OldCoot

Not so sure about that. David seems to be speaking only of himself in Psalm 27. And Zephaniah 2:1, the Hebrew behind the "nation" is Goy from which we get Goyim, or gentiles. And in the Jewish mindset, the gentiles are the undesirable nation. Whether it speaks of a rapture or not, people are being hidden in some chambers from the indignation of God as He is coming out of his place. And the Dead are resurrected during this event per Isaiah. Now if only happening on the earth and not in heaven, we will have a bunch of dead people running around with us. But Jesus did say that in His Father's house are many chambers, and that He was going back to prepare a place for us. That is why it seems to me to be a reference of some kind of rapture, removal, etc and not exclusively tied to Israel.

Strong's is neat, but hardly a definitive work on the nuances of the Greek. I use Strong's a lot, but also use Young's. And even with that, I look at word studies done by Greek scholars. We can sit and parse things all to death, but one should really look at how experts in the languages argue differences in the word usage. How do you see the passages I referenced as they pertain to this?

And it still needs to factor in how Isaiah (Isa 26), David (Psalm 27), and Zephaniah (Zeph 2) stated that the righteous are hidden from the time of trouble as referenced in Jeremiah 30, which I believe is in view in the 70th week of Daniel, as Daniel makes reference to Jeremiah's writings elsewhere. Isaiah even ties the resurrection along with this hiding of the righteous, that both are kept from this calamity. And Jesus himself supported the concept when He stated that we pray that we may be worthy to escape all these things (Luke 21). That would include "all" including the false messiah's arrival on the scene, which is before the desecration of temple at the mid point. And a lot of it centers around how we see the Apostasia of 2 Thes 2. Either a "falling away" or a "departure". Good scholars debate that. I tend to side with those, like Kenneth Wuest, who argue that since there is not a definite article to show what is being departed from, that the word stands on its own as meaning simply a departure, and not a departure from the faith, or falling away. Only if the passage had shown what is being departed from, the faith for instance, could one aptly translate the word to a general "falling away". The only other time that word is used is in Acts 21. And that context shows a departure from Moses (the Law), so a falling away application in that context would be correct, as there is a definite article (the law) as shown what is being departed from. We don't have that in 2 Thes 2.

By all means, remove yourself. Thanks for letting us know where you stand.

Actually, the Bereans would have compared all of the OT to what Paul taught. I gave you three example of prophetic writings that substantiate the position earlier but you failed to address them. Well, if you are going down this path, why did you forget Noah? He was put into the ark 7 days before the wrath of God, via the flood, came upon the earth. The literal translation of the Hebrew of the text suggests God putting him in the Ark and sealing the door. Noah couldn't have gotten out if he wanted to. Or how about the Feast of Trumpets, or Rosh hashanah? This festival speaks of the gathering of the righteous, the coronation of the King, and the wedding of the Messiah. It is a two day festival that falls on the first of the month of Tishri. It is described as the "day no man knows" because it can only be declared as starting when the new moon of the month is established. Yom Kippur occurs on the 10th of the month, which speaks of the judgement of sin. Factor out the two days of Rosh Hashanah and you have 7 days between the two festivals, which are referred to as the "days of awe", a veiled reference to a 7 year tribulation period. So if Rosh Hashanah is the removal of the righteous as is taught, then they are hidden for 7 days till the Yom Kippur. Again, the OT prophetic references I mentioned earlier substantiate that fully. And what of the 7 years that Joash is hidden and then brought forth? Another pattern. How about the 7 years of rebellion against David by Absolom? And how is Absolom killed? When his hair is caught in a branch. Absolom's pride is his hair. This is a very visual picture of the antichrist. The antichrist is caught by his pride in the Branch of David, the Messiah after 7 years. There are myriads of examples.

You are confusing the 144,000, the two witnesses, and those that come to faith during the tribulation period with the church as it is now. The 144,000 from the twelve tribes and the two witnesses have a specific mission during this time. They are called for their particular purpose. There will be those who do come to faith, but many passages, both OT and NT say those who come to faith during that time will be prevailed against, i.e. slaughtered.

Only if one uses the way you changed the wording to "that day" as opposed to "the day" as is written. Yes, Satan is here now. He wasn't around this planet for Eve or Job either? How about when Judas betrayed the Messiah? The passage in Ephesians 6 can easily be translated accurately as a period of personal anguish. That can be any time of testing and personal trials. That fits the context more accurately than just a specific period that the world will be going thru. Paul made it clear in Verses 11-12 why he is explaining this. Sure doesn't read like a specific futuristic period or that Satan isn't around now.

Just about any day that one has to face evil. We are to ALWAYS appropriate the whole armor of God. There is no indication in that passage regarding putting on the whole armor of God that it means the great climactic "Day of the Lord", Great Tribulation period, Time of Jacob's Trouble, etc. You changed the words. Nice slight of hand by those that have an agenda. You used "that evil day" in your highlighted portion, when the scripture clearly says "the evil day". You are imposing your own spin on what the scripture says. Naughty, naughty.

The whole idea was that the church is not mentioned as an entity in view during the great tribulation period. The fact that you are making yourself look ridiculous by over dramatizing the issue to the extreme doesn't help the discussion. From Pentacost after Jesus' resurrection till the Great Tribulation period, the church is main focus. During the Great Tribulation, Israel is the main focus, both OT and NT. Isaiah shows that the redeemed are hidden during this time, along with the dead that are resurrected. David, in the Psalms, says similar. Zephaniah backs them up also. That is three separate individual writers that had no association during the time when each of them lived that substantiate a removal of the righteous, and the righteous being hid during this specific time in future history. Keep in mind, the only scriptures available to the Bereans (in Acts) was the OT, for which they were commended by Paul for searching daily to prove what Paul said was true. The Mosaic Law requires that two or more witnesses be required for a matter to be supported. We have those in the OT and the NT. I follow that prescription, and I do not accept any position on such matters without clear support in the OT as well as the NT. If you don't accept that prescription in the Mosaic law about two or more witnesses, remember, that is why Jesus told the woman that was caught in adultery that He did not condemn her after all the others had left. There was not two or more witnesses left to condemn her, and He would have violated the law He gave Moses if He would have condemned her on His own. If you can show, that the church (ekklesia) is clearly identified as an entity in view during the Great Tribulation period, Daniel's 70th week, Time of Jacob's trouble, whatever label you put on it, it would be worthy of consideration. Suffering tribulation has been the hallmark of all that revered God since almost the dawn of time. That is not the same as the Great Tribulation period, wrath or not. None of these following examples are remotely considered The Great Tribulation: The Israelites endured hardship and tribulation under the yoke of Egypt and Babylon. Job endured tribulation at the hands of Satan himself. The Thessalonians were undergoing severe tribulation, which caused Paul to write them that they were NOT in the Great Tribulation, because some knot head had written to the Thessalonians, using Paul's name, and stirred them up that they were. Evidently they had the forerunners of what we deal with today.

Well, we may say it is the "day of the Lord" probably because most of the OT prophets referred to it as such. Just repeating the mantra. I don't see any indication in scripture that the church is the focus of what is needing to be purified. All I see is driving national Israel to the wall to get them finally realize what they should have realized almost 2000 years ago. All I see of saints is being slaughtered and prevailed against by Satan, and the rest of mankind refusing to change their tune. Again, the church isn't even mentioned as an entity in view during this period.

So Satan is the one who will purify the church. Wow. I'll bet he never had that in mind. Actually, a new on on me also.

Yeah, that seems to be the best approach. Whether Tribulation is not wrath or it is, I guess it depends on how those that will go thru that time will see it. We can have our little arguments over what it will be, but the only ones who will be able to give a definitive answer will be those who live thru it. And the major focus of it is Israel. The church isn't even mentioned. Now, considering that twice as many Hebrews are killed during this time as were killed in WW II, my guess is that they would consider the entire period a pretty bad one.

And therein lies the rub. Differing on whether there is a removal of the righteous before this period and those that come to faith during this time are those that are sealed, or that there is no removal and those that have the seal of God are just a continuation of what is already. Indeed, it is a matter of perspective. I would contend that, no, it is not irrespective of location. Jesus said the gates of perdition would not prevail over the church, yet, when the False Messiah (the son of perdition) is allowed to do so, he makes war with the saints and prevails over them. Now which is it? No prevail or prevail?

If there is no avoiding the tribulation period and the wrath coming upon the earth, then why did Jesus state this.... Luke 21:34-36 (NKJV) “But take heed to yourselves, lest your hearts be weighed down with carousing, drunkenness, and cares of this life, and that Day come on you unexpectedly. 35 For it will come as a snare on all those who dwell on the face of the whole earth. 36 Watch therefore, and pray always that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man.” Not an out and out, firm support to a pre-trib position, but it sure offers credence to the concept.

I am convinced that pertains to national Israel. Start with Hosea 5:14 first then go thru to 6:2. The Lord is returning to his place (that would imply that He left it) because of their offense (Israel's national rejection of the Messiah) and would not return until they acknowledge that offense and cry out to Him. It would be a major stretch to think this applies to the world in general or believers. Yeshua confirmed Hosea 5:15 with his statement in Matthew 23:38-39 against the Jewish leadership. Many Hebrews accepted Yeshua as the Messiah, but the leadership did not. It is possible to see this in a number of ways. A 2000 year time frame (2 days) and then Israel would be restored on the 3rd day (1000 year reign of Messiah). Or it could be last two years of the Tribulation period, or time of Jacob's Trouble, and then they would be rescued out of it. Probably other contentions as well. I tend to favor the former, and I am confident that we will all find out one day.

Ok. No problem. Like I stated, I don't worry about it. Actually, I am a pan-tribulationist. It will all pan out according to God. Sure, I generally hold a pre-trib idea within that, but don't really lose any sleep over those that hold mid-trib or pre-wrath positions. My only beef is with yo-yo mindset of Post-trib, and downright rejection of Amillenialism. I don't concur that the church age could be viewed as an application of the "great tribulation". It definitely has its focus on Israel, to get them to turn to Messiah, which they will according to Hosea during this time. And it is another wording of "time of Jacob's trouble" that many view as the final climatic attempt to destroy Israel. The church, as we know it, really isn't in focus regarding being an entity on the earth after Revelation 3. Tribulation saints are, but the church isn't. It (the Ekklesia) is not mentioned anywhere after chapter 3, except in Chapter 22. There were saints in the OT before the church became an entity at Pentacost, clear back to before the flood of Noah, so saints does not mean the Ekklesia. This 70th week of Daniel / Great Tribulation scenario has Israel as the main focus along with the 144,000, the two witnesses, etc. as well as the world rejection of God. And many passages in the OT show that Messiah is the one who rescues Israel during this climatic time when they call out for the Messiah that they now recognize as the one who came and died.

True, many of the rank and file did not have the scriptures available or a good knowledge of what was contained. But, they are not the ones who determined the direction of the church in general. Most folks then are like most folks today. Sunday Christians that heard what their pastors told them and that was about it. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. True, knowledge of the scriptures has been increasing, but it has also been in lock step with being perverted to match the presuppositions of some, and in far more ways than millennial positions.

I tend to look at the entire thing as the 7000 year plan of God. 2000 years from Adam to Abraham being called out. 2000 years from Abraham to Yeshua . 2000 years from Yeshua's first to His second coming. Then the 1000 year reign of the Messiah. Mirrors roughly the 6 day week with a seventh day Sabbath. 2 Peter 3:8 (NKJV) But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. Confirmed by.. Psalms 90:4 (NKJV) For a thousand years in Your sight Are like yesterday when it is past, And like a watch in the night. Based on the testimony of two witnesses (OT and NT), which is the prescription from the Mosaic Law for determining an issue, a day being equal to 1000 years in the plan of God is a valid argument. The 6 day week and Sabbath along with the feasts/festivals are considered rehearsals (miqra) and appointments of God's plan according to Leviticus 23, it is valid to assert the week as it was laid out by God is not also a rehearsal or reflection of the plan of God. Many in Jewish circles see a similar 7 day / 7000 year plan. With them, the 2 days / 2000 years before the final 1 day / 1000 years are called the "latter days". Much in the way we would consider Wednesday as "hump day", with Thursday and Friday as the down hill slide of the week. Many in Jewish circles also see a reign of the Messiah reflected in the 7th day / 1000 years. Not saying that it is a matter of fact, but it is a reasonable assumption, and fascinating to ponder. And it doesn't set a specific day or hour, which should not be done. But scripture does say we should be aware of the times and seasons.

It is all a matter of timing, and there are many good scholars in both camps. Neither position is total nonsense. Just a quibbling over details. I don't worry too much about pre-trib, mid-trib, or pre-wrath. My main concern is post trib and Amillenialism, of which the latter position impugns God's character and says His promises were all lies. But your assertion shows that there is no differentiation between pre-tribulation saints and those that come to faith in Messiah during the tribulation period. And of the latter, both the OT and NT say that Satan will prevail over the tribulation saints (Dan 7:21 and Rev 13:7), but Yeshua also said that Satan cannot prevail against the church (Mat 16:18). There has to be two groups in view... pre-trib saints and tribulation saints. It is true that the last half of the tribulation period is when God pours out His wrath, and we are not appointed to wrath, it also flies in the face of the removal of the righteous, it cannot be known the day. If the tribulation has started, then we have a counter to tick off regarding that day.

Yeah, while Martin Luther has been influential in reforming the Church, and he did recognize what Paul had tried to pound into people regarding Habbakuk 2:4, that the just shall live by faith, Luther stepped on his duffle bag in many areas. And his anti-Semitic views were espoused during the Nazi regime. From Luther himself. Is it possible he wrote Mein Kampf for Hitler? Hitler sure plagiarized Luther....

Ok, I'll bite... see if this scripture reference might suggest of a removal of the righteous before the wrath of God is poured out.... Isaiah 26:19-21 (NKJV) Your dead shall live; Together with my dead body they shall arise. Awake and sing, you who dwell in dust; For your dew is like the dew of herbs, And the earth shall cast out the dead. Take Refuge from the Coming Judgment 20 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. 21 For behold, the Lord comes out of His place To punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity; The earth will also disclose her blood, And will no more cover her slain. Yeshua did say that in His Father's house there were many chambers, and that He was going to prepare a place for the righteous. If there is no removal of the righteous, what is the purpose of those chambers then? Window dressing?

That is correct! I love how folks will use... Galatians 3:28 (NKJV) There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. Yet they fail to see that there is neither male or female. If that verse is meant to assume that there are no physical Jews or Gentiles, then to support that view, they should take a dozen males and females in the congregation, put them up front for all to see, and have them strip down to show there is no male or female. The whole contention that there are neither physical Jews and physical Gentiles is absurd. It is only a spiritual assertion that expounds that we are all equal in Messiah. There is no division, no caste system, etc.

He sure did, even Hanukah which isn't even listed in the OT festivals! John 10:22-23 (NKJV) Now it was the Feast of Dedication in Jerusalem, and it was winter. 23 And Jesus walked in the temple, in Solomon's porch.

That just means you haven't read anything regarding Jewish eschatology. Even in Jewish eschatology, the Last Trump has been traditionally associated with Rosh HaShanah which, according to much of Jewish eschatology, is reflective of the gathering of the righteous, the coronation of the Messiah, and the wedding of the Messiah. And since Rosh Hashanah falls on the 1st of the month of the Jewish calendar, and that the 1st of the month could only be established based on the declaration of the new moon, and that Rosh Hashanah is a two day festival, it is commonly called the "day that no man knows". While not proof of anything, it does support the contention that Yeshua said that of that day no one knows but His Father.

Since the NT was written by Yeshua believing Jewish people with a Jewish perspective, especially so with Paul and his extensive Rabbinic background, it might be productive to take a look at the meaning of first trump, last trump, and great trump that is revealed in perspectives on the festivals (which are holy rehearsals of God's plan over time as espoused in Leviticus 23) and eschatology from that Jewish perspective. Not that Jewish perspective is equal with scripture or taken as golden, but that it can offer a little clarity to what the NT writers were saying regarding trumpets and eschatology. While Jewish leadership definitely failed in recognition and acceptance of the Messiah, they didn't get everything wrong.