Vine Abider

Yesterday I had the "simple middle east prophesy" discussion with my dad, who is a younger Christian, and doesn't know scripture very well. I told him my simple take on middle east prophesy was this: It's exceedingly remarkable that Israel has become a nation again after 2,000 years of dispersal and that this was divinely orchestrated and God is very focused on what happens there. And soon it will look like the whole world may get dragged into a middle east conflict, which is all prophetic. And when it looks like everything will really hit the fan, a highly charismatic and capable leader will arise, who will do what no one else has been able to do - make a treaty with Israel and her enemies. Then peace and prosperity will follow and the whole world will be convinced that this leader is the best, but then in the middle of the seven year treaty, he will break it. At that point things will dramatically spiral downward, culminating in the Lord returning to stop the advancing armies, save Jerusalem, and bring in His kingdom. Dad was receptive, and said of the leader to arise, "Every one will look to guy as "The Savior!" (BTW - When it says the man of sin breaks the treat and causes the sacrifices to cease (Dan 9:27), I had a thought I'm chewing on . . . in the past I always thought the this one was coming out against the Jews in the middle of the final week, but what if he actually wants their worship? It says he sets himself up as God in the temple (2 Thess 2:4), so perhaps he says to the Jews, "You don't need to sacrifice to me any more . . . I'm God and have returned to save you and don't require these sacrifices from any more! Just worship me now unfettered without any pretense." Had I been looking at this all wrong before, or is this thinking totally out in left field?

Thanks - your thoughts are noted. So you don't believe the man of sin will arise and do a treaty?

Interesting, and thanks for directly addressing this! So I believe I have scriptures for each of these things (a condensed, simpler version of events quoted from an earlier post): "Give a little background on Israel becoming a nation again, and that things there will reach a potentially very catastrophic level, but a charismatic leader will arise to make a 7 year treaty. And even though peace and good times appear to rule the day after the treaty, the lid will seriously come off in 3.5 years, and then before too long, the Lord will return to subdue the dire situation and set up His kingdom --> therefore sinner, turn to Him and be saved!"

Never thought about a differences between partial and multiple raptures. So what about the promise to the church in Philly, where the Lord tells them "if" (a conditional standard being placed), then He will keep them from the hour of trial (tribulation) - is that not a possible partial? (Of course, one may not think the vehicle for keeping this promise is a rapture . . .)

Oh, good point . . . I wasn't thinking about that. So if it gets moved, do others see where?

@Dennis1209 @seeking the lost @AnOrangeCat @AdHoc I've started a new thread here on this topic, so as not to derail this one completely:

On another thread, a few people seemed interested in talking again about the Partial Rapture Theory. (I say again, because we did a thread on this about 1.5 years ago that got to over 90 pages before George closed it!) Here's a few of the comments I thought to bring over from that other (current) thread: Below posted by me (as a response to @AnOrangeCat on that other current thread: We had quite the thread going on this over a year ago (actually may have been a couple threads) - I can see if I find them if you'd like. But the basics are this: many argue incessantly for either pre or post trib rapture, and some also for mid trib. I subscribe to the notion that there are some merits for all these in scripture, therefore multiple, partial raptures. There have been God's people who have been caught away at various points, so I don't understand why Christians insist on dogmatically staking claim to just one rapture at the end. To me, we are all saved equally, and He puts His Spirit of life into us to make us children. Therefore we are all on equal footing in that regards - saved by grace period. But then there is the matter of how we grow and what we do with this grace and life we've been given. The Bema Seat judgement will address this and differentiate between God's children. So why should the rapture idea be any different, that is, ones taken up according to how well they have allowed the seed of life in them to grow? Much more could be said, but after some digging I found this thread I started in December 2022. (FYI - there were over 90 pages to this thread and it was closed by George, but if you read a few of the beginning pages I think you'll get the idea.) Below posted by me responding to @Dennis1209 on that other current thread: I don't know much about what the anti-Nicene church fathers held regarding the rapture(s) . . . and I would defer to @AdHoc regarding any teachings from back then about multiple/partial reapings. And even if no church father source for the idea comes from that period, I would maintain that this, in and of itself, certainly does not negate the idea. I do agree that much of the partial rapture teaching did get promulgated by 19th century authors. Here's something from Wikipedia in an article on "Rapture" subsection "Partial pre-tribulation premillennialism": As stated by Ira David (a proponent of this view): “The saints will be raptured in groups during the tribulation as they are prepared to go.”[98] Some notable proponents of this theory are G. H. Lang, Robert Chapman, G. H. Pember, Robert Govett, D. M. Panton, Watchman Nee, Ira E. David, J. A. Seiss, Hudson Taylor, Anthony Norris Groves, John Wilkinson, G. Campbell Morgan, Otto Stockmayer and Rev. J. W. (Chip) White Jr. Found here - an interesting read on the whole matter of the rapture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapture I am familiar with a number of these authors and many were in the 19th century. If anyone is interested, here is a website I found today that promotes Partial Rapture Theory (PRT): https://www.bible-prophecy.co/partial-rapture-theory/ I have just started to look through it, so I can't vouch for its veracity. UPDATE: Just realized this website is by an author whose book I have on my shelf: "The Partial Rapture and the Left Behind Church" by Paul Shoenbarger Below posted by @Dennis1209 as a response to me (on that other, current thread): To coin an old secular adage, “The closer to the bone, the sweeter the meat.” The closer we get to the source material and references, the more detail and accuracy. My point is: 1 Thes. 4: 15For 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. 18 Wherefore lcomfort one another with these words. [emphasis mine] On scripture: I am not dogmatic, but I see nowhere in scripture that teaches a partial rapture. How could we comfort one another knowing some of our beloved brethren and loved ones missed the church age (age of Grace) Rapture and Resurrection? It seems the pronoun WE is all-encompassing and all-inclusive. I mentioned the early so-called church fathers. Polycarp was a personal friend and disciple of John the Revelator, studying under John, not to mention Irenaeus under Polycarp and all the other so-called Ante-Nicene fathers. None of them knew what is spouted today as partial raptures. Short of reverifying, I do not recall any Reformation leaders of the sixteenth century mentioning partial raptures. This doctrinal introduction is a product of the 19th century, which is very late in Biblical terms. It is not to say there will only be one rapture and one glorification. I believe those Tribulation martyrs (and ourselves) will return with Christ at His 2nd coming, then having their glorified bodies. And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled. (Revelation 6:11) The final resurrection is the Great White Throne judgment, where those not written in the Lamb’s Book of Life are bodily resurrected, condemned, and join the Antichrist and False Prophet in the Lake of Fire. I also would like @AdHoc to chime in. I consistently learn from you both, getting alternate views and thoughts.

Let me just say that, as interesting as it is, much further discussion of the rapture should probably be done in a separate thread, as the topic has the propensity to take off!

Sometimes . . . as I'm lead.

I don't know much about what the anti-Nicene church fathers held regarding the rapture(s) . . . and I would defer to @AdHoc regarding any teachings from back then about multiple/partial reapings. And even if no church father source for the idea comes from that period, I would maintain that this, in and of itself, certainly does not negate the idea. I do agree that much of the partial rapture teaching did get promulgated by 19th century authors. Here's something from Wikipedia in an article on "Rapture" subsection "Partial pre-tribulation premillennialism": As stated by Ira David (a proponent of this view): “The saints will be raptured in groups during the tribulation as they are prepared to go.”[98] Some notable proponents of this theory are G. H. Lang, Robert Chapman, G. H. Pember, Robert Govett, D. M. Panton, Watchman Nee, Ira E. David, J. A. Seiss, Hudson Taylor, Anthony Norris Groves, John Wilkinson, G. Campbell Morgan, Otto Stockmayer and Rev. J. W. (Chip) White Jr. Found here - an interesting read on the whole matter of the rapture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapture I am familiar with a number of these authors and many were in the 19th century. If anyone is interested, here is a website I found today that promotes Partial Rapture Theory (PRT): https://www.bible-prophecy.co/partial-rapture-theory/ I have just started to look through it, so I can't vouch for its veracity. UPDATE: Just realized this website is by an author whose book I have on my shelf: "The Partial Rapture and the Left Behind Church" by Paul Shoenbarger

We had quite the thread going on this over a year ago (actually may have been a couple threads) - I can see if I find them if you'd like. But the basics are this: many argue incessantly for either pre or post trib rapture, and some also for mid trib. I subscribe to the notion that there are some merits for all these in scripture, therefore multiple, partial raptures. There have been God's people who have been caught away at various points, so I don't understand why Christians insist on dogmatically staking claim to just one rapture at the end. To me, we are all saved equally, and He puts His Spirit of life into us to make us children. Therefore we are all on equal footing in that regards - saved by grace period. But then there is the matter of how we grow and what we do with this grace and life we've been given. The Bema Seat judgement will address this and differentiate between God's children. So why should the rapture idea be any different, that is, ones taken up according to how well they have allowed the seed of life in them to grow? Much more could be said, but after some digging I found this thread I started in December 2022. (FYI - there were over 90 pages to this thread and it was closed by George, but if you read a few of the beginning pages I think you'll get the idea.)

I just pray the Lord gives them wisdom and that His guiding hand is on them . . .

Perhaps. But, as I've said before, the time could be ripe in the US for a 3rd party candidate to do well and even win - there are that many who are dissatisfied with our current two choices IMHO.

But if the RNC sees he can't win the general, can't they do something, or is it a lock with the delegates no matter what? And I'm seeing reports Trump is also loosing a lot - swing voters, etc. . . .

OK, I hinted at it, but I think there's good reason to expect that Trump won't prevail in the legal arena and will be forced out. What happens then? Is there a conservative plan "B"?

That was a good article!

I think I'll vote for Ross Perot - is he still alive?

Good insight! I think it's another of those "all things point to Christ," so yes, it really should get our attention if we have any awareness at all! But I'm constantly amazed at just how dead to these things my flesh is . . . I mean it's just plain DEAD to having any feeling whatsoever regarding seeing prophetic things unfold - it doesn't seem to get excited or even respond one bit. Do you think that is what the word means when it says the outer man is dead? But Hallelujah - our spirit is life because of (His) righteousness!

Agree! I am not advocating a method, which will supplant the inner leading of the Spirit. I just know that in the USA there are a lot of people who are anxious about the situation of things they see happening, both domestically and abroad. (Even though many Americans pay far more attention to domestic things, if the middle east gets ready to blow and they see we might potentially be dragged into a war with much larger implications, that will certainly get our attention!) And as Paul says, the Spirit guides us to be aware of our audience - "I have become all things to all people, that I might by all means save some." 1 Cor 9:22 Therefore, I'm just thinking we might prepare a little to be ready with a simple answer and to plant a seed if and when the opportunity arises.

So what happens if Trump gets knocked out of the race with legal issues? I'm asking because I don't know if there is a Plan "B"

Wow - now that was a good post . . . and exactly what I'm talking about here! @AdHoc & @Marilyn C - I think this post conveys it, that is, to inform (as lead) the unsaved regarding what we believers are seeing unfold regarding prophetic events in the middle east. I mean people may know generally that the Bible foretells something about the events there, but usually their understanding is extremely distorted at best. And I think telling them things like computer chips will be implanted may be a very popular notion among us Christians (indeed, it could be that the mark is a chip), but I think we need to be very careful in conveying anything that is not specifically stated in the bible. My thinking is be very simple with them: give a little background on Israel becoming a nation again, and that things there will reach a potentially very catastrophic level, but a charismatic leader will arise to make a 7 year treaty. And even though peace and good times appear to rule the day after the treaty, the lid will seriously come off in 3.5 years, and then before too long, the Lord will return to subdue the dire situation and set up His kingdom --> therefore, sinner, turn to Him and be saved! So do we at least generally agree on these simple points?

I like the simplicity of the idea - what if you think electing one person might be dangerous for the country? (I'll let the reader determine who that might be) BTW - Does anybody pray for our president as we're exhorted to do in 1 Timothy 2?

I'm wondering . . . what if a scenario plays out like this: Trump gets seriously damaged (or knocked out) by one or more of these legal issues (potentially a conviction on one or more charges), and the RNC is forced to look elsewhere. Who then?

Agreed. However, I'm not talking about setting specific timeframes. Rather just pointing to the fact that the Israel/Jerusalem/middle east is predominate in end-of-the-age prophecy, and giving just a few particulars --> also saying that this is how I personally take scripture to mean. People should know that it's not by chance that the world is focusing on - and being drawn into - the middle eastern situation . . . it is in The Book. Therefore, knowing this can be an opportunity for Good News. And that's also why I think it good to be more general. That is, avoid being more specific than scripture is in these matters, because if something doesn't go down exactly the way we specifically state, that can become a stumbling. As it says in a couple places (Dan 12 for one), these things should be unveiled the more closely we get to them, and to those who are watching.

Below is something I've been playing with (and mentioned it in another thread). I see an opportunity to share with unsaved about things occurring toward the end of this age, so that there might be an opening for the Good News. For believers, the end of the age is about His Kingdom being manifested, but to unsaved, this is "the end of the world." To us the apocalypse means the wonderful, full unveiling of Christ and the sons of God; but to unbelievers it is something full of dreadful fear. The Lord can use that fear for the entrance of His Word! So the 10 steps below are a very basic conveying of my thoughts on what is, and will soon occur, concerning Jerusalem and the middle east. It is, of course, according to my own theology and my understanding of prophesy. For nonbelievers I would want to keep it real simple, and might just share points #1 and #2, and perhaps #4, 6-7. For instance, I probably wouldn't get much into matters concerning the raptures (I believe in multiple, partial raptures). And I know that believers might have varying views and opinions about some of these events (especially the raptures & manchild), but my purpose in conveying these is in hope that we may see a clear way to present simple, end of the age prophesies to the unsaved, as a means for the gospel. My basic Understanding of Prophetic Last Week (7 years) of this Age as an Abbreviated Outline: 1. The background - Israel returned in 1948 to become a nation again, after 2,000 years of dispersal throughout the world. This is unprecedented in history. 2. Soon, serious conflict in the middle east/Israel will have the whole world greatly disturbed. A charismatic leader arises to power who makes a grand 7 year treaty with Israel and her enemies – great peace and prosperity takes place in the world (but also many disturbing/destructive natural calamities occur). This is the beginning of the final 7 years. 3. First-fruits (early rapture) are taken directly to God’s throne somewhere in first 3.5 years of the treaty. Next items happen in rapid succession mid-way through the final week (3.5 years from treaty enactment): 4. Charismatic leader dealt death blow 5. Manchild taken to heaven - Satan is cast down to earth 6. Dead leader comes back to life supernaturally 7. Leader breaks treaty 3.5 years after signing it & desecrates the Jerusalem temple, setting himself up as God there 8. Final 3.5 years start – supernatural calamities upon the whole earth - two witnesses appear Toward the end of last 3.5 years (end of 7 year week): 9. Large armies gather to middle east – battle of Armageddon 10. Christ returns to defeat armies and antichrist, and to set up His kingdom on the earth