. To separate out only certain characteristics would require that characteristic to be identified as exclusive in the comparison.

The first two are illustrating the certainty of His appearance - like saying 'just as sure as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, Jesus is coming and will inevitably appear'.

Don't think so. There would be better things to compare Jesus' Return to if it was just "certainty" he was emphasizing. "Lightning" suggests something much more than just "certainty."

Otherwise, you could say that He will appear in the east and then move westward...

In any case, I do not believe that it will be [near] 'instantaneous' like the time frame of a lightning strike.

But that is how Jesus' Return is described, as "lightning." It not only shines from East to West, but it does so at the same time, which requires speed, or quickness.

Did you not read my previous post?

Does 'then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven' not seem to take some amount of time longer than the time frame of a lightning strike?

Will 'all the tribes of the earth mourn' in the time frame of a lightning strike?

Does 'they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory' not seem to take some amount of time longer than the time frame of a lightning strike?

I may not have seen all of your posts. I do not feel the "sign of the Son of Man" takes longer than lightning because Jesus was not speaking just of the event, but also, of what the "sign" is to disprove any false Coming.

It will not be an earthly cultic movement, but rather, a change in heavenly authority as it will impact the earth. The sign is given to disprove fale cults on earth in the present age, and not depict something that will be seen in a moment. We will, however, see the results in a new Kingdom and a new age.

But this involves exposing a false conception of Christ's Coming as something contrived by men on earth. That's how we are to benefit from this "sign"--not by seeing it in the quickness of its time, but by avoiding anything short of a heavenly change.

 

[randyk]

...and yet your theory is exactly a uturn in the sky.

Your characterization of it as a "U Turn" is a joke. The Bible depicts Christ's coming as a coming to earth, a revelatioin to the entire world. The saints join him in his descent. Simple--no "U Turns" necessary. No travel time, unless you call "instant" something akin to "travel time?"

We are seized "up," yes. If I pulled someone up out of the water and put him in a boat, is that a "U Turn?" It's a poor characterization, meant to make the biblical picture look silly.

 

[Psalm1]

Your characterization of it as a "U Turn" is a joke. The Bible depicts Christ's coming as a coming to earth, a revelatioin to the entire world. The saints join him in his descent. Simple--no "U Turns" necessary. No travel time, unless you call "instant" something akin to "travel time?"

We are seized "up," yes. If I pulled someone up out of the water and put him in a boat, is that a "U Turn?" It's a poor characterization, meant to make the biblical picture look silly.

What do you call the sudden reversal in direction?
I can call it whatever is acceptable.

 

[randyk]

1) the AC kills all refusing the mark.
No saint "goes through" the trib.
2) angels gather after the trib..not Jesus.
3) all rapture verses are normal life, normal Activities, Commerce, and peace time. So the setting that Jesus gave for the rapture is exactly opposite you're setting.
4) Revelation, 14 has 3 gatherings. 2 of them are during the tribulation. So I don't know how in the world any such theory of a post Trib rapture can possibly happen
( unless the dead in christ do not rise first).
Your doctrine has the dead in christ rising at the white horses.
(100% impossible due to rev 14)

The Antichrist does *not* kill all on earth who refuse the mark. He kills all who in his presence refuse to take the mark. The Antichrist is not omnipresent like God. He has a temporal kingdom on earth, and it will be located, I think, in Europe, in the midst of 10 nations. That's where those brought before him will die if they do not acknowledge him.

I don't know what you mean by a gathering of angels that exclude Jesus? I don't find this to be biblical.

You're wrong that Rapture verses are only "peaceful." Sometimes normal life is used to show how the world does not recognize either sin or prophecy. That is a far cry from calling this "peaceful."

Jesus compared his Coming to the Flood. And before the Flood violence ruled on earth. Would you call this "peaceful?"

Rev 14 does not have 3 gatherings *during* the Tribulation. For one, the Reign of Antichrist is not the "Great Tribulation." The 'Great Tribulation" is the NT Jewish Diaspora.

2nd, the 3 gatherings are distinct and separate visions without any need for a chronological sequence, and with no time stamp, unless they are directly associated with Christ's Coming Kingdom.

The appearance of the angels itself is part of the vision--not the actual history when it will take place. You are confusing the vision with the fulfillment.

If you take away the "one coming" invention, the whole Post trib rapture doctrine is completely destroyed.
Rev 14 TOTALLY DESTROYS a postrib rapture theory.

There has only been "one Coming" since the Early Church. A few people tried to have the Church escape judgement just seconds or days before all Hell breaks loose on Judgment Day. But separating the Rapture from the 2nd Coming has never been the eschatology of the Church. Sorry, that view is not supported by Scriptures. And Christians in history certainly never saw it!

 

[randyk]

What do you call the sudden reversal in direction?
I can call it whatever is acceptable.

As I said, a near timeless upward movement is hardly travel as in a "U Turn." Your characterization is wrong-headed, in my opinion.

 

[Psalm1]

Your characterization of it as a "U Turn" is a joke. The Bible depicts Christ's coming as a coming to earth, a revelatioin to the entire world. The saints join him in his descent. Simple--no "U Turns" necessary. No travel time, unless you call "instant" something akin to "travel time?"

We are seized "up," yes. If I pulled someone up out of the water and put him in a boat, is that a "U Turn?" It's a poor characterization, meant to make the biblical picture look silly.

I have no desire to contentious.
But in the pretrib rapture he would be up and into the boat.
In your doctrine he would go back to the water.
I am saying you guys would do an "about face"...."a 360".
..and it would not mischarachter your belief.

 

[Psalm1]

The Antichrist does *not* kill all on earth who refuse the mark. He kills all who in his presence refuse to take the mark. The Antichrist is not omnipresent like God. He has a temporal kingdom on earth, and it will be located, I think, in Europe, in the midst of 10 nations. That's where those brought before him will die if they do not acknowledge him.

I don't know what you mean by a gathering of angels that exclude Jesus? I don't find this to be biblical.

You're wrong that Rapture verses are only "peaceful." Sometimes normal life is used to show how the world does not recognize either sin or prophecy. That is a far cry from calling this "peaceful."

Jesus compared his Coming to the Flood. And before the Flood violence ruled on earth. Would you call this "peaceful?"

Rev 14 does not have 3 gatherings *during* the Tribulation. For one, the Reign of Antichrist is not the "Great Tribulation." The 'Great Tribulation" is the NT Jewish Diaspora.

2nd, the 3 gatherings are distinct and separate visions without any need for a chronological sequence, and with no time stamp, unless they are directly associated with Christ's Coming Kingdom.

The appearance of the angels itself is part of the vision--not the actual history when it will take place. You are confusing the vision with the fulfillment.



There has only been "one Coming" since the Early Church. A few people tried to have the Church escape judgement just seconds or days before all Hell breaks loose on Judgment Day. But separating the Rapture from the 2nd Coming has never been the eschatology of the Church. Sorry, that view is not supported by Scriptures. And Christians in history certainly never saw it!

I need no help from the early church as it was so steeped in error that Iraneous wrote the book "against heresies"
If you are catholic then I can understand a church father loyalty.
As for me, the bible is my basis.
I just can not go along with that doctrine of men thingy.
BTW..catholic websites on end times adheres to postribber doctrine. (Complete with playing the "Darby card")

All that kinda building block is extremely weak, and really has zero profit if I am trying to disqualify my opponent.
I need verses

I invite WHOLEHEARTEDLY some verse or smoking gun to void the pretrib rapture verses.

I have a slight advantage in the end times debate because I took the time to learn postrib rapture doctrine.
Most people I debate do not even know pretrib rapture doctrine.

 

[Psalm1]

The Antichrist does *not* kill all on earth who refuse the mark. He kills all who in his presence refuse to take the mark. The Antichrist is not omnipresent like God. He has a temporal kingdom on earth, and it will be located, I think, in Europe, in the midst of 10 nations. That's where those brought before him will die if they do not acknowledge him.

I don't know what you mean by a gathering of angels that exclude Jesus? I don't find this to be biblical.

You're wrong that Rapture verses are only "peaceful." Sometimes normal life is used to show how the world does not recognize either sin or prophecy. That is a far cry from calling this "peaceful."

Jesus compared his Coming to the Flood. And before the Flood violence ruled on earth. Would you call this "peaceful?"

Rev 14 does not have 3 gatherings *during* the Tribulation. For one, the Reign of Antichrist is not the "Great Tribulation." The 'Great Tribulation" is the NT Jewish Diaspora.

2nd, the 3 gatherings are distinct and separate visions without any need for a chronological sequence, and with no time stamp, unless they are directly associated with Christ's Coming Kingdom.

The appearance of the angels itself is part of the vision--not the actual history when it will take place. You are confusing the vision with the fulfillment.



There has only been "one Coming" since the Early Church. A few people tried to have the Church escape judgement just seconds or days before all Hell breaks loose on Judgment Day. But separating the Rapture from the 2nd Coming has never been the eschatology of the Church. Sorry, that view is not supported by Scriptures. And Christians in history certainly never saw it!

1) yes he does kill all refusing the mark
Without question.
2)Rev 14 is not going away.
How do you think you made it go away?