"The Catching Away"

[revlynn]

Thanks guys. I really appreciate your understanding and prayers. I have had back problems since my early 20s - four areas of serious damage down my spine. Basically, I'm a walking miracle - according to the doc, with the damage I have I should be in major pain 24/7, but I'm not. Most of the time I get away with doing all sorts of things that one really shouldn't do with a bad back - and occasionally some that one shouldn't do even without a bad back - but every so often it just lets me know it's there and wants some attention. Most of the time when it gives trouble I have no idea what caused it, but yesterday I got caught with a coughing fit just as I was leaning forward to open the curtains. It jarred my spine and sent the whole of my back into a kind of spasm, hence the day of pain. It has improved a little today, but is more generalized.

I'm a stubborn old biddy who totally refuses to take medication unless I absolutely have to - doc thinks I'm crazy - but if it gets really bad I will take a Brufen (ibruprophen, double strength.) Yesterday I took two. 'Nuff said. 'Nuff grumbling.

As for 1 Thess. and the man of sin the A/C.........he cannot be revealed until the church is removed and then he is revealed and Daniel tells us his rule will be for 7 years which is the entire Tribulation period NOT AFTERWARDS.
The A/C ruleing after the Tribulation makes no sense at all. Jesus comes physically at Armageddon, the end of the Tribulation !!!!

Major, I think you misread my post:

Now lets look at the passage in 2 Thess. The key is this verse:
2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
Who is the "Man of Sin"? Most commentators would agree this refers to the Antichrist. But wait ... the Antichrist's rule is during the tribulation. So this clearly places the return of Christ and the catching up after the trib.

You see I quite clearly said that A/C's reign will be during the trib, but since "that day" (the return of the Lord and catching up of the saints) will not come till after the A/C is revealed, that means the catching up must be after the trib.

I think I have addressed the question of tribulation saints here:

Scripture makes it clear that there will be believers here on earth during the tribulation:
Rev 7:14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
To get around this, those who hold to a pre-trib rapture have to teach that some will come to the Lord during the trib. However, two things stand against this:
1) If, as pre-tribers do, we take the "one who letteth" and who must be taken away (2 Thess 2:7) to be the Holy Spirit, how is anyone going to be saved, since it is only through the work of the Holy Spirit that we are brought to Christ?
2) Jesus said that His return would be "as the days of Noah" and "as the days of Lot" (Luke 17:26-28). What happened in the days of Noah? Noah's family were taken into the ark and judgement came. No second chances. No-one able to say, "Oh, now I see what is happening and I know God is real after all. Please pull me up into the ark too." Same in the days of Lot. That tells me that when Jesus Christ returns to this earth, that will be the end of chances for mankind. Those who are saved will be caught up with Him, everyone else will face judgement. No tribulation saints. Therefore, since the Bible clearly says there will be saints during the tribulation, the catching up must happen after it.

Actually, this whole discussion (in this and other threads) has been an interesting exercise for me. When I first got involved in a discussion on this topic here on CFS, I was leaning toward a post-trib position, but was still open to the other two (pre and mid.) I said then, and still say that the most important thing is that we know that Jesus is coming back and that we live in such a way as to be ready, whenever that event might take place. But, as I have examined the arguments put forward for the pre-trib position, I have become more and more sure that this is not Scriptural and more convinced that Jesus' return will take place at the end of the tribulation period.

Hi Lynn,

I am curious. Your attention to the scriptures is admirable and your observations that Christ returns only once and that when He does ALL who are in Christ (dead and alive) will be raised up to meet Him in the air is according to scripture. But how is it then that you are expecting Christ to return and THEN reign for 1,000 years? After all does not Revelation 20 tell us that ONLY those beheaded (literally decapitated) for Christ are raised to life to reign WITH Him for 1,000 (the 1,000 years clearly referring to how long THEY reign with Him, not how long HE reigns) BUT that the REST (remainder) of the dead are not raised until sometime AFTER the 1,000 years. We are told the raising of those who were beheaded is the first ressurection therefore there is none before it, and that nobody else is raised until sometime AFTER the 1,000 years.

As you pointed out we know from elsewhere in the Bible that when Christ does return ALL who are dead in Christ by whatever means, and all those still alive in Christ are raised AND changed. We know from Rev 20 that this does not occur until sometime AFTER the 1,000 years has ended.

Likewise we know from both Revelation and Zechariah that Jesus returns when the nations are gathered together against Israel and Jerusalem. And we know from Rev 20 that Satan is not loosed to gather the nations against Israel until AFTER the 1,000 has ended.

I am just curious why you believe the scriptures when they clearly tell us that Jesus does not return before the Great Tribulation but do not believe the SAME scriptures when they equally clearly tell us Jesus does not return before the 1,000 years either.

Misty, as I read my Bible, the return of Jesus (Rev. 19) occurs before the establishment of the millennial Kingdom (Rev. 20) The nations have already been gathered against Israel at Har Meggido in Rev. 16, and at His return Jesus defeats them with the sword in His mouth (His Word.) As I understand it, this is the point at which the dead in Christ will rise, and those who are living will be transformed and caught up to meet Him in the air and return with Him as part of His victory march.

I don't see Revelation 20:4 as suggesting that the tribulation martyrs will be the only ones resurrected at that time, or the only ones reigning with Christ:
Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Rather, I see this as simply emphasizing the victory of Christ over the A/C - even though he had tried to destroy these saints, they live and reign with Christ. I believe the "rest of the dead" in verse 5 refers to those who have died outside of Christ. This is supported by
Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
and
Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
Since these verses make it clear that the choice is be part of the first resurrection, or be part of the second death, the first resurrection must include all true believers who have been saved by the blood of Jesus. That being the case, verse 6 also suggests that it is all believers - not just the tribulation martyrs - who will reign with Christ for the thousand years.

The uprising of satan and the rise of Gog and Magog against Israel at the end of the millennium is a separate event from Armageddon:
Rev 20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

blessings,

Lynn

 

[Major]

I understand your position Lynn, I just do not agree with it.

The Bible describes the Rapture and Second Coming as different events.
The Bible must see the Rapture (Jn. 14:1-14; I Cor. 15:51-58; 1 Thes. 4:13-18) and the Second Coming (Zech. 14:1-21; Matt. 24:29-31; Mk. 13:24-27; Lk. 21:25-27; Rev. 19) as separate events, because when the verses are compared they describe two very different events

1)Rapture — believers meet Christ in the air
Second Coming — Christ returns to the Mount of Olives to meet the believers on earth

2)Rapture — Mount of Olives is unchanged
Second Coming — Mount of Olives is divided, forming a valley east of Jerusalem

3) Rapture — living believers obtain glorified bodies
Second Coming — living believers remain in same bodies
4)Rapture — believers go to heaven
Second Coming — glorified believers come from heaven, earthly believers stay on earth

5)Rapture — world left unjudged and living in sin
Second Coming — world is judged and righteousness is established

6) Rapture — depicts deliverance of the Church from wrath
Second Coming — depicts deliverance of believers who endured wrath

7) Rapture — no signs precede it
Second Coming — many signs precede it

8) Rapture — revealed only in New Testament
Second Coming — revealed in both Old and New Testaments

9) Rapture — deals with only the saved
Second Coming — deals with both the saved and unsaved

10) Rapture — Satan remains free
Second Coming — Satan is bound and thrown into the Abyss

Since the Rapture and Second Coming clearly are different events that do not occur at the same time, this would rule out a Post-Tribulation Rapture scenario.

 

[Major]

It just ain´t right, is it? I didn´t have the time to go to the hospital in the middle of the fight and it should be that if we were mean enough to go ahead and fight then for what was right, that we should not hurt so cotton-pickin´ bad now!!
Praying for all three of you.

Actually Bill, my back problems began when I was in the middle of a fight. VA doctors told me it would get worse as I grow older and boy were they ever right.

 

[mistmann]

Thanks guys. I really appreciate your understanding and prayers. I have had back problems since my early 20s - four areas of serious damage down my spine. Basically, I'm a walking miracle - according to the doc, with the damage I have I should be in major pain 24/7, but I'm not. Most of the time I get away with doing all sorts of things that one really shouldn't do with a bad back - and occasionally some that one shouldn't do even without a bad back - but every so often it just lets me know it's there and wants some attention. Most of the time when it gives trouble I have no idea what caused it, but yesterday I got caught with a coughing fit just as I was leaning forward to open the curtains. It jarred my spine and sent the whole of my back into a kind of spasm, hence the day of pain. It has improved a little today, but is more generalized.

I'm a stubborn old biddy who totally refuses to take medication unless I absolutely have to - doc thinks I'm crazy - but if it gets really bad I will take a Brufen (ibruprophen, double strength.) Yesterday I took two. 'Nuff said. 'Nuff grumbling.


Major, I think you misread my post:
You see I quite clearly said that A/C's reign will be during the trib, but since "that day" (the return of the Lord and catching up of the saints) will not come till after the A/C is revealed, that means the catching up must be after the trib.

I think I have addressed the question of tribulation saints here:


Actually, this whole discussion (in this and other threads) has been an interesting exercise for me. When I first got involved in a discussion on this topic here on CFS, I was leaning toward a post-trib position, but was still open to the other two (pre and mid.) I said then, and still say that the most important thing is that we know that Jesus is coming back and that we live in such a way as to be ready, whenever that event might take place. But, as I have examined the arguments put forward for the pre-trib position, I have become more and more sure that this is not Scriptural and more convinced that Jesus' return will take place at the end of the tribulation period.

Misty, as I read my Bible, the return of Jesus (Rev. 19) occurs before the establishment of the millennial Kingdom (Rev. 20) The nations have already been gathered against Israel at Har Meggido in Rev. 16, and at His return Jesus defeats them with the sword in His mouth (His Word.) As I understand it, this is the point at which the dead in Christ will rise, and those who are living will be transformed and caught up to meet Him in the air and return with Him as part of His victory march.

I don't see Revelation 20:4 as suggesting that the tribulation martyrs will be the only ones resurrected at that time, or the only ones reigning with Christ:
Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Rather, I see this as simply emphasizing the victory of Christ over the A/C - even though he had tried to destroy these saints, they live and reign with Christ. I believe the "rest of the dead" in verse 5 refers to those who have died outside of Christ. This is supported by
Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
and
Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
Since these verses make it clear that the choice is be part of the first resurrection, or be part of the second death, the first resurrection must include all true believers who have been saved by the blood of Jesus. That being the case, verse 6 also suggests that it is all believers - not just the tribulation martyrs - who will reign with Christ for the thousand years.

The uprising of satan and the rise of Gog and Magog against Israel at the end of the millennium is a separate event from Armageddon:
Rev 20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

blessings,

Lynn

Hi Lyn,
Glad to hear you are on the mend. I share your aversion to taking medication unless absolutely necessary. It is surprising how much pain one can actually put up with and dismiss with the Lord's help. Pain is often our bodies way of saying "Hey, don't do that." The Lord designed us with pain receptors as a protection against harm and I often wonder why people, eg. sports professionals, choose to numb the pain so they can keep on inflicting yet more damage to their bodies. But then I wonder why people do a lot of the things they do

But as to this interesting 1,000 years I hear what you are saying but ask yourself why Rev 20 specifically mentions those beheaded for Christ and not just those who die in Christ as mentioned elsewhere? Also no mention is made of those still alive in Christ. Consider also all those who have died in Christ since 96AD who have never even been asked to take the mark of the beast, many have not even suffered great tribulation.

In Rev 20 John has gone to great detail to specifically identify exactly who it is who is raised. I know that many, when they cannot believe what is actually written retreat to the "catch all" explanation of "allegorical" or "metaphorical" but John is very specific here as to who is and who is not raised, and it is NOT all who are in Christ alive or dead that are raised to reign with Him 1,000 years but those who had been beheaded for Christ who did not do those things listed after (that is why they were beheaded). Regarding the second death John has not said these are the ONLY ones to escape the second death but that those who are raised TO LIVE have their salvation ensured at the time they are raised. The reason this is specified is because they a raised to LIVE again on earth as men not as the Angels in Heaven.

It should also be noted that the battle before the 1,000 years is NOT the battle at Armageddon spoken of in Ezekiel 38-39, Zechariah 14 and Revelation 20:7-9 (specifically noted as AFTER the 1,000 years). Note the armies are not gathered against Israel and Jerusalem but against the unnamed rider of the white horse who as *A* name (note not HIS name) written on his thigh and vesture. At Armageddon the armies of the nation are under the impression they are gathering to fight only the people of Israel and the City of Jerusalem, not a heavenly army led by somebody on a white horse. In neither Ezekiel nor Zechariah is any mention made of a white horse or the 1,000 years and in Rev 20 it is made abundantly clear that the battle at Armageddon they describe takes place AFTER the 1,000 years, not before. And we know from many places Jesus returns at the battle of Armageddon not over 1,000 years before it.

In addition while both Ezekiel and Zechariah infer it, Rev 20:10-15 makes it crystal clear that immediately after the Battle at Armageddon comes judgement and the DESTRUCTION of THIS world, not 1,000 years of reign over it. It also notes that those found in the book of Life, not just those from the first resurrection, do not suffer the second death.

But remember also what Jesus said to His disciples face to face BEFORE He ascended. He said clearly and unmistakably :-

John 14:2 "In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also."

Jesus did not say He shall return to reign over the Earth for 1,000 years but that He will return for the purpose of taking His people FROM the Earth to the place He will have ALREADY prepared for them. In other words the New Earth will already exist when Jesus returns. This is consistent with the "rapture" that coincides with the return of Jesus and BEFORE His feet touch the mount of Olives. ALL the dead in Christ and all those still alive in Christ shall not only rise to meet Him in the air (for His angels shall go out around the world to gather the elect to Him) but shall be changed to become as the angels for flesh and blood quite literally cannot go where Jesus will take us (flesh and blood CANNOT inherit the Kingdom of God). Remember the moon sized New Jerusalem is seen by John descending on to the NEW Earth, not THIS Earth.

While you are resting that back of yours ponder for a little while what ALL of the Prophets and Apostles of the Lord are actually saying to you by their OWN words, for they mean exactly what they say, and they say exactly what they mean.

If you are wondering how those can reign WITH Christ for 1,000 years without Christ's physical return remember what Christ told His disciples both then and now even though He then physically ascended up into Heaven:-

Matt 18:20 "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."

Matt 28:20 ... "and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen."

Jesus is reminding us He has the power and ability to be in two or more places at once. Or, in other words He does not have to be there - to be there. When you are Lord of all time and space all things are possible. Just because Jesus has ascended into Heaven does not mean He is absent from the Earth.

 

[th1bill]

Actually Bill, my back problems began when I was in the middle of a fight. VA doctors told me it would get worse as I grow older and boy were they ever right.

My Dad and Top, back in Germany, both told me I was not going to like what I had 1040ed to do and that if I wasn´t killed that it would hurt the rest of my life. (and the old fossil gently grins as he leans back in his powered scooter, purchased by the V.A.) My Dad served with Custer´s unit in WW II and was never ashamed, so did Top. With two heroes like that... they expected me not to follow? Pain be damned! I never saw one Infantry-man that was mad because we landed in the middle of a fire fight.

 

[Major]

My Dad and Top, back in Germany, both told me I was not going to like what I had 1040ed to do and that if I wasn´t killed that it would hurt the rest of my life. (and the old fossil gently grins as he leans back in his powered scooter, purchased by the V.A.) My Dad served with Custer´s unit in WW II and was never ashamed, so did Top. With two heroes like that... they expected me not to follow? Pain be damned! I never saw one Infantry-man that was mad because we landed in the middle of a fire fight.

AMEN to that my brother!! AMEN!

 

[Major]

The Rapture has Scriptural referrences.

1 Thess. 4:16-17...........
For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.

1 Cor. 15:23................
But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming.

Paul is explaining 3 things here:

1). Christ is the FIRSTFRUITS of resurrection.
2). The THEY that are Christs's are the dead IN Christ of 1 Thess. 4:16, who at the Rapture will rise first.
3). AT HIS COMING is referrence of the Rapture, and NOT AT THE SECOND COMING at Armagedddon.

1 Cor. 15:51-52.......................
Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed— in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

This is a NEW teaching not yet revealed but is now being done so much like the church was a MYSTERY as well.

Now in 2 Thess. 2:1-8 Paul once again addresess 3 issiues:

1). The Second coming.
2). The Raptue.
3). The revealing of the A/C.

He is telling the church that as long as they remained they would be the "restraining force untill they were removed (vs 7). That is because the Holy Spirit indwells in the believer and the believers make up the church.

In Rev. 3:8-10 God clearly identifies the body that will be Raptured. Speaking to the church of Philadelphia He says.......
"“I know your works. See, I have set before you an open door, and no one can shut it; for you have a little strength, have kept My word, and have not denied My name. Indeed I will make those of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie—indeed I will make them come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you. Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.

No matter how we slice that, it comes out as a promise to he believers that they will not go through the Tribulation but will be removed.

WHY???????????????????

1 Thess. 5:9 Paul tells the church that.....................
"For God did not appoint us to wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ".

It then becomes claer that only the Raptured believers are not appointed a time of God's wrath which in fact the confirms Revelation 3:10.

Then Rev. 4 opens with........
"After these things I looked, and behold, a door standing open in heaven. And the first voice which I heard was like a trumpet speaking with me, saying, “Come up here, and I will show you things which must take place after this.”
John now is showing us the same open door of Rev. 3:8 and when he hears the call to " COME UP HITHER"
he experiences God's promise of Rev. 3:10 to Rapture true believers.

As for TIMING.

Daniel's prophecies were expressly directed at the JEWS as a nation and Jerusalem as their Holy City. In Daniel 9:27 he gives us an overview of the start, middle and end of the final WEEK.....or the LAST & YEARS that comes before the Second Coming of Christ.

I have already listed 1 Thess. 4:16-17 as the "CATCHING AWAY" of the church of true believers thereby fulfilling His promise that the Church would not go through the wrath of God. That my dear friends is a "SET TIME" by God.

The Rapture is important to the END TIMES because it must take place before the identity of the A/C who confirms the 7 year peace treaty for the Jewish nation, can be revealed. This confirming or action of a peace pact is the start of the 7 year long series of events we call the Tribulation and ends with Armageddon.

Daniel 9:26-27................
" And after the sixty-two weeks
Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; ------(Crucifixion)
And the people of the prince who is to come -----(Romans )
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. -----------(70 AD)
The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined. -----------(Set Times are in place)
Then "he" shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; --- (HE is the A/C----One week is 7 YEARS)
But in the middle of the week -----------------------------------------(3 1/2 year or 1260 days @ 360 days a year)
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. ---------------------(Offering indicates a New Temple)
And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
Even until the consummation, which is determined,
Is poured out on the desolate.”

By understanding Daniels and Paul's prophecies together we can understand that the significance of the Rapture to the End Times is the clear Biblical fact that the Rapture is the next prophetic event on God's time table that must take place BEFORE THE PEACE TREATY and the individual behind it can be revealed which in fact begins the 70th week of Daniel or if you prefer, THE TRIBULATION PERIOD.

 

[revlynn]

Hi Guys. I haven't left the conversation, just very busy at the moment. Be back soon.

blessings,

Lynn

 

[mistmann]

The Rapture has Scriptural referrences.

1 Thess. 4:16-17...........
For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.

1 Cor. 15:23................
But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming.

Paul is explaining 3 things here:

1). Christ is the FIRSTFRUITS of resurrection.
2). The THEY that are Christs's are the dead IN Christ of 1 Thess. 4:16, who at the Rapture will rise first.
3). AT HIS COMING is referrence of the Rapture, and NOT AT THE SECOND COMING at Armagedddon.

1 Cor. 15:51-52.......................
Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed— in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

This is a NEW teaching not yet revealed but is now being done so much like the church was a MYSTERY as well.

Now in 2 Thess. 2:1-8 Paul once again addresess 3 issiues:

1). The Second coming.
2). The Raptue.
3). The revealing of the A/C.

He is telling the church that as long as they remained they would be the "restraining force untill they were removed (vs 7). That is because the Holy Spirit indwells in the believer and the believers make up the church.

In Rev. 3:8-10 God clearly identifies the body that will be Raptured. Speaking to the church of Philadelphia He says.......
"“I know your works. See, I have set before you an open door, and no one can shut it; for you have a little strength, have kept My word, and have not denied My name. Indeed I will make those of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie—indeed I will make them come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you. Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.

No matter how we slice that, it comes out as a promise to he believers that they will not go through the Tribulation but will be removed.

WHY???????????????????

1 Thess. 5:9 Paul tells the church that.....................
"For God did not appoint us to wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ".

It then becomes claer that only the Raptured believers are not appointed a time of God's wrath which in fact the confirms Revelation 3:10.

Then Rev. 4 opens with........
"After these things I looked, and behold, a door standing open in heaven. And the first voice which I heard was like a trumpet speaking with me, saying, “Come up here, and I will show you things which must take place after this.”
John now is showing us the same open door of Rev. 3:8 and when he hears the call to " COME UP HITHER"
he experiences God's promise of Rev. 3:10 to Rapture true believers.

As for TIMING.

Daniel's prophecies were expressly directed at the JEWS as a nation and Jerusalem as their Holy City. In Daniel 9:27 he gives us an overview of the start, middle and end of the final WEEK.....or the LAST & YEARS that comes before the Second Coming of Christ.

I have already listed 1 Thess. 4:16-17 as the "CATCHING AWAY" of the church of true believers thereby fulfilling His promise that the Church would not go through the wrath of God. That my dear friends is a "SET TIME" by God.

The Rapture is important to the END TIMES because it must take place before the identity of the A/C who confirms the 7 year peace treaty for the Jewish nation, can be revealed. This confirming or action of a peace pact is the start of the 7 year long series of events we call the Tribulation and ends with Armageddon.

Daniel 9:26-27................
" And after the sixty-two weeks
Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself; ------(Crucifixion)
And the people of the prince who is to come -----(Romans )
Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. -----------(70 AD)
The end of it shall be with a flood,
And till the end of the war desolations are determined. -----------(Set Times are in place)
Then "he" shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; --- (HE is the A/C----One week is 7 YEARS)
But in the middle of the week -----------------------------------------(3 1/2 year or 1260 days @ 360 days a year)
He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. ---------------------(Offering indicates a New Temple)
And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate,
Even until the consummation, which is determined,
Is poured out on the desolate.”

By understanding Daniels and Paul's prophecies together we can understand that the significance of the Rapture to the End Times is the clear Biblical fact that the Rapture is the next prophetic event on God's time table that must take place BEFORE THE PEACE TREATY and the individual behind it can be revealed which in fact begins the 70th week of Daniel or if you prefer, THE TRIBULATION PERIOD.

Major, As you know I have in the past pointed out that the scriptures themselves ( Dan 12:7 ) declare that the latter propheies of Daniel END with the scattering of the power of the Holy people. This is now an historic event that occurred with the fall of the last Jewish stronghold of MASADA in 74AD which was exactly 70 "weeks" after the restoration of Jerusalem was completed. But on that I guess we will continue to agree to disagree. People can read for themselves what Daniel himself wrote in HIS book and what the pages of world history record and make up their own minds.

My puzzlement here is something else. I note you quote 1 Thess. 4:16-17 and then claim that the "rapture" it describes does not coincide with the second coming of Christ.

But lets put this passage in a slightly wider context by including the verse before it also:-

1 Thess 4:15 "For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 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."

What puzzles me is why you are using a passage that clearly declares that at the very time Jesus returns (second coming) all those in Christ alive or dead shall be raised (raptured) to meet Him in the air and remain with Him for all eternity, in support of a claim that is directly CONTRADICTORY to it?? This passage, more than any of the others that also support it declares without doubt that those in Christ are "raptured" AT the second coming of Christ. There is no third coming of Christ spoken of anywhere in the Bible. The first coming is at His birth, the second coming is at His return when He DESCENDS from above in the same manner that He ascended.

Your claim that the second coming and the rapture occur at different times is at surprisingly (and puzzingly) considerable odds with the word of God.

 

[Major]

Major, As you know I have in the past pointed out that the scriptures themselves ( Dan 12:7 ) declare that the latter propheies of Daniel END with the scattering of the power of the Holy people. This is now an historic event that occurred with the fall of the last Jewish stronghold of MASADA in 74AD which was exactly 70 "weeks" after the restoration of Jerusalem was completed. But on that I guess we will continue to agree to disagree. People can read for themselves what Daniel himself wrote in HIS book and what the pages of world history record and make up their own minds.

My puzzlement here is something else. I note you quote 1 Thess. 4:16-17 and then claim that the "rapture" it describes does not coincide with the second coming of Christ.

But lets put this passage in a slightly wider context by including the verse before it also:-

1 Thess 4:15 "For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 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."

What puzzles me is why you are using a passage that clearly declares that at the very time Jesus returns (second coming) all those in Christ alive or dead shall be raised (raptured) to meet Him in the air and remain with Him for all eternity, in support of a claim that is directly CONTRADICTORY to it?? This passage, more than any of the others that also support it declares without doubt that those in Christ are "raptured" AT the second coming of Christ. There is no third coming of Christ spoken of anywhere in the Bible. The first coming is at His birth, the second coming is at His return when He DESCENDS from above in the same manner that He ascended.

Your claim that the second coming and the rapture occur at different times is at surprisingly (and puzzingly) considerable odds with the word of God.

Your "pointing out" as you call it of Daniel being accomplished in 70 AD being fulfilled is NOT A CORRECT Bible teaching but is in fact your opinion which as we have discussed is completly wrong ..IMO.
YOUR "pointing out" does not in fact make your opinion correct my friend. It is JUST your opinion.

Your comment was..............
"Your claim that the second coming and the rapture occur at different times is at surprisingly (and puzzingly) considerable odds with the word of God."

YES, to you it would be puzzeling as it seems a lot of Biblical things are to you. But to me, it is the clear teaching of the Word of God as I have the same access to it as do you.

And by the way, not that names matter to me or positions, but my understanding of the Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ being TWO events seperated by the 7 year Tribulation period is not just something I came up with my friend. It is the PRE-MILLENIAL position of the End Times. This theology is taught in almost all Christian colleges now and supported by great men such as:
Drs. Edward Dobson, Charles Feinburg, Ed Hinson, W. M. Kroll, Harold Wilmington, Billy Graham, J. Vernon McGee, Oliver B. Green, John Walrood, Charles Schafer, Wade Singeltary and the list goes on and on and on.

Your way of commenting on this teaching tends to cast a shadow on me personally and it seems to make it an out of the way fringe theology from me and that your opinion is of greater Biblical authority. I only list these great men of Biblical theology to show others reading this material that is not the case in any what what soever and it is actually your opinion which is on the fringe of acceptability.

My comment to you is..........
"As we often are when it comes to the Bible, we are once again in disagreement."

Your mis-understanding of the TWO seperate events of the Rapture and the Second Coming are equally puzzeling to me. It is very discomforting to see one who is knowledable in Biblical things so easily distracted from the truth of Biblical teaching when it is so obvioulsy presented by the same Scripture we both read.

I can not help but wonder why you continually must cast doubt on ALL the people you respond to????????

WHY do you feel the need for example to use the phraseology of ................................................................
"Major, As you know I have in the past pointed out that the scriptures themselves ( Dan 12:7 ) declare that the latter propheies of Daniel END with the scattering of the power of the Holy people."

Then this............
"Your claim that the second coming and the rapture occur at different times is at surprisingly (and puzzingly) considerable odds with the word of God".

Why do you feel the need to put down or condasend the thoughts of others.???????????
Do you think challenging others belief's add validity to yours????

Just post what you believe the Scriptures are saying to YOU and I will do the same and PLEASE cut out the attitude of condasention and confrontation with not just me........but all others as well.

Blessings to you.

 

[Major]

"End Times" is specifically referring to the seven year period of Daniel 9:27 known as the 70th week of Daniel.

No matter who tells you that the 70th week of Daniel has taken place....REJECT THAT THOUGHT!!!

Daniel's prophecies were expressly directed at the Jews as a Nation, and Jerusalem as their Holy City. In the 27th versehe presents an overview of the beginning, middle and end of the final week, or last seven years that precedes The Second Coming of Christ.

By Definition The Rapture is the 'catching away' of the true believer in Jesus, as described in IThes.4:16,17, thereby fulfilling His promise that the Church was not appointed to wrath (IThes5:9), and completing the age of the Church.

The Rapture is significant to "End Times" because, the Rapture must occur before the identity of the individual, who confirms the pact, leading to peace for the Jewish Nation, can be revealed. This action (the confirming) also initiates a seven year long series of eventsthat ends with the Second Coming of Christ.

Matthew, Chapter 24, has Jesus foretelling of the signs that would precede His second coming [not the rapture], and issues a warning concerning those future events. He instructs us to know that the end of Daniel's 70th week is "even at the door"when we see these signs happening. However, before it can end, at the second coming of Christ, it must begin.

Daniel clarifies the beginning of the seven year period when he says: (speaking of a future ruler from v.26). "...then HE shall confirm a covenant with many for one week..." (9:27). Here Daniel is referring to a 'pact' that a particular individual will make with the Jews and their adversaries, that bring them peace. It is the confirmation of this 'pact' that begins the seven year period, not the Rapture. A WEEK in Hebrew is the word "SHEMA" and means a 'SET OF SEVENS". If we go back to the context of Daniel 9:1-4 we see clearly that his focus was on YEARS. Therefore.....a WEEK means a set of SEVEN years.

To grasp the significance of that event, please turn your attention to Paul's second letter to the Thessalonians to realize that the Rapture of the Church must precede the confirmation of the pact and the identification of the individual responsible for it.
"...And now you know what with-holdeth that he might be revealed in his time . For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work, only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy him with the brightness of His coming...".(IIThes.2:6,7,8)

Paul is referring to the particular individual who is responsible for establishing the pact, that brings the Jews peace, as the lawless one, son of Perdition, Man of Sin. He is reminding the Church at Thessalonica that there is a 'Restraining Force' withholding the identity of this singular person.
'...only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way...'. (v.7)
The force that does the RESTRAINING is Holy Spirit. The 'HE' that is the restraining force indwells in the believers that make up the body of Christ, the CHURCH, and until they(Church) are Raptured this individual cannot be revealed.

By linking Daniel's and Paul's prophecies together we can understand that the significance of the Rapture to end time is the fact that the Rapture is the first event that must happen before the pact and the individual behind it can be revealed beginning Daniel's 70th week.

The fact is, the true believers will not see peace come to the Jews. They will only see the events leading to an eventual peace, but peace can't come until after the Rapture happens. And then, with the agreement on peace, the seven year clock begins to tick.

It is important to note that even though Paul is describing him as a man of sin' and 'son of Perdition', initially this individual comes onto the scene with an offer instrumental in making peace for the Jews. John describes him in Revelation, Chapter 6, as riding in on a white horse, carrying an unloaded bow, and wearing a crown of authority given to him in honor. It isn't until he breaks his covenant and turns on the Jews three and a half years later that he shows his true nature as the of son of Perdition (The Antichrist -- meaning Substitute, or false deliverer). That's when the Jews find out that they've been deceived, and why Jesus issues such a strong warning in Matt.24:8-51 concerning what this substitute deliverer has in store for them between the time he shows himself to be false, and the end, when Jesus returns in Revelation 19.

Where the false teaching comes in, is when anyone thinks that the Church has replaced the Nation of Israel.
IT HAS NOT!!!

The church is the church and Israel is Israel. God will remove the church and then deal with Israel for 7 years which is the Tribulation and also Daniel's 70th Week, again......7 years.

God bless you as you consider the Word of God.

 

[Major]

Just something to think about.

OOps, gt to run out. Be back later.

 

[Major]

By forcing all second coming texts into an AD 70 straitjacket, the past-tribs have conjured up a narrow theory in the extreme. Their straitjacket can’t hold Matt. 24:5-7 (false Christs, wars and rumors of wars, famines, pestilences, and earthquakes).

Just in the last 50 years, for instance, over a thousand have claimed to be Christ, the 20th century has had the bloodiest wars of all time, 50 million died in WW2 alone, and, then, there’s the ever present threat of pestilence (biological warfare), and nuclear annihilation hanging over our heads.

Famines? Taking only one example of recent times, in the wake of Communism 10 million starved to death. Need we mention the tremendous push for one world government?And the High tech ability to control everyone on the face of the earth (see Rev. 13: 16, 17)? Knowledge and travel has increased 100 fold in these last days, and since AD 70 (see Dan. 12:4).

Revelation expands on wars, famines, pestilences, and earthquakes in great detail. It repeatedly uses universal terms such as “all kindreds, tongues, and nations.” The various plagues and judgments in the seals, trumpets, and vials are against the “EARTH.” Obviously, a wider meaning than localized destruction in the Jerusalem area in AD 70. The second coming of Jesus in Rev. 19 is to do battle at Armageddon with “the kings of the earth and of the WHOLE WORLD,” (Rev. 16:14), the “nations,” (Rev. 19:15).

Part of those who are drawn to the battle of Armageddon, Revelation chapter nine says, are a 200 million man army – the “kings of the East” from beyond the river Euphrates. There were no such “kings of the East” from beyond Euphrates with a 200 million man army, who fought against Jerusalem in 70 AD. These things illustrate the universal nature of the endtime battle of Armageddon.

Armageddon, according to the Past-tribs, is supposed to be the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. The past-tribs say the beast was the Roman emperor Nero. But Nero committed suicide at least two years before Jerusalem was destroyed — Jerusalem was destroyed under the Roman emperor Vespasian, not Nero. Furthermore, neither Vespasian, nor his general, Titus, were killed at Jerusalem with their bodies “cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone” (Rev. 19:20).

The beast and his armies are supposed to be Rome coming against Jerusalem in 70 AD, this can hardly be, Titus and the Roman armies were the victors in 70 AD! Revelation says “the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his armies” (Rev. 19:19), were the losers, not the victors.

Just something to think about.

 

[mistmann]

Your "pointing out" as you call it of Daniel being accomplished in 70 AD being fulfilled is NOT A CORRECT Bible teaching but is in fact your opinion which as we have discussed is completly wrong ..IMO.
YOUR "pointing out" does not in fact make your opinion correct my friend. It is JUST your opinion.

I am sure people can read for themselves that Daniel Himself in Dan 12:7 recorded that HE

"heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.

They can also read for themselves the words of the final curse of Leviticus 26:14-46 that Daniel was contemplating when Gabriel arrived. Likewise they can also read the words of official world history of the events of 70-74AD.

It is entirely up to them whether they choose to believe your words or those of Daniel, Moses, and official world history. It is not possible that they can believe BOTH to be true for they declare CONTRARY things to be true.

Your comment was..............
"Your claim that the second coming and the rapture occur at different times is at surprisingly (and puzzingly) considerable odds with the word of God."

YES, to you it would be puzzeling as it seems a lot of Biblical things are to you. But to me, it is the clear teaching of the Word of God as I have the same access to it as do you.

It is not the Bible that is puzzling me but why it is you seem so reluctant to declare what the words themselves so clearly SAY there on the page. Others here may have various reasons for remaining quiet but I doubt that I am the only one puzzled.

And by the way, not that names matter to me or positions, but my understanding of the Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ being TWO events seperated by the 7 year Tribulation period is not just something I came up with my friend. It is the PRE-MILLENIAL position of the End Times. This theology is taught in almost all Christian colleges now and supported by great men such as:
Drs. Edward Dobson, Charles Feinburg, Ed Hinson, W. M. Kroll, Harold Wilmington, Billy Graham, J. Vernon McGee, Oliver B. Green, John Walrood, Charles Schafer, Wade Singeltary and the list goes on and on and on.

Your way of commenting on this teaching tends to cast a shadow on me personally and it seems to make it an out of the way fringe theology from me and that your opinion is of greater Biblical authority. I only list these great men of Biblical theology to show others reading this material that is not the case in any what what soever and it is actually your opinion which is on the fringe of acceptability.

I will test the word of ANY man by the word of God but I will not change the meaning of the words of God to suit any man or even myself. If a man is wrong then he is wrong regardless of how famous he is, how well respected he is, how well educated he is or how many people believe him. Truth, like the Lord, is no respecter of persons. If you choose to believe the word of these people over the word of the Lord Himself that is your choice, but it is not my choice. My choice is to believe the word of God over ANY man no matter how important they are in the eyes of the world. I am not out to see as the world sees but as the Lord sees.

BUT understand that if YOU teach as they teach then it becomes what YOU teach also. Our responsibility to the Lord is to teach the truth of HIS word. If we teach what is not the word of God we cannot disown our own sin of false teaching by trying to blame it on somebody else. We are responsible to the Lord to ensure that what WE teach is in accordance with HIS word, not the word of others. Both Adam and Eve have already tried passing the buck on the sins THEY commit. It does not work.

I can not help but wonder why you continually must cast doubt on ALL the people you respond to????????

WHY do you feel the need for example to use the phraseology of ................................................................
"Major, As you know I have in the past pointed out that the scriptures themselves ( Dan 12:7 ) declare that the latter propheies of Daniel END with the scattering of the power of the Holy people."

Then this............
"Your claim that the second coming and the rapture occur at different times is at surprisingly (and puzzingly) considerable odds with the word of God".

Why do you feel the need to put down or condasend the thoughts of others.???????????
Do you think challenging others belief's add validity to yours????

Firstly I would point out that if a person is speaking in accordance with the word of God I usually see no need to post anything unless it is in support of them or adding something of value to what they have said. Occasionally I will simply add an amen. Where I speak up I speak up for the benefit of others, not myself. I speak up for those who may be led astray but teachings that are not in accordance with the word of God by ensuring they are aware of the fact. My encouragement to them is to ALWAYS check things against what is written to see if they are actually true or not (even my own words).

When I am present I find I cannot infer, by my silence, agreement with erroneous teaching. My love for my fellow believers requires that I speak up lest by my silence they are led astray. Has not the Lord made us ALL our brothers keeper? How can we love our brother if we do not care whether or not they fall or are enticed into error and risk not entering the Kingdom by such error?

But Major, your opening comment on this thread ends with the open invitation "Any thoughts on this comment????"

Why are you grumbling at me for commenting? Why is it condescending to point out that we have disagreed on a particular point before? Why is it condescending to be genuinely puzzled as to why you would declare something to be true that is the very opposite of what the verse you use to support it actually says?

Just post what you believe the Scriptures are saying to YOU and I will do the same and PLEASE cut out the attitude of condasention and confrontation with not just me........but all others as well.

Blessings to you.

Understand Major that opinions are meaningless when it comes to matters of God. Those who are blown about by every wind of opinion are no different to those blown about by every wind of doctrine.

Our opinions about what is written is nothing more than personal opinion regardless of who and how many may share it. Of what use to you or me is an opinion that is not in accordance with what the Lord has written. What the Lord has WRITTEN is the truth HE has declared. Our opinion of it is of no importance or help to anybody, especially ourselves.

If the Lord has declared something to be true a person's opinion that something else is true instead does not make their opinion true, it just makes their opinion WRONG. The word of the Lord stands INDEPENDENT of any person's opinion of it. We are called to UNDERSTAND the meaning the Lord intends His words to have, not form our OWN opinions of it. That is to lean on our OWN understanding and declare truth from our OWN imaginations.

I point out what is written on the page. What the words the Lord has chosen to use actually SAY there on the page. Whether or not you or anybody else agrees does not change the fact of reality of what the words THEMSELVES actually say.

You and others here may or may not like it but I will continue to draw attention to what the Lord has actually WRITTEN. I do not fear the wrath of man if I DO, I fear the wrath of God if I DON'T.

Blessings to you also.

 

[th1bill]

mistman,
I know that what I´m about to tell you is divisive and much disliked today but it is no less correct today than it was on the day of Pentecost. A man or a woman without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit can not possibly understand the scriptures. To the Lost man (a man without the Spirit) the Bible s a mystery. At this point it is critical that pride not enter here, because I also know the passages about being in the minority as a Christian.

You find yourself surrounded, here, by a good number of fundamental and well grounded Christians and still, you are in the minority! In all honesty, you should see that something is amiss and partner, that is you. i.e. Major, Lynn and I have our differences in our take on this or that but when it all boils down to the Basics, all of our takes meld into one, larger, point of view. The different pats or points, taught to us by the Holy Spirit, compliment all the other parts or points. You seem to always be in stark contrast to the rest of us.

I am not telling you that you are not being led by a spirit. What I am, stronger than suggesting and likely , just pure telling you is that you are not led by the same spirit as the one we are led by. That concerns me! You see, here you are condensing scripture to make it fit and that is nothing like what the Holy Spirit has taught me, nor does your take fit with what the Spirit has taught Major... you´re not right. The Rapture and the Second Comming are two separate events with the timing being disputed.

Please, examine yourself, spiritually.

 

[Major]

I am sure people can read for themselves that Daniel Himself in Dan 12:7 recorded that HE

"heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.

They can also read for themselves the words of the final curse of Leviticus 26:14-46 that Daniel was contemplating when Gabriel arrived. Likewise they can also read the words of official world history of the events of 70-74AD.

It is entirely up to them whether they choose to believe your words or those of Daniel, Moses, and official world history. It is not possible that they can believe BOTH to be true for they declare CONTRARY things to be true.

It is not the Bible that is puzzling me but why it is you seem so reluctant to declare what the words themselves so clearly SAY there on the page. Others here may have various reasons for remaining quiet but I doubt that I am the only one puzzled.

I will test the word of ANY man by the word of God but I will not change the meaning of the words of God to suit any man or even myself. If a man is wrong then he is wrong regardless of how famous he is, how well respected he is, how well educated he is or how many people believe him. Truth, like the Lord, is no respecter of persons. If you choose to believe the word of these people over the word of the Lord Himself that is your choice, but it is not my choice. My choice is to believe the word of God over ANY man no matter how important they are in the eyes of the world. I am not out to see as the world sees but as the Lord sees.

BUT understand that if YOU teach as they teach then it becomes what YOU teach also. Our responsibility to the Lord is to teach the truth of HIS word. If we teach what is not the word of God we cannot disown our own sin of false teaching by trying to blame it on somebody else. We are responsible to the Lord to ensure that what WE teach is in accordance with HIS word, not the word of others. Both Adam and Eve have already tried passing the buck on the sins THEY commit. It does not work.

Firstly I would point out that if a person is speaking in accordance with the word of God I usually see no need to post anything unless it is in support of them or adding something of value to what they have said. Occasionally I will simply add an amen. Where I speak up I speak up for the benefit of others, not myself. I speak up for those who may be led astray but teachings that are not in accordance with the word of God by ensuring they are aware of the fact. My encouragement to them is to ALWAYS check things against what is written to see if they are actually true or not (even my own words).

When I am present I find I cannot infer, by my silence, agreement with erroneous teaching. My love for my fellow believers requires that I speak up lest by my silence they are led astray. Has not the Lord made us ALL our brothers keeper? How can we love our brother if we do not care whether or not they fall or are enticed into error and risk not entering the Kingdom by such error?

But Major, your opening comment on this thread ends with the open invitation "Any thoughts on this comment????"

Why are you grumbling at me for commenting? Why is it condescending to point out that we have disagreed on a particular point before? Why is it condescending to be genuinely puzzled as to why you would declare something to be true that is the very opposite of what the verse you use to support it actually says?

Understand Major that opinions are meaningless when it comes to matters of God. Those who are blown about by every wind of opinion are no different to those blown about by every wind of doctrine.

Our opinions about what is written is nothing more than personal opinion regardless of who and how many may share it. Of what use to you or me is an opinion that is not in accordance with what the Lord has written. What the Lord has WRITTEN is the truth HE has declared. Our opinion of it is of no importance or help to anybody, especially ourselves.

If the Lord has declared something to be true a person's opinion that something else is true instead does not make their opinion true, it just makes their opinion WRONG. The word of the Lord stands INDEPENDENT of any person's opinion of it. We are called to UNDERSTAND the meaning the Lord intends His words to have, not form our OWN opinions of it. That is to lean on our OWN understanding and declare truth from our OWN imaginations.

I point out what is written on the page. What the words the Lord has chosen to use actually SAY there on the page. Whether or not you or anybody else agrees does not change the fact of reality of what the words THEMSELVES actually say.

You and others here may or may not like it but I will continue to draw attention to what the Lord has actually WRITTEN. I do not fear the wrath of man if I DO, I fear the wrath of God if I DON'T.

Blessings to you also.

God bless you Misty!

I have no problem whatsoever with yoor words or comments. My objections are about your attitude toward others. I know your foundness for reporting others so I want to be carfull here.

You just seem to not understand that there are other people who have the access to the Scriptures as you do and from where I sit, they know as much if not more than do you. Your thoughts are well offf of the norm of Biblical teachings and once again, I do not care. If you choose to believe those things...good for you. I AM NOT YOUR ENEMY neither is anyone else here. I and many others simply do not agree with your interpretation of accepted Biblical matters.

There is no need to argue withme or anyone else over the differences as I for one am very confident in my knowledge of these matters.

You say............."You and others here may or may not like it but I will continue to draw attention to what the Lord has actually WRITTEN"/

NOT SO my dear friend. It is when you continue to NOT draw your comments from what is written which is the concern.

Any way.....Blessing to you once again.

 

[mistmann]

mistman,
I know that what I´m about to tell you is divisive and much disliked today but it is no less correct today than it was on the day of Pentecost. A man or a woman without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit can not possibly understand the scriptures. To the Lost man (a man without the Spirit) the Bible s a mystery. At this point it is critical that pride not enter here, because I also know the passages about being in the minority as a Christian.

You find yourself surrounded, here, by a good number of fundamental and well grounded Christians and still, you are in the minority! In all honesty, you should see that something is amiss and partner, that is you. i.e. Major, Lynn and I have our differences in our take on this or that but when it all boils down to the Basics, all of our takes meld into one, larger, point of view. The different pats or points, taught to us by the Holy Spirit, compliment all the other parts or points. You seem to always be in stark contrast to the rest of us.

I am not telling you that you are not being led by a spirit. What I am, stronger than suggesting and likely , just pure telling you is that you are not led by the same spirit as the one we are led by. That concerns me! You see, here you are condensing scripture to make it fit and that is nothing like what the Holy Spirit has taught me, nor does your take fit with what the Spirit has taught Major... you´re not right. The Rapture and the Second Comming are two separate events with the timing being disputed.

Please, examine yourself, spiritually.

But will not those who are without the Spirit still THINK they understand the Scriptures? The Pharisees and Sadducees thought THEY understood the scriptures and that Jesus and His disciples did not, all of them being "ignorant and unlearned" men without proper "religious" training. Do not the RC think THEY understand the scriptures better than anybody else? Do not the Eastern Orthodox think it is THEY that have the better understanding? And so on down through ALL the denominations, yours included. Do you think ALL of these share the same Spirit even though they teach vastly different doctrines?

Remember those who cry "Lord Lord" that Jesus spoke of all believed THEY had understood the scriptures properly. Of what use is it to just say "I understand the scriptures better than you"? Or "my church is better than your church"? Or "I have the Spirit and you don't"? Is not this no more than the way of children in the playground? Is not the only difference that they are more likely to stick their tongue out at the end and go "nah,nah,nah"?

The Lord has told us how we are to judge and discern the spirits in those we meet. What has been said between us here is there for all to read for themselves as is the word of God. Will not the wise among us judge according to what is written in the word of God and the nature of the fruits our words bear? And will not the foolish among us do what the foolish have always done - judge foolishly?

I do not bear my OWN witness of the spirit that dwells within me for as Jesus said "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true." (Joh 5:31 ) Rather I allow the written word of God and the fruits the indwelling Spirit causes me to bring forth to bear witness for me knowing those who are wise and who are truly in Christ take note of such things as Jesus has taught them.

But why do you think I am in the minority here? Just because others may not respond openly or publically for any number of reasons does not mean I am alone. Others may not agree with everything I say and that is OK because I never ask people to believe ME but to believe what is actually written in the scriptures. To believe what the Lord Himself has declared. I am simply encouraging people to test all claims and teachings against what is actually written to SEE for themselves if it is true or not. But while they may not agree with everything I say you should not just assume they agree with everything YOU say either. I encourage people to judge these things according to the way the Lord has taught EACH ONE of them to do for THEMSELVES.

You have declared that the spirit in you is not the same spirit that is in me. Fair enough, but it is for others to test for themselves and judge which of the spirits is from the Lord and which is not. I test ALL spirits even that which is within me to be certain it is from the Lord, I always encourage others to do the same - Jesus has taught us how to do it. Does it speak in accordance with what is WRITTEN and what is the nature of the fruits it displays.

 

[mistmann]

God bless you Misty!

I have no problem whatsoever with yoor words or comments. My objections are about your attitude toward others. I know your foundness for reporting others so I want to be carfull here.

You just seem to not understand that there are other people who have the access to the Scriptures as you do and from where I sit, they know as much if not more than do you. Your thoughts are well offf of the norm of Biblical teachings and once again, I do not care. If you choose to believe those things...good for you. I AM NOT YOUR ENEMY neither is anyone else here. I and many others simply do not agree with your interpretation of accepted Biblical matters.

There is no need to argue withme or anyone else over the differences as I for one am very confident in my knowledge of these matters.

You say............."You and others here may or may not like it but I will continue to draw attention to what the Lord has actually WRITTEN"/

NOT SO my dear friend. It is when you continue to NOT draw your comments from what is written which is the concern.

Any way.....Blessing to you once again.

Major if you are being constantly reported ( I am not privy to such matters however) you can be sure it is not me who is doing it. I prefer to confront my accusers and those whose teachings are of significant concern openly and directly, using the occassion to help others learn for themselves ways of how to and how not to deal with such matters for as Christ warned those who follow Him must be prepared for many such confrontations. I am not much of a "behind closed doors" type person.

Besides I am certain that where us two or three find ourselves gathered together I am sure a moderator or two is certain to be in the midst of us keeping an eye on things . They know who does and does not report to them and I am certain if they think it is necessary they will chip you for making such false and unfounded accusations.

As to the rest rather than repeat myself just read the previous response to Bill.

 

[KingJ]

I always lol at these discussions of post or pre trib rapture and timing of end time events.

For me ''common sense'' and logic has to prevail.

On the timing of the rapture: God will not strike His own hand (The Holy Spirit and church), rapture before tribulation makes most sense.

 

[Major]

I always lol at these discussions of post or pre trib rapture and timing of end time events.

For me ''common sense'' and logic has to prevail.

On the timing of the rapture: God will not strike His own hand (The Holy Spirit and church), rapture before tribulation makes most sense.

Agreed.

It is almost impossible to have a civil onversation on such things.