OldCoot

A major conceptual failure by everyone who doesn't actually read the covenant... Genesis 15:18 (NKJV) On the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying: "To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the River Euphrates— Now that promise has never been fully realized. Not one time in history has Israel contained all that land. And the same covenant was made with Isaac and Jacob. Genesis 17:19 (NKJV) Then God said: "No, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his descendants after him Genesis 28:13 (NKJV) And behold, the Lord stood above it and said: "I am the Lord God of Abraham your father and the God of Isaac; the land on which you lie I will give to you and your descendants. So the covenant has more than Christ alone in view. The covenant is an unconditional with a linear series in view. While the Abrahamic covenant has the specified land in view as being Israel's possession, the Messiah is not so talked about. The Lord specifically says that all the earth will be His... Psalms 2:6-8 (NKJV) "Yet I have set My King On My holy hill of Zion." 7 "I will declare the decree: The Lord has said to Me, You are My Son, Today I have begotten You. 8 Ask of Me, and I will give You The nations for Your inheritance, And the ends of the earth for Your possession.

I wasn't making a pre-trib point per se. I didn't go back and re-read all of what I posted, but I am sure I never mentioned anything about pre-trib or mid-trib for that matter. The post was in response to the argument that there is no 'rapture' or such until the end of all that period, after the AOD and all the nonsense to come. That is categorically wrong according to both OT and NT. Now one can fit what I posted as pre or mid trib to some extent, but post trib or post millennial is not an option. And some of the disagreement is happening because we are using different translations, and that can be a problem. For instance, your argument that David was not talking about a removal in Psalms 27. "the time of trouble", the "the" is a modifier that specifies a unique occurrence, not trouble in general. Psalms 27:5 (NKJV) For in the time of trouble He shall hide me in His pavilion; In the secret place of His tabernacle He shall hide me; He shall set me high upon a rock. That is considerably different in reading and meaning compared to whatever translation you used to post the same passage. And in conjunction with Jeremiah... Jeremiah 30:7 (NKJV) Alas! For that day is great, So that none is like it; And it is the time of Jacob's trouble, But he shall be saved out of it. Well it seems David had a removal and hiding in the abode of the Lord in mind, His pavilion and His tabernacle. Isaiah seems to suggest the same thing... Isaiah 26:20 (NKJV) Come, my people, enter your chambers, And shut your doors behind you; Hide yourself, as it were, for a little moment, Until the indignation is past. And Zephaniah suggests the same thing.. Zephaniah 2:1-3 (NKJV) Gather yourselves together, yes, gather together, O undesirable nation, 2 Before the decree is issued, Or the day passes like chaff, Before the Lord's fierce anger comes upon you, Before the day of the Lord's anger comes upon you! 3 Seek the Lord, all you meek of the earth, Who have upheld His justice. Seek righteousness, seek humility. It may be that you will be hidden In the day of the Lord's anger. So David, Isaiah, Zephaniah, etc talk about a unique event of being hidden in a unique place from the calamities in a unique period of time of trouble in the future. And that comports with 1 Thessalonians 4, 2 Thessalonians 2, 1 Corinthians 15, and John 14. Now one could suggest that Zephaniah is talking about pre-trib in that he makes a point to state that this happens before the decree is issued. Now that could be the affirmation of the covenant of Daniel 9:27 or it could be before the opening of the scroll of Revelation 6 or something similar. 'Ol Zeph wasn't specific enough to let us in on what decree he was referring to. But we do know that this 'hiding' will be before the decree is issued. And from the other passages, it would seem that 'decree' has some connection to the final unique major events coming upon the earth preceding the return of the Lord.

Abraham was justified and considered a favorite. The Covenant was made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. All justified. And by extension, that makes their posterity elect as the covenant was made with them and their descendants. The Lord is pretty clear in Isaiah... Isaiah 45:4 (NKJV) For Jacob My servant's sake, And Israel My elect, I have even called you by your name; I have named you, though you have not known Me. And considering that the main focus of the tribulation period is to drive Jacob/Israel to the wall and realize their offense of rejecting Messiah, turn to Him, and petition for His return as described in Hosea 5:14-15 and that aligns with the "elect" fo Matthew 24 being Jacob/Israel. From Matthew 24:15 onward is focused on those living in the land of Israel.

That could be assumed to be true if one throws out the OT. Isaiah is pretty clear that the righteous dead and living are gathered and hidden in their chambers (see John 14:2-3) BEFORE the calamities come upon the earth. All of Isaiah 26 talks of this. Isaiah 26:2 ties into Revelation 4:1. Isaiah 26:17 ties into Jeremiah 30:6-7 and David in Psalms 27:5 affirms the same. And Zephaniah 2:1-3 reiterates this also, adding that it will happen BEFORE the decree is issued, which could be the affirmation of the covenant of Daniel 9:27. And Isaiah 26:19-21 is pretty clear that the righteous, including righteous dead, are taken in accordance with 1 Thessalonians 4:16-18 and 1 Corinthians 15:51-54. And 2 Thessalonians 2, the gathering is before the man of sin / son of perdition is revealed. Paul had to remind them of that because a forged letter had been circulating that had the Thessalonians concerned they were in the day of Lord period. If they were fearful, it must mean that they felt they had missed something. Paul reminds them that "that day" would not happen unless the departure happen first and then the man of sin / son of perdition would be revealed. He amplified it a few verses later stating that the one who restrains will be taken out of the way then the "lawless one" would be revealed. And what Paul wrote to those Thessalonians conforms to what David and Zephaniah said on the issue. The 'elect' being gathered at the end does not mean the church. The Lord clearly says that Jacob/Israel is His elect in Isaiah 45:4. Paul also states in Romans 11 that the gifts and calling of God is irrevocable. And the gathering of the elect of Jacob/Israel ties into Ezekiel 20. Don't confuse election with justification. Jacob/Israel is elect because of the promises made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, which does not mean they are all justified in Messiah though they are all elect. The redeemed are also elect because of their justification in Messiah, but that doesn't mean the redeemed are literal Jacob/Israel. As it is literal Jacob/Israel (Judah and Israel) that caused Yeshua to return to His place after He came the first time and it will be literal Jacob / Israel that will have to admit that rejection and turn to the Lord and petition for His return... BEFORE He will return. Hosea 5:14-15 and Matthew 23:37-39.

I have always seen blasphemy of the Holy Spirit as denying the Messiah, the one the Holy Spirit testifies of. So it does still exist today as a sin. Denying the Messiah and not placing one's trust in Him is the only sin that cannot be forgiven. And the Holy Spirit's main function is to testify and reveal who the Messiah is. If one rejects the Messiah they are rejecting the testimony of the Holy Spirit and that is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. When Yeshua said that comment, the Pharisees were accusing Yeshua being of Beelzebub and the demons. Totally against what the Holy Spirit testifies of who Messiah is. Hence His reply that they can say anything they want against Him, but essentially equating the Holy Spirit with being a liar, that was unforgivable. And as long as one holds that position and does so until one dies, it cannot be forgiven. If one has believed and placed their trust in Messiah, there is no way they could commit that sin. Some folks worry about things that they really shouldn't. We can grieve the Holy Spirit by our actions and such sometimes, but that is not blasphemy of the HS.

Petition worked! Luke 17:26-27 (NKJV Strong's) And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: 27 They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. Matthew 24:38-41 (NKJV Strong's) For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 40 Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left. 41 Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left. In both, regarding who is taken in the flood is the wicked and condemned. And Yeshua says it will be the same at His coming. So those being "taken" are those fit for destruction. The condemned. That is in keeping with Matthew 25 / Joel 3 where the nations are gathered, judged, and the condemned are taken away. Likewise, how Jacob/Israel is gathered and judged and the condemned likewise are separated out. And the passage of Matthew 24, from verse 15 onward it is targeted towards those who are living in Israel/Jerusalem, not the world. Only those that need to worry about fleeing and whether or not it is on a Shabbat would only pertain to those living in Israel. Not sure that anyone would need to flee Jerusalem when the AOD occurs, if they live in Malaysia. And only in Israel is there laws regarding transportation and such on Shabbat. No conflict with a pre-trib position. The condemned as the scripture above shows, are not "raptured'.... pre, mid, pre-wrath, or post. They are taken away for destruction. Also, it is those who are living at that time. Not a bit of reference to the dead, righteous or condemned. Yet in many passages, both OT and NT, the righteous dead and living are gathered at the same time, just that the righteous dead get a head start according to Paul, but then, I think even he realized they have 6 more feet to go.

I think it only hurts because you have twisted into a pretzel what I wrote about. Much on what you wrote above, I never wrote about. Very disingenuous on your part.

No... but it says all Jacob/Israel is Elect. It is true, there are saved of that group and unsaved of that group. They will be separated out when the Lord returns. But ALL ISRAEL is elect. That is, unless the Lord is a liar. He said it direct to Isaiah Again... do not confuse election with justification. That is where so many stumble at this. Isaiah 45:3-4 (NKJV) I will give you the treasures of darkness And hidden riches of secret places, That you may know that I, the Lord, Who call you by your name, Am the God of Israel. 4 For Jacob My servant's sake, And Israel My elect, I have even called you by your name; I have named you, though you have not known Me. Even when Jacob/Israel is not believing, they are still elect or set apart to God for His plan and purpose. Likewise, Paul makes the same proclamation. Romans 11:28-29 (NKJV) Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. What part of irrevocable is irrevocable or can be taken away? Romans 9:3-4 (NKJV) For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh, 4 who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; All of that is present tense. Jacob/Israel still has the adoption and the promise. Paul is wishing he was accursed if it would rescue his unsaved brethren of Israel. But he still acknowledges that the same thing as he did in Romans 11, that it is to Jacob/Israel that pertains the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the Law, the service of God, and THE PROMISES. The promises have not passed on to the church or some other nonsense. They still belong to literal Jacob/Israel. Also Jacob / Israel is elect because it will be solely because of them that the Lord will return again! I know in our Christian arrogance that seems unbelievable, but... Hosea 5:14-15 (NKJV) For I will be like a lion to Ephraim, And like a young lion to the house of Judah. I, even I, will tear them and go away; I will take them away, and no one shall rescue. 15 I will return again to My place Till they acknowledge their offense. Then they will seek My face; In their affliction they will earnestly seek Me." Matthew 23:37-39 (NKJV) "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing! 38 See! Your house is left to you desolate; 39 for I say to you, you shall see Me no more till you say, 'Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!'" And the above is why Satan has expended so much effort to eliminate the Hebrew people from the earth over the centuries, so there is none left who can call (in the time of Jacob's Trouble coming upon the earth) on the Lord for His return. Unfortunately many of the "church" have been complicit in this motivation to eradicate the Hebrew people as well. And it is the main purpose to the tribulation period, the "Time of Jacob's Trouble"... to drive Jacob/Israel to realize their offense of rejecting Messiah the first time He came, and turn to Him and petition for His return. Then as Paul states.... Romans 11:26-27 (NKJV) And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; 27 For this is My covenant with them, When I take away their sins."

I would agree, but in a different way. When one looks at how the tribes were to camp in relation to the tabernacle while in the wilderness, something wonderful is in view. Imagine being on a mountain overlooking the camp of Israel......

I am interested in all the covenants the Lord has made. The Davidic Covenant is especially important as it is the one that gives Messiah the authority to rule in the lineage of David over Israel in the future. The Messianic Kingdom after the GT period. The Abrahamic covenant has never yet been fulfilled, so I am interested to see it fulfilled in the future. Also during the Messianic Kingdom. The main point is, if the Lord cannot be trusted to fulfill the covenants He has made that are unconditional, then one's salvation cannot be assured either. That Fact that the Lord holds His promises even higher than His name and it is for His name's sake that He will ensure they are fulfilled is the insurance policy that He can be trusted to fulfill the promises made to those who trust in Messiah. Those covenants are indeed critical, even for the believer for whom they do not directly apply and to whom those covenants were not made. Even Peter recognized this. Even though he and the disciples had personally interacted with Yeshua, it is the sure word of prophecy regarding the Messiah and the trustworthiness of the Lord to fulfill His promises that was more important and confirmed who Yeshua is. Prophecy was more sure to Peter than even his own eyes. 2 Peter 1:16-19 (KJV) For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount. 19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: We rest on the prophecy of the Covenants the Lord made unconditionally to Abraham and David. It is our insurance that we have redemption unconditionally thru Messiah when we trust in Him. To spiritualize those covenants away is impugning the character of the Lord. And I am not sure that one who is willing to do that is indeed in Messiah because to spiritualize these things away is to say that the Lord is a liar and didn't know what He was talking about.

I still am waiting for anyone to show where in Macdonald's vision she even referenced a pre-trib. She does mention that the church will undergo persecution by the antichrist. That would seem to support pre-wrath or post trib. I am surprised those folks haven't pasted her vision all over the place. But I will post a link from an Preterist website that is a transcript of the account. That is so there is a level playing field and no pre-tribber fiddled with the text of Macdonal's vision.... https://www.preteristarchive.com/dEmEnTiA/1975_macpherson_incredible-coverup.html Last I checked and if I am not mistaken, Dr. Thomas Ice had a $1000 reward out for anyone who could show that Macdonald ever referenced the pre-trib rapture. Good chance for anyone to make some quick spending cash if they want to. And William Watson did an extensive treatise "Dispensationalism Before Darby" on the subject and documented that there are writings and sermons that go several hundred years (back to the 1500's) before Darby that show the pre-trib was a concept that was referenced. It is not a late view as many suppose, and your information is faulty. Of course there would be sparse evidence prior to the 1500's as the institutional Church pretty much controlled writings and sermons so the evidence prior to the reformation is sparse. But even as early as the 4th century there is evidence that the pre-trib was referenced in sermons.

Right. I said the believers are elect in my previous post. But the problem is, many confuse election with justification. And there are different groups/individuals that are "elect" or selected by God for His unique plan and purpose. Israel is also elect according to Isaiah and Paul, but not all of those of Israel are justified or redeemed. In the believers case, that unique group is elect BECAUSE they are justified. Israel is elect because of the covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. But in that case, not all of Israel are justified. Even Paul makes that very clear. And in Matthew 24:15 onward, the context is speaking of those in Israel, not the world. So that would be the elect of Israel that is in view. Later in Matthew 25, when the Lord returns, the nations are gathered and judged on how they treated the elect group of Israel. It is an exposition on Joel 3.

It has been argued, and one can find some support for it in the OT that the the giving birth is the catching away of the body of Messiah. Not sure that is the case, but it is curious. Especially since Yeshua was not caught up as a child and the "caught up" is the same Greek "harpazo" that Paul uses to describe the believers being caught up to the Lord In Matthew 25 is the judgement is occurring and there is dialogue going on between the Lord and those being judged, both the righteous and the unrighteous of the nations who are gathered when the Lord returns. So here, it is the unrighteous who the Lord is dialoguing with and stating the case.... Matthew 25:41-45 (NKJV) "Then He will also say to those on the left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; 43 I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.' 44 "Then they also will answer Him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?' 45 Then He will answer them, saying, 'Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.' So it would seem that the unbelievers are not wiped out as you suggest before the Lord comes. Everyone left alive from that period is present.... those that came to faith in Messiah during that time, those that remained unbelievers, and the remnant of Israel who also will be separated out just as those of the nations are according to Ezekiel 20. So the conundrum for the post trib folks still remains.... if the righteous are caught up to be with the Lord at the END of the tribulation period as He is coming back, then there are no righteous of the nations to separate out from the unrighteous, complete with dialogue between the both groups of individuals and the Lord, on the physical earth in the area of Jerusalem. The remnant of Israel who survive the tribulation period will have their own separation judgement to undergo. So whether it is the nations or the people of Israel, there are righteous and unrighteous who will be separated out after the Lord returns.

Indeed it is. But was the Adamic Covenant not literal but just an allegory? How about the Noahic Covenant? Of that one, even James heading up the Jerusalem council said that was still in effect for gentiles that come to faith in Messiah. What of the Abrahamic Covenant? The Lord was very clear that as long as the sun is during the day, the moon is during the night, and the waves roar on the seashore, that covenant is still in effect. Even to a thousand generations. And Gabriel seemed to think the Davidic Covenant was literal, as he reaffirmed it to Mary when he told her she was going to bear the Messiah. So it still remains. If there is no objective standard to determine what is to be seen as literal and what is seen as allegory, then anyone can change the goal post anytime they want. That leads to all sorts of confusion and misapplication of the scripture. The HS uses many rhetorical devices in scripture, and allegory is one of them. When the scripture says that the Lord protects the righteous under His wings, it is obvious that is an allegory because to think it is literal would imply that God has feathers. Unless the context implies an allegory, it is not within our right to impose an allegorical meaning on the text. The default position should always be the the text means exactly what it says unless the context suggests otherwise. Origen and Augustine really messed things up when they incorporated gnostic exegesis into things. In other words, making allegory the default position. Uh oh.... that came from the minds of men!

Fair enough. My previous post was directed to those who feel that the removal of the righteous (rapture) occurs at the same time that Messiah is coming back at the end of the tribulation period. What is commonly known as the post trib view. Kind of an up we go and right back down we come. In Matthew 25 and Joel 3, the nations of the world are gathered together at the Valley of Johoshaphat (also known as the Kidron Valley and valley of decision). That is the valley that runs between Jerusalem and the Mt. of Olives. There, those of the nations are separated out by the Lord into the righteous (sheep) or the unrighteous (goats). The unrighteous to condemnation. The righteous go into the kingdom. But if the righteous were caught up just as the Lord is returning, then how would there be any righteous of the nations to separate out from the unrighteous in the valley? That is the kink or flaw in the post trib rapture view. If the removal or rapture occurs at the same time Yeshua is coming back to rule over the earth, It leaves no righteous left on earth and of the nations to separate out as Joel 3 and Matthew 25 talks about. There has to be a delineation. Those of the nations that are being gathered and separated out are still living, mortal beings. The righteous who were caught up earlier are changed to immortality according to Paul in his letters to both the Thessalonians and the Corinthians. So at a very minimum, the catching up / removal / rapture has to occur some time before the end of the tribulation period when Yeshua returns and assumes His rule over the earth. Post trib is totally invalidated. That only leaves the pre, mid, or pre-wrath views in play. That these righteous that are separated out go into the kingdom are said to have eternal life is not a conflict. Those of us that believe and place our trust in Messiah now have eternal life, as we have passed from death to life. John told us so in 1 John. But at the removal or rapture, we are changed from mortal to immortal according to Paul. The righteous that are separated out of the nations also have eternal life, just as we do now. They also have passed from death to life just as John says we have. But they are not yet changed. They go into the kingdom as mortals to repopulate the earth

Kenny, the big problem is that many really don't understand ecclesiology... who, what, and why the church is and why it must be removed before the the terrible period comes. Which stems from not having a clear understanding of who is the main focus of that period and what that means for the reason the period is allowed to happen. There is indeed a specific, unique purpose for that period to play out the way it does. And it has nothing to do with the unique Body of Messiah nor is it in view. Nor is the main focus the destruction of the antichrist or the world systems. The clear reason for that period is to drive the Hebrew people to the wall and get them to finally realize their offense of rejecting Messiah and petition for His return. Hosea 5:14 - Hosea 6:2 and Matthew 23:37-39. It is why Satan has expended so much effort over the centuries to extinguish the Hebrew people, so that there are none who can fulfill the prophecy and petition for Messiah's return. Hosea 5:15 (NKJV) I will return again to My place Till they acknowledge their offense. Then they will seek My face; In their affliction they will earnestly seek Me." For the Lord to return to His place, He had to have left it. That was the first coming. "in their affliction" is a reference to the "time of Jacob's Trouble" that Jeremiah wrote about. The final terrible period. Matthew 23:39 (NKJV) for I say to you, you shall see Me no more till you say, 'Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!'" Cliff

Still leaves things open to subjectivity based on the individual reading the scripture. It is not pride or foolishness of man to believe that there is an objective standard than can be applied to studying scripture. It was the lack of following that objective standard that caused the Hebrew leadership of the 1st century to miss the fact that the Messiah was among them. And Yeshua held them accountable for not knowing.

And you need to follow your advice on using other books regarding the "elect" of Matthew 24. From Matthew 24:15 onward, it is speaking to those in the land of Israel. Those that will have to flee when they see the AOD, hoping it is not on a Shabbat, etc And in that context, Isaiah says that Jacob/Israel is the Lord's "elect".... Isaiah 45:4 (NKJV) For Jacob My servant's sake, And Israel My elect, I have even called you by your name; I have named you, though you have not known Me. It is arrogance on the part of those in the body to think that they are the only "elect". Election is not the same meaning as justification. The Justified or Redeemed of the unique Body of Messiah are indeed "elect" because of their justification thru Messiah, but that doesn't mean they are the only elect with a unique plan and purpose for the Lord. Even the Messiah is called the Lord's "elect", but He sure doesn't need to be redeemed or justified or gathered from the four winds of the earth..... Isaiah 42:1 (NKJV) "Behold! My Servant whom I uphold, My Elect One in whom My soul delights! I have put My Spirit upon Him; He will bring forth justice to the Gentiles. So the Lord can indeed gather the elect that makes up the unique body of Messiah prior to the the calamities of the period, and still gather the elect of Jacob/Israel at the end of the period, in keeping with Ezekiel 20:33-38. No conflict.

I said.... who would be left to be sheep, of the sheep and goat judgement of Matthew 25. If the righteous are caught up at the same time that Yeshua is then going to return to rule on the earth, then there would be no righteous left (sheep) on the earth for the sheep and goat judgement of Matthew 25 which is the judgement of the nations as in Joel 3 when Messiah returns.

Yep. Who is it that cracks the seals? It sure isn't John or the Elders. The wording above is faulty. Messiah doesn't "unleash" the antichrist, He allows him to be revealed. Just as Paul wrote.... 2 Thessalonians 2:7-8 (NKJV) 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. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming.

So that would mean that salvation is just an allegory also. Where does one draw the line between literal and allegory and who sets the division? I admit that the HS uses allegories, puns, metaphors, and other rhetorical devices in scripture, but unless the text clearly suggests that, then I stick with the "if the plain sense of a passage makes sense, then seek no other sense, lest one risks ending up with nonsense". Hermeneutics 101 and basic grammar.

I would think the reverse would be true, since viewing the text allegorically would make things highly subjective with no baseline standard. Every time I read where Yeshua refers to scripture, He seemed to take it at face value or “literal”, so I see no reason to do otherwise.

If Yeshua is only going to rule on a perfected earth then why... 1) does the kingdom only last 1000 years and then there is another rebellion? 2) why are people penalized by having rain withheld from their land if the do not come to Jerusalem for Tabernacles? 3) why is there still death in the kingdom? 4) why do the nations seek to throw off the rule of Messiah over them? 5) why is Messiah ruling with “a rod of iron” implying He will deal swiftly and firmly with anyone who gets out of line? 6) who is it that enters into that kingdom which would cause these issues?

Except an early removal fo the righteous was taught long before Darby. Darby gets far too much credit for inventing something that had been taught for several centuries before he came on the scene. But I am honored that you think folks like me who believe in an early removal of the righteous are worthy of ridicule and scorn. Peter was right.

I guess the first thing that must be answered is... what is the condition that actually causes the Messiah to return to earth? Yes, scripture (both OT and NT) is quite clear that a specific condition must be met before He will return to rule. And no, it has nothing to do with the church or the antichrist. Nor does it have anything to do with seals, bowls, vials, trumpets or anything else that people spend a lot of time trying to determine when they happen. There is one specific thing that must happen before He will even consider returning to this earth. And Satan has spent at least the last 2000 years trying to prevent it from happening. Once one gets a handle of what that one condition is, then they can understand what the purposed of the tribulation period is and who is the main focus. Then everything else is easy including understanding not only the timing of the removal of the righteous, but the reason.