Pre-tribulation raptiure or post-tribulation rapture?

[PlainWord]

And what is God the Father doing during all of this, sitting back on His throne in heaven watching, or does He return also?

 

[valiant]

Scripture like Matthew 26:29?
...This product of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in the kingdom of My Father.

He drank it new with them after the resurrection (Acts 10.41) under the Kingly Rule of God into which they had already entered. His words were an assurance that though He might die, He would rise again.

However I am quite happy to see it as also referring to the fact that when they died they would drink with Him in heaven.

Zechariah 14:2-16
I'll gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city will be captured, and the houses plundered, and the women ravished...Then Jehovah will go forth and fight against those nations...And His feet will stand in that day on the Mount of Olives...Jehovah my God will come, and all the saints with Him...And Jehovah will be King over all the earth...and there will be no more curse, for Jerusalem will dwell securely...And everyone left from all the nations that went forth against Jerusalem will go from year to year to worship the King, Jehovah of hosts.

well you need to see this in its whole context of Zech 12-14 in order to fully see it. but when was this fulfilled.? The destruction of Jerusalem occurred in 70 AD, God went forth to do battle with the nations in Acts (see Isaiah 59.17-20; 1 Thess 5.8), with His people as soldiers of Christ (Eph 6.10 ff; 2 Ti 2.3-4), and the curse was removed from all who believed (Gal 3.10-13), and there was continual day (John 8.12), all darkness was removed, .Jerusalem dwells securely (Gal 4.20 ff; Heb 12.20-22) and all who believe in Him enter the Holiest through the blood of Jesus (Heb 10.19 ff) and rejoice in worship before God (Heb 13.15).

John 8:58
Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Before Abraham came into being, I am. So they picked up stones to throw at Him.

I'm not sure what your point is here?

Acts 1:9-12
While they were looking on, He was lifted up, and a cloud took Him away from their sight. And while they were looking intently into heaven as He went, behold, two men in white clothing stood beside them, Who also said, Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you beheld Him going into heaven. Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet.

yes Jesus will return to the earths atmosphere and will take His people to be with Himself. bringing judgment on the world.

Daniel 2:34-35
A stone was cut out without hands, and it struck the image at its feet of iron and clay and crushed them...And the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth...

and that has happened and is happening even NOW.

Hebrews 1:6
He brings again the Firstborn into the inhabited earth.

oh come on don't play with the Greek to make Scripture mean what you want it to mean. Besides He brought His Firstborn again into the world at the incarnation. that is what the writer to the Hebrews means.

Revelation 10:1-5
And I saw another strong Angel coming down out of heaven, clothed with a cloud; and the rainbow was upon His head, and His face was like the sun, and His feet like pillars of fire; and He had in His hand a little opened scroll. And He placed His right foot on the sea and the left on the land...And the Angel whom I saw standing on the sea and on the land...

You must have a strange mind if you think that this refers to Jesus taking an earthly throne. It simply indicates the sovereignty of God in judgment.

5:10
Made them a kingdom and priests to our God; and they will reign on the earth.

we are a kingdom and priests, and we are reigning on the earth

20:7-9
Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog...And they went up upon the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, and fire came down out of heaven and devoured them

this is already in process. it will end as in Rev 19.

21:1-3, 10, 24-26; 22:2-3
And I saw a new heaven and a new earth...And I saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven...Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will tabernacle with them, and they will be His peoples and God Himself will be with them...The holy city, Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven...And the kings of the earth bring their glory into it. And its gates shall by no means be shut by day...And they will bring the glory and honor of the nations into it...And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations...And the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it.
22:20
Amen. Come, Lord Jesus

this refers to the eternal future

I think you're saying Scripture doesn't reveal any motive of God for your interpretation's view.

not at all. I am simply saying that I am not God and cannot determine ALL His motives. His main motive was that any future earthly kingdom would be an irrelevance. Now that Christ is victorious all that awaits is the eternal kingdom.

As to Christ's motive to return to earth: earth is what He made for man and made man from. And man is made to contain Him.

Rubbish. Earth was for man's initial probation. But when man rises again he will be heavenly, not earthly. Christ's motive is that we share the eternal kingdom with Him. 'My kingdom is not of this world -- flesh and blood will NOT inherit the kingdom of God.

2 Corinthians 4:7
We have this treasure in earthen vessels.

but only until the resurrection. then we will be heavenly vessels.

Revelation 21:2
I saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

but this is to the new spiritual earth in which we will dwell with the Father and the Son. There is never any thought that the Father will become man. The New Jerusalem is the wife of Christ, and is made up of His true people.

Isaiah 65:25
The wolf and the lamb will feed as one, and the lion will eat straw like the ox, and dust will be the serpent's food; they will not harm nor destroy in all My holy mountain, says Jehovah.

symbolic of eternal peace. whether the new spiritual, heavenly earth will really contain animals I would not hazard a guess, but it may well do so

So then when He states in Scripture that
The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ, and He will reign forever and ever;
He means clearly
MY KINGDOM IS NOT OF THIS WORLD ?

you've got it at last. as it says this is the ETERNAL kingdom not some paltry earthly kingdom. All the redeemed from earth share eternity with Him.

Is that also what He means when He says
Now is the judgment of this world; now shall the ruler of this world be cast out. And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself

This was referring to the fact that His cross and resurrection would result in men of all kinds being drawn to Him. What else?

 

[Elin]

Oh come on. you are old enough to know better. The Apostles had watched Jesus rise through the clouds and were still gazing upwards. the angels merely told them that He would return in the clouds 'as they had seen Him go'. They did not mean that He would reproduce every action that he had taken.
You are pressing things too far for the sake of your theory. And that is certainly not a good thing.

You have no basis for asserting the angels spoke of only a part of his ascent.

 

[Elin]

Well I don't tell God how to go about His business, but even Rev 19 doesn't give the impression of Him coming to earth. It is nowhere taught in the New Testament. Where the Scripture is silent, I am silent I suspect the final events will take place far more quickly than we can imagine.

But Scripture parallels his second coming to his first coming (Heb 10:27), which coming was to earth.

 

[valiant]

Originally Posted by valiant Oh come on. you are old enough to know better. The Apostles had watched Jesus rise through the clouds and were still gazing upwards. the angels merely told them that He would return in the clouds 'as they had seen Him go'. They did not mean that He would reproduce every action that he had taken.
You are pressing things too far for the sake of your theory. And that is certainly not a good thing.

You have no basis for asserting the angels spoke of only a part of his ascent.

what the angels were concerned about was to get over the point that one day He would physically return. If they had meant more they would have said so. As I said, you are simply reading in what you want to. But it is not there in fact. What we should understand about it is what is revealed. Anything else is speculation. In all cases Jesus is seen as returning to earth's atmosphere, not to actually stand on the earth (Matt 24.30-31 and parallels; 1 Thess 4.13-18; Rev 19.11. ff)

 

[valiant]

But Scripture parallels his second coming to his first coming (Heb 10:27), which coming was to earth.

His appearance was to MAN, not to earth. It was to gather His own that He came, and His return will be in order to gather His own. Scripture is concerned with OUR future, not with the earths future, which is irrelevant. It will be destroyed.

Look if you want to convince yourself He returns to earth, anything I say won't change your mind. But just recognise that Scripture does not say so.

 

[Elin]

But Scripture parallels his second coming to his first coming (Heb 10:27), which coming was to earth.

His appearance was to MAN, not to earth.

C'mon, valiant. . .you're too informed to make such a silly argument.

His first coming was to earth and his ascent was from earth, where he dwelt amongst us.

It was to gather His own that He came, and His return will be in order to gather His own. Scripture is concerned with OUR future, not with the earths future, which is irrelevant.

Are you concerned with your personal theology, not with the plain import of the parallels in Heb 10:27; Ac 1:11?

And it's not about the earth's future, it's about him coming (descent to terra firma) in the same way he left (ascent from terra firma), paralleling his first coming (to terra firma).

It will be destroyed.

There will also be a new earth, the home of righteousness.

Look if you want to convince yourself He returns to earth, anything I say won't change your mind. But just recognise that Scripture does not say so.

 

[Elin]

Look if you want to convince yourself He returns to earth, anything I say won't change your mind. But just recognise that Scripture does not say so.

It is the plain import of the parallels in Heb 10:27 and Ac 1:11.

 

[valiant]

C'mon, valiant. . .you're too informed to make such a silly argument.

His first coming was to earth and his ascent was from earth, where he dwelt amongst us.

'He came unto His own and His own received Him not, but to as many as did receive Him to them gave He the right to be children of God'. His coming was to MAN.

His second coming from beyond the veil to receive us is also to man. Why should the earth be involved? Oh of course lol to suit your theory?

Are you concerned with your personal theology, not with the plain import of the parallels in Heb 10:27; Ac 1:11?

my personal theology is unimportant. It happens to be based on Scripture. Nothing in Heb 10.27; Acts 1.11 either contradicts it or changes it. But if your position is founded on a wrong interpretation of them then so much the worse for your position

And it's not about the earth's future, it's about him coming (descent to terra firma) in the same way he left (ascent from terra firma), paralleling his first coming (to terra firma).

But Scripture makes no mention of terra firma. In both cases His coming is described as to PEOPLE.

There will also be a new earth, the home of righteousness.

Very true, a 'heavenly earth', a spiritual earth, not one of flesh and blood.

 

[Elin]

what the angels were concerned about was to get over the point that one day He would physically return.

And you know their concerns, how?

If they had meant more they would have said so.

They did say so, that's what "the same way" is.

And it is amplified in the import of the parallels in Heb 10:27 and Ac 1:11, coming to terra firma and ascending from terra firma.

As I said, you are simply reading in what you want to.

It seems you are shoe horning it to mean what you want it to.

But it is not there in fact.

It is in the plain imports of the parallels in Heb 10:27 and Ac 1:11.

Anything else is speculation.

The plain import of the parallels in Heb 10:27 and Ac 1:11 are not speculation.

It is this part of your theology that is speculation.

In all cases Jesus is seen as returning to earth's atmosphere, not to actually stand on the earth (Matt 24.30-31 and parallels; 1 Thess 4.13-18; Rev 19.11. ff)

Not in the plain import of the parallels in Heb 10:27 and Ac 1:11, descending to terra firma and ascending from terra firma.

 

[DiscipleDave]

I am confused by this topic. I have read multiple biblical scriptures that indicate either might occur. Can someone please shed their thoughts on this and explain what makes them feel this way? My feeling could go either way...
on one hand, God is love... and would a God of love allow his followers and true believers to suffer a tribulation?
On the other hand we are already suffering and I feel god allows us pains to "bring us down a notch.." as Christians in America I feel I am somewhat a spoiled brat. Well, I dont know if that is the right term or not, but in this country Christianity is not widely encouraged and it is brushed off frequently. Because of this it is hard to keep a mindset on living a Christlike life and not giving in the all the sinful temptations currently out there. Make sense. My point is, I understand why difficult times are necessary, it brings me closer to My Father.
Please help me clear this confusion.

Here is the Truth.
There are verses that are contrary to pre-tribulation belief.
There are verses that are contrary to post-tribulation belief.
There are NO verses that are contrary to mid-tribulation belief.

Here is the truth. Christians will go through some of the Tribulation Period (during which will be a great falling away from the Faith) but not all of it.

Christians will go through all 7 seals
Christians will go through all 7 trumpets.
At the last Trumpet True Christians are taken up with Jesus Christ into the New City Jerusalem in the sky.
Many, Many, Many who thought they were Christians will weep and gnash their teeth during that mournful day.
Then the 7 vials/bowls are poured out upon the Earth to wipe humankind off the Earth, this will take approx 3 1/2 years, only 144,000 which are born after the Rapture, will survive and make it through the Tribulation Period, these are protected by Angels during the Tribulation period.
This is the Truth which was told to me by God. And NONE of what i said above, contradicts even one verse in Scriptures, but most certainly contradicts with what this generation believes is the Truth.

If what you believe contradicts even one verse in Scriptures then what you believe is WRONG.
verses contradict pre-trib
verses contradict post-trib
ONLY mid-trib there are NO verses which contradict that. Christians will go through some of the Tribulation Period but not all of it. That is the Truth.

^i^ Responding to OP

 

[Elin]

'He came unto His own and His own received Him not, but to as many as did receive Him to them gave He the right to be children of God'. His coming was to MAN.

Agreed. . .and if he put his feet on the earth at his first coming, he can put his feet on the earth at his second coming.

You are denying the obvious.

His second coming from beyond the veil to receive us is also to man.
Why should the earth be involved? Oh of course lol to suit your theory?

But the earth not being involved is not to suit your theory?

my personal theology is unimportant. It happens to be based on Scripture. Nothing in Heb 10.27; Acts 1.11 either contradicts it or changes it.

It seems it is not unimportant enough to acknowledge the plain import of the parallels in Ac 1:11 and Heb 10:27 of a physical ascent from terra firma and a physical return to terra firma.

But if your position is founded on a wrong interpretation of them then so much the worse for your position

Does that knife not cut both ways?

But Scripture makes no mention of terra firma. In both cases
His coming is described as to PEOPLE.

So I need Scripture to state that his first coming took place on earth, and that his ascent was from earth, before I can even know such?

Don't you think that would be kinda' silly?

Very true, a 'heavenly earth', a spiritual earth, not one of flesh and blood.

A physical earth like a physical spiritual resurrection body, as Christ's was.

Are you misunderstanding Paul's use of "spiritual" and "flesh and blood"?

 

[Elin]

Here is the Truth.
There are verses that are contrary to pre-tribulation belief.
There are verses that are contrary to post-tribulation belief.
There are NO verses that are contrary to mid-tribulation belief.

Here is the truth.

Theories of the timing of the rapture are based in uncertain private interpretation of unfulfilled prophetic riddles.

However, certain NT teaching locates the rapture at the end of time, presented here.

Any uncertain interpretation of prophetic riddles not in agreement with certain NT teaching are incorrect interpretations.

 

[DiscipleDave]

Here is the truth.

Theories of the timing of the rapture are based in uncertain private interpretation of unfulfilled prophetic riddles.

However, certain NT teaching locates the rapture at the end of time, presented here.

Any uncertain interpretation of prophetic riddles not in agreement with certain NT teaching are incorrect interpretations.

Interpretations belong to God, NOT to men. Woe to those who interpret the Word of God. It is God that interprets. Many false doctrines and false teaching came into being because MEN INTERPRETED the Word of God, what they THOUGHT was the Truth, they do error and know not the Truth at all, it is God who interprets His own Word. Man should never interpret the Word of God, it is not their place to do so. Woe to this wicked and perverse generation who interpret the Word of God based on their own intellect then teach others what they THINK is the meaning thereof.

^i^ Responding to post # 153

 

[valiant]

Agreed. . .and if he put his feet on the earth at his first coming, he can put his feet on the earth at his second coming.

You are denying the obvious.

no I am going by what Scripture reveals about His second coming to meet His saints IN THE AIR. It nowhere refers to His actually putting His feet on earth..

But the earth not being involved is not to suit your theory?

It makes no difference to my view. But I think you American Christians are obsessed with earth. We in the UK treat the earth lightly. We are taken up with Heaven.

It seems it is not unimportant enough to acknowledge the plain import of the parallels in Ac 1:11 and Heb 10:27 of a physical ascent from terra firma and a physical return to terra firma.

As I have made clear, there is no indication whatsoever that He returns to terra firma. He returns to the air in His glory.

So I need Scripture to state that his first coming took place on earth, and that his ascent was from earth, before I can even know such?

As you know perfectly well we know that His first coming as a physical man resulted in Him walking on earth. He had come to live on earth. But His second coming is very different. He comes in His glorified spiritual, heavenly body, and has no need to stand on earth. He has come to gather His people not to walk on earth.

Don't you think that would be kinda' silly?

yes it was a silly suggestion of yours. but never mind

A physical earth like a physical spiritual resurrection body, as Christ's was.

It is nowhere stated to be a physical spiritual resurrection body. That is a contradiction in terms. Indeed we do not know what His true heavenly body is like. It is doubtful if it is the same as His resurrection body when He revealed Himself to His disciples. We could not all be united with Him in His body if it was.

Are you misunderstanding Paul's use of "spiritual" and "flesh and blood"?

No I am not. He also refers to it as heavenly. 1 Cor 15.47-48. Compare Phil 3.21. Flesh and blood and physical earths are done with. All will then be heavenly.

 

[Gr8grace]

no I am going by what Scripture reveals about His second coming to meet His saints IN THE AIR. It nowhere refers to His actually putting His feet on earth..

Zechariah 14:4 (NASB95)
4 In that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which is in front of Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives will be split in its middle from east to west by a very large valley, so that half of the mountain will move toward the north and the other half toward …

 

[Elin]

Are you misunderstanding Paul's use of "spiritual" and "flesh and blood"?

I am going by what Scripture reveals about His second coming to meet His saints IN THE AIR. It nowhere refers to His actually putting His feet on earth..

Yes, the saints rise to meet him in the air.

It is nowhere stated to be a physical spiritual resurrection body. That is a contradiction in terms.

Okay, so that is where the problem lies.

Paul's use of the word "spiritual" always means the province of the Holy Spirit, as opposed to "natural" sinful man.
Paul never uses the word "spiritual" to specifically denote the non-physical, non-corporeal or non-material.
See Ro 1:11, 7:14, 15:27; 1Co 2:13, 15, 3:1, 9:11, 10:3, 4, 12:1, 14:1, 37; Gal 61; Eph 1:3, 5:19, 6:12; Col 1:9, 3:16.

Paul does not oppose "spiritual" body to "physical" body, he opposes "spiritual" physical body to "natural" physical body (1Co 15:45).
The natural physical body is perishable, sinful, weak; while the spiritual physical body is imperishable, sinless, with power (1Co 15:44).

Likewise with "flesh and blood."
Paul's use of it does not mean human tissue, but is another term for the natural (sinful, weak perishable) body.
"Flesh and blood;" i.e., the natural (sinful, perishable, weak) physical body "cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable (natural) inherit the imperishable (spiritual)." (1Co 15:50)

Jesus is the firstborn from the dead (Col 1:18; Heb 12:22-23), the pattern of all those to be resurrected from death as he was.
His resurrection body was physical (Lk 24:39), and ours will be also.
Jesus' resurrection physical body was able to pass through solid matter and be in a room whose doors were locked (Jn 20:19).
So while physical, it was not the same at his pre-resurrection body.

Our "physical" resurrection body does not mean it will be like the physical body we have now, as Jesus's resurrection body also is not like the physical body he had before his resurrection.

 

[valiant]

Zechariah 14:4 (NASB95)
4 In that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which is in front of Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives will be split in its middle from east to west by a very large valley, so that half of the mountain will move toward the north and the other half toward …

yep that happened around 33 AD, and in what followed..

 

[valiant]

Yes, the saints rise to meet him in the air.


Okay, so that is where the problem lies.

Paul's use of the word "spiritual" always means the province of the Holy Spirit, as opposed to "natural" sinful man.

Not so. It has various meanings and is used in various ways. A person is spiritual because of the presence of the Holy Spirit.
But a spiritual body is a body of the nature of spirit.

Paul never uses the word "spiritual" to specifically denote the non-physical, non-corporeal or non-material.

well he does it in 1 Cor 15 LOL

See Ro 1:11, 7:14, 15:27; 1Co 2:13, 15, 3:1, 9:11, 10:3, 4, 12:1, 14:1, 37; Gal 61; Eph 1:3, 5:19, 6:12; Col 1:9, 3:16.

There are a variety of uses in these citations. But are you saying that the spiritual hosts of wickedness in Eph 6.12 are not in contrast to physical hosts? I disagree with you. The whole point is that they are spirit and not flesh. Just as our bodies will be spirit and not flesh.

Paul does not oppose "spiritual" body to "physical" body, he opposes "spiritual" physical body to "natural" physical body (1Co 15:45).

But the natural body IS a physical body as you say. And it contrasts with the spiritual body which is not natural and is not physical. Indeed this is speaking of a Christian's natural body, so in that sense it is already spiritual. So there are two contrasting uses of spiritual.

The natural physical body is perishable, sinful, weak; while the spiritual physical body is imperishable, sinless, with power (1Co 15:44).

no, no this is 'cheating'. you cannot define the spiritual body as physical and then say this proves it is physical. If it was physical it would not be imperishable. It is because it is spiritual and NOT physical that it is imperishable.

Likewise with "flesh and blood."
Paul's use of it does not mean human tissue, but is another term for the natural (sinful, weak perishable) body.

but flesh and blood IS human tissue. You really cannot just change it to mean what you want it to mean for your convenience.

"Flesh and blood;" i.e., the natural (sinful, perishable, weak) physical body "cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable (natural) inherit the imperishable (spiritual)." (1Co 15:50)

Let us rather say that the natural physical body made of human tissue cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Thus the spiritual body is NOT a natural physical body made of human tissue. That is why it CAN inherit the spiritual kingdom of God.

Jesus is the firstborn from the dead (Col 1:18; Heb 12:22-23), the pattern of all those to be resurrected from death as he was.

But we do not know what He is like now in His resurrection body. And in fact firstborn does NOT indicate likeness. It indicates priority. Thus your conclusion is invalid. Although it may well be that our resurrection bodies will be similar to His NOW
.

His resurrection body was physical (Lk 24:39),

The body He took on for revealing Himself too His disciples in order to prove that He had risen appeared physical. But it was not really physical for it could dematerialise in a split second. What of its physical nature then?

and ours will be also.

why should it be? will we appear to men to prove we are alive?

Jesus' resurrection physical body was able to pass through solid matter and be in a room whose doors were locked (Jn 20:19). So while physical, it was not the same at his pre-resurrection body.

Don't you see the contradiction? His body could pass through solid matter. So it was not physical. But they could feel it. then it was physical. As I have said above Jesus could make it appear physical when He needed to (compare the angels in Gen 18.1).
We can draw no conclusions from a body that could pass through walls and could dematerialise at will

Our "physical" resurrection body does not mean it will be like the physical body we have now, as Jesus's resurrection body also is not like the physical body he had before his resurrection.

But it will not be a physical body. It will be a spiritual body. Nor n se say that it will be exactly like the body in which Jesus revealed Himself which could dematerialise at will.

Note the description of our resurrection body. 'As is the earthy, such are they also who are earthy, and as is the heavenly, such are they also who are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we will also bear the image of the heavenly (1 Cor 15.48-49). We will no longer be earthy but heavenly. Sorry, but that busts your theory wide open.

Furthermore the use of spiritual of our resurrection body is in contrast with our natural body which is also spiritual in the sense that you describe. 'Spiritual body' is in this case thus describing the essential nature of the body (as with the spiritual hosts of wickedness). As Phil 3.21 makes clear it is a glorified body. It is thus not using spiritual in the sense which you describe.

Christ's glorified body will not be like the body in which He revealed Himself to His disciples. That was for that purpose only. It appeared and disappeared at will. His real glorified body is beyond anything we can ever know on this earth. As Scripture says we are united with HIM in His body. That requires something unique.

 

[flob]

yep [Zechariah 14:4] happened around 33 AD, and in what followed..

what a joke.
Jehovah 'fought' against the nations = the apostles preached the good news to the Jews first, then to the Gentiles.
No, that 's not what Jehovah's fighting means in Zech 14.
And the mountain split--------I think I remember Valiant clueing me in. That means 'some disciples went south, some north...
or some east, some west'..... And Israel was delivered....how tiresome. It's beyond silly,
Tiresome.........yet i'm waiting to hear the silly symbolic interpretation of Revelation 20. Part of it Valiant starts literally, in his mind....disembodied souls in heaven.........so i'm waiting to hear what the Gog part means, since he feel free to reject literality there