OldCoot

It is allegory to an extreme to make the case that the Apostles are the twelve stars. Many scholars clear back to the early Church fathers all stated that the woman with the sun and twelve stars and moon at her feet is a reference to Genesis 37:9-11. That is the only reference that is similar to the Revelation 12 account. We will likely never agree. I am not into gnostic allegorical scripture interpretation. Neither were the Apostles or the early church fathers. Augustine and Origen really screwed things up.

And I realize folks really like to use that "in Christ there is no Jew or Gentile" thing. They seem to forget the other part.... "there is neither male or female". Now, if they really take the "there is no Jew or Gentile" thing so seriously and like to apply it to the physical world, then do the same with the latter and prove it by having a bunch of men and women stand up in front of the Church during a meeting and strip and then try to make the case that there is neither male or female. True, in the spiritual sense there is neither Jew nor Gentile in Messiah, but that is not true at the physical level. There are Jewish Believers and Gentile believers, just like outside the church there are Jews and Gentiles. Even Paul, in Romans 9, 10, and 11 is speaking of physical Israel. He does say that not all of Israel are Israel, that not all have the faith of Abraham which is the distinguishing mark of a "true Jew". But they, physical Israel, are beloved because of the fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and the promises belong to them.

Modern Israel is indeed the Israel of scripture and was predicted when it would come into being.... before the first return from Babylon. Ezekiel 4.... poor old Zeke is required to lay on one side then the other, for a total of 430 days. Each day to represent one year that the entirety of Israel was to be punished. When the Southern Kingdom was taken into captivity by Babylon, all the tribes were in that group. The books of the Chronicles and Kings have many references to the faithful of the northern tribes migrating to the south at various times to join with the Southern Kingdom. So the lost tribe idea has no legs and the idea is the equivalent of what comes out of the south end of a north bound buffalo. When the remnant returned from Babylon, they were called Jews 11 times and Israel 22 times by Ezra. Nehemiah called then Jews 8 times and Israel 40 times. Again, all the tribes were present. 70 of those years ticked off in the Babylonian captivity. When allowed to return, only a remnant did so. The majority remained in Babylon where they had built homes, businesses, jobs, etc. That majority was in rebellion to God at that point, because God says that when the people of Israel are not in the Land, they are profaning His name. Ezekiel 36:20 Now, that being said, if Israel remained in rebellion, which they were by not all returning, then their punishment would be multiplied 7 times, per Leviticus 26:18. 430 years, minus the 70 in the Babylonian Captivity, is 360 years. 360 years multiplied by 7 is 2520 years. 2520 years on the Hebrew Lunar Calendar is 907,200 days. 907,200 days on the 365.25 day Solar Calendar we commonly use is 2483.78 years. The decree by Cyrus for the Hebrews to return was given in early fall 537BC. That would be -536.3 for math calculation purposes. -536.3 plus 2483.78 is 1947.48. We have to add 1 to that, since there is no "zero" year between BC and AD. That gives us 1948.48, or roughly May 1948, when Israel became a nation. They had never been a sovereign independent nation with a common government from the start of the Babylonian Captivity until May 1948. Even during the Hasmonean period when they were not controlled by outside countries, they were just a sectarian mix of interests and not one unified country. When modern Israel became a nation in 1948, 80% of the Jews in the land were Sabras, or long time generational Hebrews who had lived in the land since the Babylonian times. Even during the Crusades of the Middle Ages, the Crusaders killed many Jews in the land. 20,000 were burned alive in one instance in the Great Synagogue of Jerusalem while the Crusaders marched around it singing "Christ We Adore Thee". Some Crusaders had contests to see how many Jewish babies they could get on a sword. The church is not Israel. That dog just won't hunt. And YHWH is a God who remembers His promises. If He isn't faithful to remember His promises regarding physical Israel, then He can't be trusted to remember His promises to any of us.

Yeshua told the leadership of Israel at the time, that Israel would not see Him again until they proclaimed "Blessed is He who comes in the Name of the Lord." Matthew 23:39. In Hosea, we see the same thing.... Hosea 5:15 - 6:2 (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.” 1 Come, and let us return to the Lord; For He has torn, but He will heal us; He has stricken, but He will bind us up. 2 After two days He will revive us; On the third day He will raise us up, That we may live in His sight. I see this as the passage that Yeshua was referring to. And in V15, for Him to return to His place, He had to have left it. So this is a clear reference to the Messiah. I also see the length of time involved. Peter the Apostle told us that to the Lord, one day is as a thousand years to us. And that is confirmed in Psalms 90:4. It is possible that, taking a day equals a thousand years idea, Hosea was giving us a time frame of the period between Yeshua being rejected by national Israel and His being accepted by them and their calling out to Him. That the time period between Yeshua's first and second coming would be two days (2 thousand years). And also in the same passage, Hosea is saying the periods of the festivals in which Yeshua's first and second coming would be.... He will come to us like the rain, Like the latter and former rain to the earth. On the Hebrew civil calendar, the latter rain is the springtime and the former rain is the fall. Yeshua fulfilled the spring festivals of Leviticus 23 at His first coming, and will fulfill the fall festivals of Leviticus 23 at His second coming. So who is acknowledging their offense of rejecting Yeshua? That right there would fly in the face of some sort of replacement theology idea and make it nonsense. If the church is now Israel, when did the entire church reject Yeshua so that He returned to His place? Yeshua returned to His place before the Church began at Pentacost! Obviously, it is national Israel which is in view in the passage and has to acknowledge their offense of rejecting Yeshua and call out to Him. And during the time of Jacob's Trouble when 2/3 of the Jewish people will perish, they will finally acknowledge their offense and cry out to Him. The replacement theology thing really exhibits that some people have failed to say "no" to drugs.

Not quite sure where you pulled that one from, inchrist. I am getting old and don't have the time or desire to type it all out like you, so here is a snapshot of what I was referring to.... resembling, similar, like, etc grammatically would imply that they are not the same thing. Kinda like having two coins. Sure, they are both coins, but one is Gold and the other polished brass. Close in resemblance, but they are not the same thing. One has value, the other a trinket. Either way... you stated the text did not originally include "something like" and was added later. Well, that is what the meaning of the Greek word is. I know modern textual critics like to dismiss sections they are not comfortable with, but you erred. And like some others, failed to acknowledge it and went on word chase.

You err. G3664 “homoios” is the word translated as “like”. Definition is “similar”. That implies not gold like the Elder’s crowns.

But notice the difference. The 24 Elders have crowns of gold, but the locust reference in 9:7 says they are “something like gold”. Revelation 9:7 The shape of the locusts was like horses prepared for battle. On their heads were crowns of something like gold, and their faces were like the faces of men.

Nope. Not in danger of adding anything. Just commenting on what is there. The 24 Elders are there. I didn’t add them. Just speculating on who they are.

Well now, you are interjecting a little bit of Talmudic thought here. I will fully agree that Jewish tradition teaches that the coronation of the Messiah is on Yom Teruah. Just like the wedding of the Messiah is at that time. And the first trumpet of Yom Teruah is also called the awakening blast and some in Jewish tradition think it is a reference to the resurrection. But it is speculation nonetheless. I kind of agree with the idea in general, but there is no hard proof in scripture that all of these events transpire on Yom Teruah. But it has a unique feature about it that seems to correlate well with the resurrection. It is a two day festival, it falls on the first of Tishri and cannot be official determined when it starts until the new moon is verified. It is called "the day that no man knows" in Jewish tradition, so it seems to dovetail nicely with Yeshua's claim... of that day, no man knows. Never said it wasn't. Just never commented on it. Actually, the entire Book of Joshua has striking relevance to the Book of Revelation. You will continue to wait. Your comment did not change one bit of my position on the 24 elders, so we will just have to disagree. I am not obligated to rebut everything someone posts. You didn't sway me, I didn't sway you. So that part is dead in the water.

Ok, inchrist, you are confusing temple and heaven. It is the Temple in Heaven that is opened in Revelation 11:19. Nowhere does it say or even suggest that the redeemed are residing in the Temple proper in Heaven. You see the 24 Elders about the throne of God, which is not the Temple of God. But, if as you assert, heaven is not opened until the 7th trumpet. Then, how is it the woman who is having the child, who most recognize as the Messiah, comes after the 7th trumpet in the text yet the child is caught up to the throne? And what of the two witnesses that are resurrected and told to "come up here"? Where did they go since this happened before the Temple was opened later in the chapter? And even their enemies will see them ascend into Heaven in that chapter. And we also have a problem. Where did Enoch end up after he was taken by the Lord in Genesis? And Elijah, he was caught up on a chariot of fire, so has he only been on perpetual orbit of the earth until the Temple in Heaven is opened as you state? And the resurrected saints of Matthew 27. The text does say they are saints, unlike the resurrections of Lazarus, Jairus' daughter, etc. Where did those resurrected saints go? The early Church writers all concurred that these saints were taken to the Lord, and since most of those writers had close contact with the Apostles themselves or disciples of the Apostles, they probably are more accurate in this assertion than a 20th or 21st century textual critic. The text of Matthew doesn't say so only speculation can be made, but since Yeshua always seemed to be pointing us to the harvest, it is probably wise that we look at the legal prescription regarding the harvest in Leviticus 23. And of the harvest, a sheaf offering of first fruits of the harvest is required to be brought before the Lord by the High Priest. Yeshua is the first fruits of those who are resurrected, but NOT the first fruits of the harvest. He is our high priest. He told Mary after He was resurrected not to hold Him. He had not yet ascended to the Father in His role as High Priest to deliver the first fruits of the harvest to Him. Thereafter is the main harvest of the field. But also the harvest field, part of the crop is not harvested and is left for the gleanings harvest. There are three distinct harvests of a field. The other problem still is that group of 24 elders. They have been there since chapter 4 and they have white robes and crowns, the latter being exclusive posession of believers. Crown of Life, Crown of righteousness, Crown of Glory, etc. per the Epistles, and in Revelation 2 & 3, Yeshua has been mentioning rewards of white robes and crowns in His letters to the Churches. And just after those letters, we see 24 Elders in heaven wearing white robes and crowns. Proper scripture exegesis (following the Law of First Mention of hermeneutics) and basic principles of grammar and writing would suggest the 24 Elders are the Church in the previous chapters. It is never said of Angels that they get crowns of any kind. Angels are messengers. The 24 Elders sing the song of the Redeemed. Angels are not redeemed. The Elders are also called Kings and Priests. Only the redeemed believers (outside of Messiah Himself) are called kings and priests, and not just in Revelation. The 24 Elders are seen on thrones. Only the redeemed righteous rule and reign with Messiah.

Noah. Sealed by God inside the ark 6 days before the destruction came on the 7th. Lot. He and his family had to be removed before the angels could bring destruction on Sodom and Gomorrah. King Joash as a child. When Athaliah was killing the royal line and is a pretty good picture of the future false messiah, as evil as that wretched woman was. Joash was hidden in the upper part of the temple for 6 years while all this was going on. Then he was brought forth in the 7th year. Athaliah was slain, and Joash was crowned as king. Prophecy is pattern as well as prediction.

I wanted to separate this one out so we could focus on it better. You raise a very valid question. Who is there with John? Notice in Revelation 4:4, there are 24 elders with white robes and gold crowns. Now, angels do not get gold crowns. Those are given to only those who were made righteous by the blood of Yeshua. And take notice also, crowns are given as rewards. The Bema seat judgement (2 Corinthians 5:10 the Greek is Bema) where the believer's works are judged (not their salvation) has already happened. Thus the Ekklesia has already been brought before the Bema seat judgement. The church is there as a separate entity from John. Now, why would the singular address be used as you asked? Good question. We are all individuals, but we make up the one body of Messiah. We are all individuals, but we are all the one bride of Messiah. But that is not really the point. I have never held that John being there represents the church en masse. The 24 elders are who the church is. John is an observer of these events and was told... I will shew thee. But point of fact.... those 24 elders do have white robes and gold crowns. Angels do not get gold crowns. That is an exclusive of believers. And what is the other purpose of the Gold crowns? Rewards, yes, but something else..... Read Revelation 2:26-27 Some, I think, confuse John going up for the church. But the church is right there in front of John. The church has been mentioned in the 7 letters directed at them by Yeshua Himself in chapters 2 & 3. But the church is never mentioned again in all the the Book of the Revelation after chapter 3. No need to. The church is no longer on the earth. Now that doesn't mean that others on the earth will not come to trust in the saving work of the Messiah also and be saved. Israel has to cry out for the Messiah's return (Hosea 5:15 & Matthew 23:39) so obviously at some point, the majority of Israel comes to faith in Yeshua. It just means that what we have known as the Ekklesia from the time of Pentacost after Yeshua's resurrection until today, they are not part of that. But then, neither were the saints of the OT part of the NT Ekklesia. They looked forward to the Messiah and trusted, but they were not part of the Ekklesia of the NT. Moses, David, the Prophets..... they were not and are not part the NT Ekklesia, but they are saved by the same atoning work of Yeshua. The Ekklesia (church) is a unique identity, but not everyone throughout history who are saved by the atonement of Messiah part of the NT Ekklesia. It all really shouldn't be as difficult as some make it out to be. One can be a qualified, certified electrician and still not be a member of the Brotherhood of Electrical Workers.

Many others see it the way you do. Marv Rosenthal, a dear brother in the Lord, has been one of the primary advocates of the Pre-wrath position for years. The main leg that idea stands on is defining the wrath of God as beginning later in the 70th week of Daniel. And on the surface, it would seem so. I see the wrath as beginning right out of the gate, with the breaking of the first seal. The seals represent things that are happening on the earth, but these events do not happen until the seals are broken. And who is it that is breaking the seals? Yeshua Himself, who is God. By implication, the events could not happen until Yeshua broke open those seals, therefore, it is by His hand that they happen. So Yeshua is the one who is behind these events which are the first calamities that come upon the earth. Let's look at this from a different angle. When Yeshua was beaten and crucified, who was doing these actual things to Yeshua? Of course, the pagans (Romans). But, the scripture clearly says that Yeshua was undergoing the punishing wrath of God for our sins that we deserve. So was it the Romans or God that killed Yeshua? Trick question... both! But it could not happen unless God was behind it all the time and bringing it forth as it was predicted in the scripture to happen. So, Yeshua is opening the seals starting in Revelation 6. It is by His hand these things are happening upon the earth. They cannot start to happen until Yeshua breaks open each seal. Even though it is weather, geologic, and human caused chaos, it could not happen without Yeshua bringing it forth. Therefore, the seals are indeed the beginning of the wrath of God. And that leads to the conundrum we face..... if the seals are indeed part of the wrath of God, then how is it the scripture says we are not appointed to wrath? And why is the church not even mentioned from chapter 4 onward in Revelation? Why did Isaiah write the passage where God is telling His people to hide themselves in their rooms because He is coming out of His place to bring wrath upon the earth? And why did Yeshua, when He was here on earth, mention that He was returning to the Father's house to prepare rooms for us? And where is the Father's house? It sure isn't here on earth, at least, not until the new heaven and new earth are created. Doesn't make either of us right or wrong. We each see the scripture in our limited, mortal way.

Neither do I. I merely posted it as a curiosity. I said so in the first sentence. Did you not read that? Take it however you want. You don't buy it, then fine. I am not losing any sleep over your decision. You are more than free to dismiss it. It was commented that the pre-trib position was a lie of Satan, so I figured we would glean what Satan has to say about such things and see what he thinks about a early removal of the righteous. If it is lie being foisted on the church by him, he should be going out of his way to support it. But that is not what seems to be going on. That is not saying any position we might hold is absolute truth. Only scripture can be the measuring line we use for that. But Satan was very adept at using scripture against Yeshua, and I believe he knows scripture better than any mortal being. So, there is something is scripture that alludes to a early removal if Satan is putting forth this kind of effort to dismiss the idea. To follow the assertion in Hamlet with a couple of word changes... Me thinks Satan doth protest too much.

Now, this is getting outside scripture, so this is just for curiosity's sake. Many folks seem to become apoplectic about the concept of a pre-trib position. I can understand passion in supporting what view they do hold, but they can't just live with that. They have to make accusations about it being from Satan himself and other comments intended to demean others. So, let's see what Satan has to say about the pre-trib position, since as some claim, he is the author of the idea. Satan obviously is behind some of the most wild deception that has come about over the centuries. And it has been ramped up tremendously in these last days. I don't think we need to dispute that. So what has Satan propositioned regarding the end times and the righteous as it pertains to pre, mid, or post trib? There has been a lot of ink used by New Age gurus, authors, channelers, etc to explain away a sudden disappearance of hundreds of thousands to millions of people. They will use arguments of things like, their vibrations were not in harmony with the earth changes that need to happen. They will be removed "in the twinkling of an eye" by UFO's. And a raft of other nonsense. One thing is apparent in all their goofy stuff though..... they spend an inordinate amount of time explaining away a pre-trib position, but they hardly waste a minute on dismissing any other position. Wonder why that is. What is it about the pre-trib position that has Satan's hair falling out and all these new age writers trying to explain away? Watch for yourself if you think I am just dreaming this up. Plenty of quotes and documentation.

It all sounds good, except you left out 2/3rds of the Bible. Since all the early believers had was the OT, and they checked up on what the Apostles told them from that, then any eschatological position one gleans from the NT must be supported in total by the OT. 100%. That fulfills the Torah requirement that any issue has to be confirmed on the testimony of two witness. I believe those two witness are the NT and OT. Now make the case from the OT that there will be no pre 70th week removal of the righteous. And you better make a very strong case to counter the accusation that such a concept is a lie from the father of lies. Now why you would make such a accusation is a wonder. What is it about a pre-trib position that has your panties in such a wad to take things to that level. By that accusation, you are implying that anyone who entertains the concept is of Satan himself. That is pretty stout. And you are treading on a job position that you are not qualified for.

Well, your opinion is as good and any other. But you are on point... it really doesn't matter what any of us think about it... God is sovereign and has it already laid to according to His will.

Ok... last time. I will break this down since you seem to have a horrible time with the English language. Some of us will see a pre-trib removal. Plain, simple, to the point. If the concept is true, some will see it some won't. Not everyone in the world is saved. There are even some who go to church each week and appear to be solid Christians who are not saved. It is a relationship, not a religion. But for those who disagree with a pre-trib position, I like to jokingly say that those of us who do will gladly explain it on the way up to those who don't! Emphasis being in that little quip is all of those who trust and believe in the Lord will be going up! I might have used that here except quality humor is not something that many here seem capable of grasping. Others won't. Plain simple to the point. No hidden meaning or agenda. There are those in the world who are not saved. They won't experience a pre-trib removal if it occurs. They won't experience a mid, post, pre-wrath, or any other position either for that matter. They are not saved. But that will not be based on their eschatology. Here is the emphasis!! Grasp it and take hold of it! Eyes wide open and minds clear. Grab a cup of coffee and get woke up if one needs to... Ok... here we go boys and girls...... Eschatology will have nothing to do with it. If a person is saved, no matter which eschatological position they hold, they will be part of the pre-trib rapture if it is a true concept. If they are saved, they will be part of one of the many positions that end up being true. but rather on their relationship with the Lord. Plain and simple. Views on eschatology will have nothing to do with it. If a person knows and trusts the Lord they will be a part of a pre-trib removal of the righteous if it does occur, or again, any eschatological position that happens to be true. It is truly sad that so many have a feeble grasp on basic reading comprehension and grammar that it leads to a silly, time wasting dispute. But it did do something I wasn't intending.... it brought out the character of who some people are. It was a revealing light turned on. Instead of asking what I meant if you weren't sure, you instead twisted what I said into a club to beat me up with. You are so blinded by your quest to prove you are right, you are so convinced that everyone is wrong and your goal is to trash them at any point you can. Your selfish pride has overtaken your reason. This is why you did what you did and your pride will not allow you to admit you were wrong. I, sadly, suspected you wouldn't be able to admit you are wrong in what you did. That seems to be the general condition of many in the Body these days. Try to deflect what you did instead of facing it. Because of that, anything you now have to say about this, or any other matter in Christianity, has no merit. You will not admit your sin, so you have distanced yourself from the Lord and anything you could say at this point cannot be trusted as truth. There is no Holy Spirit guiding one who is willfully remaining in sin.

I will be one of the first to admit... the whole idea sounds preposterous! It flies in the face with anything that man in his developing a religion would usually come up with. It is akin to Quantum Physics. I can't recall the physicist to stated this, but I remember the quote (paraphrased)..... "The one thing about Quantum Physics is that it seems like the most preposterous concept to come along, but it is unquestionably true".

You are twisting things I stated. That was a simple statement of fact. If the pre-trib position is correct, some will see it... i.e. all those who are in right relationship with the Lord, irregardless of which eschatological position they hold. Some won’t experience it... i.e. those who are not in the right relationship with the Lord. You really need to lighten up and not come at every statement someone makes as if it is something to pounce on. It negatively affects your reasoning process. Read what is written and not what you think is written. This is the kind of thing I was referring to. Militant, confrontational attitudes. You violated 2 of the 10 Commandments in front of everyone. You carried (represented) the Lord's name in vain and you bore false witness against a brother. Both stoning offenses in ancient Israel. Your problem is not with me. I am a big boy. But you might want to hit your knees before the Lord. What is especially heinous about what you did, you started out with what appeared to be a respectful, considerate approach, just so you could make an attempt to go for the kill, which resulted in your misrepresenting, adding words not there, and demeaning me. You really need to seek the Lord's face on this event. It was cruel and malicious.

No, it isn't posting what you believe is a refutation of the pre-trib position that is the problem. It is the attitude of some that demeaning and denigrating those who hold a pre-trib position is proper. I had no problem with and actually have enjoyed the back and forth when it came to scripture. It makes me work thru the scripture and that is always beneficial. But when subtle innuendos are tossed about like "you are just trying to justify your own faulty belief" and such subtleties which are intended to demean the opposition comes into play, that is not Christian on any level. Keras, you essentially did the same thing in your post. "common reaction of pre-Tribbers" and the one that really smacks of denigrating others because it has single quotes around it meant to add some fuel to the fire.... "the 'rapture to heaven' believers." See ones I highlighted and underlined in your post. You know darn well that those comments were meant to demean or force people into a box of your own making. If you don't, then you have to be the most naive person on the planet. The fact that you put quotes around that one negative insinuation lends proof that you knew exactly what you were doing and wanted to emphasize it. You or anyone else will never be able to show where I used the same demeaning tactics on anyone. Sure, I questioned interpretation of some verses and showed how it was disingenuous to avoid sound grammatical constructs in what a verse says. But I have never said anything like "that is the problem with you Post Tribbers, Mid Tribbers, Pre Wratherites, or Amillenialists." I have never even asked what other position anyone else holds. I have just debated in support of the position I hold. I have not even tried to attack any other position because, frankly, I have no clue what exact position any of you guys who have been going back and forth with me hold! I only have gleaned from this debate is that you guys don't like my position. And really, isn't that sad? All this debate and the only thing I have gotten about others who have interacted with me is that they think I am wrong. Not once in this back and forth has any of those who have interacted with me explained, even in basic terms, the position they hold and tried to lobby for it. They just know I am wrong and by golly they are going to prove it. Those in that camp, be careful. That is bordering on pride and that is the basis for all sin. Yet, it is clear the position I take and I don't shy away from it one bit. Never have. And if no one buys it, that really isn't my problem. I don't worry about it. it is not a salvation dependent thing. Where is the guts on other folk's part to proclaim their particular position and expound on it by showing verses that support their position instead of only using verses they think obliterates their opposition? That is worldly, partizan politic style of debate. And that clearly is un-Christian. Takes me back to the Vietnam War days of guerrilla tactics. Just hit the opposition without standing ground long enough to expose any weakness in themselves. And isn't that sad as well. Now discussions and debates have to be akin to guerrilla warfare instead of thoughtful and passionate interaction. Is it any wonder that the unsaved look at the Church and want no part of it. Now, you claim what I am doing isn't Christian because I pointed out what is going on. I have not called into question anyone's salvation. That is not in my pay grade. But I along with others in the Body are called to inspect fruit. That is in our pay grade. And there is some pretty questionable fruit on the part of some on this forum.

Still playing the dismissive card, eh? Well, I was trying to be positive about it that we all would see what really happens. But you might have a point there. Some of us will see a pre-trib removal and others won't. But that will not be based on their eschatology but rather their relationship with the Lord.

Could be. But not really off point. You were concentrating on Clarke referencing the Talmud and how that was bad. Well, Yeshua had no problem observing a feast day that is only laid out in the Talmud and Mishna. So maybe not everything in the Talmud is all that bad or goes against scripture. It has it's problems, but they are easy to spot. And if there is a pre-trib removal of the righteous, I won't gloat about it. I will be thankful. If there isn't, It will not affect one bit my view on the Lord. I would rather be using scripture justify my position than spending an inordinate amount of time using scripture to shoot down others. Kind of reminds me of politics. Don't focus on voting for someone you actually like. Focus on voting for a candidate opposite the one you hate, even though you will likely end up with the same result in the end. But that is the culture we live in now. The problem I see in all of this, is that many who disagree with the idea of a pre-trib removal of the righteous seem so militant about it. It is just one of many eschatological positions that have no bearing on one's actual salvation. Yet, one thing I have noticed, if one holds to a pre-trib position, it seems like they just stuck themselves in a river full of piranha's. Folks are going to descend on them in a feeding frenzy. While I disagree with other positions, I primarily make the case for my own and don't normally go out of my way to attack the opposite position. I don't think I have once in any thread related to the topic ever demeaned or condemned anyone for disagreeing. It is for each to decide what the scripture is telling them. I might have shot back a little based on how they treated me in the thread, but not over the position they hold. And the militancy of some who want to chastise other who do hold to a pre-trib removal seems more to be focused on wanting others to suffer as opposed to encouraging one another. Seems strange. A pre-trib offers a blessed hope. Anything else only offers apprehension and fear. We should be able to discuss these things like Brothers and Sisters who love the Lord and are part of the same body. Sadly it seems, the prayer the Lord made in John 17:20-21 didn't get answered. Yeah, in all of what the Lord has done, he ends up not getting what He desired. He desired that all trust in Him, and that those who do will be as one. Maybe not in each theological position, but in love and respect for each other. But really, are dismissive comments like "justify anything you wish. You'll see soon enough there is no pretrib rapture" really helpful to the discussion? It smacks of dismissal, condemnation, and denigration. Is that really what the Lord wanted of us?

Yes WE will. And the neat thing, it is coming at us like a rocket sled. Not a lot of time left. AMEN!

Still it remains.... the Lord is the one opening the seals. That implies those events associated with each seal would not occur if He didn't open those seals. Therefore, the entire period is Lord directed. And that still matches up with Isaiah 26.