What ELSE Happens at the Gathering of the Saints?

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, yod.

Quite simply, the "tribulation period" is NOT restricted to a mere 7 years. Yeshua` talked about it occurring when Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) was destroyed in 69-70 A.D. (Luke 21:20-24) and talked about it continuing until He returned (Matt. 24:29-31). The mistake is equating the "tribulation period" with the 70th Seven of Dani'el 9:24-27. They are not the same.

(Furthermore, how could a horrible event such as the battle of Armageddon or rather Har Megiddown (Tel Megiddo near Haifa and Nazareth, Isra'el) be AFTER the terrible pressure on the Jewish people?! That really doesn't make practical sense.

FInally....someone who allows the Word to say what it says without injecting it with their pet theological presumptions.

Welcome to the WB, bro

Thank you, yod. That's probably been my LONGEST learning curve, learning to allow the Word to say what it says without injecting it with the theological presumptions I have or others have given me, and I don't believe I'm totally there, yet. I used to be a premillennial, pretribulational rapturist every bit as staunch as Tim LaHaye. In fact, my dad used to be a Fundamental, independent Baptist minister; so, I was well indoctrinated from childhood. However, since 1978, I have learned to question the things I used to believe so thoroughly. Providentially, God taught me to adhere to certain things I could believe and throw out the rest. I started by going all the way back to my justification by God ("salvation") and the fact that God would want to communicate with us in a way that would survive beyond a single lifespan. From that point on, I've been carefully adding the bricks of Bible information we can know, even adjusting them from time to time when I discover something about the Hebrew or Greek languages.

I started out boot-strap learning the languages, even before that time. I learned and memorized the Hebrew alefbet (although not pronounced correctly) from Psalm 119 in my old Scofield Reference Edition of the KJV when I was a child of 8 or 9 while I was in church one Sunday (much to my father's displeasure at not "paying attention to the sermon"). I was proud of what I was learning and could share it with my mother, who was far more open to how I was developing, even though my father couldn't appreciate it at the time. I didn't even know that all the letters were consonants; so, I equated an "alef" with our letter "A" and a "hei" with our letter "E!" I even supplemented this with the Compton's Encyclopedia set, for the index of the A volume had a chart of ancient alphabets compared to the development of our letters in our alphabet. Being a "bookworm," preferring to stay indoors and read the encyclopedias and the dictionary instead of going out to play, I did a LOT of reading!

We had a family Bible on the coffee table at home that had the Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries in the back based on Young's Concordance, and I, being an avid reader, would pour over the definitions of various words from both the Greek and the Hebrew, although Hebrew continued to allude me. I actually learned from the Tetragrammaton that Hebrew was written from right to left, because I had heard in some sermon that God's Name was transliterated as "YHVH!" I would almost always get a new Bible for Christmas or a birthday when my old one was beginning to fall apart (I was rough on Bibles), but one year, early in Junior High School, I think, I received a Strong's Concordance with the dictionaries in the back! I was in "heaven!" By the time I had graduated from Bible college, I had that thing pretty well DESTROYED!

Now, I use PC Study Bible v. 5 with Hebrew and Greek texts.

That's probably more than you needed to know (or wanted to know), but that's who I am.

In the Messiah's love,

Roy

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, Montana Marv.

Quite simply, the "tribulation period" is NOT restricted to a mere 7 years. Yeshua` talked about it occurring when Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) was destroyed in 69-70 A.D. (Luke 21:20-24) and talked about it continuing until He returned (Matt. 24:29-31). The mistake is equating the "tribulation period" with the 70th Seven of Dani'el 9:24-27. They are not the same.

(Furthermore, how could a horrible event such as the battle of Armageddon or rather Har Megiddown (Tel Megiddo near Haifa and Nazareth, Isra'el) be AFTER the terrible pressure on the Jewish people?! That really doesn't make practical sense.

FInally....someone who allows the Word to say what it says without injecting it with their pet theological presumptions.

Welcome to the WB, bro

The term "tribulation" (the last seven years) or (the Seventh week of Daniel) is a coined term that Christendom has place on this period of time. Which is different from the trails and tribulations that those of the Church are going through now or have already gone through. But the description in Matt 24:21 of a great distress unequaled from the beginning of the world until now; One must equate this with the Flood in Noah's time, very destructive, no survivors except Noah and his family, worse than Armageddon will be, for those during the Flood were unaware, but those who die during Armageddon are aware. Many did not die at Armageddon. This "distress unequaled" is referring to the pouring out of the Seal, Trumpet and Bowl judgments upon all mankind. This 'great distress' or great 'tribulation" does not occur until after the A/D is set up in the temple by the A/C. (According to Matt 24:15) and quoting Daniel 9:27 and 12:11.

So there are a lot of semantics involved. When verbally speaking, one (the hearer) must know the meaning; Cell, has many meanings, or Sale, Sail, or Sell and all pronounced the same. So when one author speaks of the Tribulation eschatology speaking, he is referring to the upcoming end times; Why fight his description?

Biblically speaking the 70th Week of Daniel has not started, the last seven years has not started. A lot of time or very little time between Now and then (the 70th Week).

In Christ

Montana Marv

Right off the bat, Marv, you've made the assertion that the "tribulation" is the "last seven years!" What proof do you have of this? Please, tell me what proof you have because, quite frankly, I believe that it is just that worn-out rhetoric of the pretribulational rapturist position! Who told you that the "tribulation" was a "seven-year period?" I don't mean to be combative, but please, think about it! There is nothing in Scripture that DEMANDS that the "tribulation" be a "seven-year period." Now, the 70th seven of Dani'el is different; yes, that IS seven years, but what makes you think this is equal to the "tribulation?"

Secondly, what makes you think that this "tribulation" is AT ALL being compared to "the trials and tribulations that those of the Church are going through now or have already gone through"? The "tribulation," as described by Yeshua` in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and to some extent in Luke 21 is NOT about the "trials and tribulations of the Church!" It's simply about the "pressure" put upon the Jews, whether believers or not, since the first century!

Thirdly, Matthew 24:21, once again, is NOT talking about an inevitable "tribulation" that MUST occur and therefore must occur in the future because such an event has not as yet happened! It was a POTENTIALLY devastating "tribulation" IF AND ONLY IF the disciples has neglected to pray that their flight not be in the "winter" (the rainy season) or on the "Shabbat" (the Sabbath)! They did NOT neglect to pray, consequentially they did NOT experience such a devastating "tribulation!" YOU'VE GOT TO KEEP THINGS IN THEIR CONTEXTS! Look at it again:

Matthew 24:20-21

20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

KJV

This is a conditional statement, and verse 21 is DEPENDENT UPON verse 20! It's like the "stones crying out" in Luke 19:40:

Luke 19:40

40 And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.

KJV

They COULD have cried out, but it was NOT NECESSARY for them to do so because the disciples and the children did what they were prophesied to do! Understand?

Fourthly, I don't know what dialect of English you speak, but "cell" may sound like "sell" and "sail" may sound like "sale," but "cell" and "sell" do NOT sound like "sail" and "sale" in most English dialects I've heard! Regardless, this is NOT just a case of semantics! It's about an error in definitions and the use of the wrong words in the Bible. It's just like the term "salvation": "Salvation" means "deliverance" or "rescue" and, within the prophecies of the Bible, has to do with the NATIONAL rescue of the Jewish nation, Isra'el! And yet, most Christians erroneously use the term for God's justification of an individual. That, too, may seem like just a case of semantics ... UNTIL one goes looking for verses that contain the word "salvation" or "saved" and finds verses that SHOULD be applied to the national rescue of the Jews but is thought to be about the standing one has with God! That's not "semantics"; that's just ERROR!

For instance, one should not use Romans 10:13 as a verse for God's justification of an individual. If one looks at the verse from which it is quoted, namely Joel 2:32, one will see from its context that this is talking about Isra'el as a nation, not about individuals! One should use 2 Corinthians 5:21 instead. THAT verse is definitely talking about God's justification of an individual through the transferrence of our sins with the righteousness of God in the Messiah, also called "reconciliation with God."

While I would tend to agree with you that the seventieth seven is not now being fulfilled, the "tribulation" or "pressure" has been going on for nigh onto two millennia!

[~candice~]

Shalom, yod.

Quite simply, the "tribulation period" is NOT restricted to a mere 7 years. Yeshua` talked about it occurring when Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) was destroyed in 69-70 A.D. (Luke 21:20-24) and talked about it continuing until He returned (Matt. 24:29-31). The mistake is equating the "tribulation period" with the 70th Seven of Dani'el 9:24-27. They are not the same.

(Furthermore, how could a horrible event such as the battle of Armageddon or rather Har Megiddown (Tel Megiddo near Haifa and Nazareth, Isra'el) be AFTER the terrible pressure on the Jewish people?! That really doesn't make practical sense.

FInally....someone who allows the Word to say what it says without injecting it with their pet theological presumptions.

Welcome to the WB, bro

Thank you, yod. That's probably been my LONGEST learning curve, learning to allow the Word to say what it says without injecting it with the theological presumptions I have or others have given me, and I don't believe I'm totally there, yet. I used to be a premillennial, pretribulational rapturist every bit as staunch as Tim LaHaye. In fact, my dad used to be a Fundamental, independent Baptist minister; so, I was well indoctrinated from childhood. However, since 1978, I have learned to question the things I used to believe so thoroughly. Providentially, God taught me to adhere to certain things I could believe and throw out the rest. I started by going all the way back to my justification by God ("salvation") and the fact that God would want to communicate with us in a way that would survive beyond a single lifespan. From that point on, I've been carefully adding the bricks of Bible information we can know, even adjusting them from time to time when I discover something about the Hebrew or Greek languages.

I started out boot-strap learning the languages, even before that time. I learned and memorized the Hebrew alefbet (although not pronounced correctly) from Psalm 119 in my old Scofield Reference Edition of the KJV when I was a child of 8 or 9 while I was in church one Sunday (much to my father's displeasure at not "paying attention to the sermon"). I was proud of what I was learning and could share it with my mother, who was far more open to how I was developing, even though my father couldn't appreciate it at the time. I didn't even know that all the letters were consonants; so, I equated an "alef" with our letter "A" and a "hei" with our letter "E!" I even supplemented this with the Compton's Encyclopedia set, for the index of the A volume had a chart of ancient alphabets compared to the development of our letters in our alphabet. Being a "bookworm," preferring to stay indoors and read the encyclopedias and the dictionary instead of going out to play, I did a LOT of reading!

We had a family Bible on the coffee table at home that had the Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries in the back based on Young's Concordance, and I, being an avid reader, would pour over the definitions of various words from both the Greek and the Hebrew, although Hebrew continued to allude me. I actually learned from the Tetragrammaton that Hebrew was written from right to left, because I had heard in some sermon that God's Name was transliterated as "YHVH!" I would almost always get a new Bible for Christmas or a birthday when my old one was beginning to fall apart (I was rough on Bibles), but one year, early in Junior High School, I think, I received a Strong's Concordance with the dictionaries in the back! I was in "heaven!" By the time I had graduated from Bible college, I had that thing pretty well DESTROYED!

Now, I use PC Study Bible v. 5 with Hebrew and Greek texts.

That's probably more than you needed to know (or wanted to know), but that's who I am.

In the Messiah's love,

Roy

Are you no longer pre mil?

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, candice.

Shalom, yod.

Quite simply, the "tribulation period" is NOT restricted to a mere 7 years. Yeshua` talked about it occurring when Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) was destroyed in 69-70 A.D. (Luke 21:20-24) and talked about it continuing until He returned (Matt. 24:29-31). The mistake is equating the "tribulation period" with the 70th Seven of Dani'el 9:24-27. They are not the same.

(Furthermore, how could a horrible event such as the battle of Armageddon or rather Har Megiddown (Tel Megiddo near Haifa and Nazareth, Isra'el) be AFTER the terrible pressure on the Jewish people?! That really doesn't make practical sense.

FInally....someone who allows the Word to say what it says without injecting it with their pet theological presumptions.

Welcome to the WB, bro

Thank you, yod. That's probably been my LONGEST learning curve, learning to allow the Word to say what it says without injecting it with the theological presumptions I have or others have given me, and I don't believe I'm totally there, yet. I used to be a premillennial, pretribulational rapturist every bit as staunch as Tim LaHaye. In fact, my dad used to be a Fundamental, independent Baptist minister; so, I was well indoctrinated from childhood. However, since 1978, I have learned to question the things I used to believe so thoroughly. Providentially, God taught me to adhere to certain things I could believe and throw out the rest. I started by going all the way back to my justification by God ("salvation") and the fact that God would want to communicate with us in a way that would survive beyond a single lifespan. From that point on, I've been carefully adding the bricks of Bible information we can know, even adjusting them from time to time when I discover something about the Hebrew or Greek languages.

I started out boot-strap learning the languages, even before that time. I learned and memorized the Hebrew alefbet (although not pronounced correctly) from Psalm 119 in my old Scofield Reference Edition of the KJV when I was a child of 8 or 9 while I was in church one Sunday (much to my father's displeasure at not "paying attention to the sermon"). I was proud of what I was learning and could share it with my mother, who was far more open to how I was developing, even though my father couldn't appreciate it at the time. I didn't even know that all the letters were consonants; so, I equated an "alef" with our letter "A" and a "hei" with our letter "E!" I even supplemented this with the Compton's Encyclopedia set, for the index of the A volume had a chart of ancient alphabets compared to the development of our letters in our alphabet. Being a "bookworm," preferring to stay indoors and read the encyclopedias and the dictionary instead of going out to play, I did a LOT of reading!

We had a family Bible on the coffee table at home that had the Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries in the back based on Young's Concordance, and I, being an avid reader, would pour over the definitions of various words from both the Greek and the Hebrew, although Hebrew continued to allude me. I actually learned from the Tetragrammaton that Hebrew was written from right to left, because I had heard in some sermon that God's Name was transliterated as "YHVH!" I would almost always get a new Bible for Christmas or a birthday when my old one was beginning to fall apart (I was rough on Bibles), but one year, early in Junior High School, I think, I received a Strong's Concordance with the dictionaries in the back! I was in "heaven!" By the time I had graduated from Bible college, I had that thing pretty well DESTROYED!

Now, I use PC Study Bible v. 5 with Hebrew and Greek texts.

That's probably more than you needed to know (or wanted to know), but that's who I am.

In the Messiah's love,

Roy

Are you no longer pre mil?

No, I AM premillennial. See, I MUST believe that the authors of Scripture who wrote under God's inspiration were ... normal. Therefore, I believe that the proper understanding of the Scriptures is derived from the normal, historical, grammatical interpretation of the Scriptures. IMO, that means that the normal understanding of the prophecies is to take them as given in a normal, historical, grammatical interpretation. This produces a premillennial interpretation of prophecy.

I try not to read anything into the Scriptures; I prefer to get my information FROM the Scriptures (almost to a "fault," in the opinions of others). Therefore, I might be seen as a "hyper literalist" by some. However, I'm not totally against figures of speech. Figures of speech are NORMAL grammatical tools; HOWEVER, IMO, they are used SPARINGLY in Scripture and well-telegraphed! If they are not clear with words such as "like" or "as," then they need to be VERY clearly "figures of speech!" "Metaphors" in the opinion of some readers are NOT always metaphors according to the authors!

The things to which I DO strongly object are getting "teaching allegories" out of just any-ol'-where in Scripture WITHOUT CAUSE! While the Scriptures WERE "written for our admonition," that doesn't give us permission to see beyond what the author was trying to convey! Indeed, one can acquire "admonition" from historical lessons, such as from the book of Genesis (or B'resheet), without resorting to "this means that" and "that means this" allegories!

I find most "teaching allegories" fabricated by modern preachers and teachers to be ... well ... GOOFY at best and DANGEROUS AND DECEITFUL at worst! My motto is "STICK TO THE SCRIPTURES" as they were intended!

Cooper's Golden Rule of Interpretation is...

"When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense;

Therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning

Unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light

Of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths indicate clearly otherwise."

Often, this is reduced to...

"If the plain sense makes good sense, seek no other sense, lest it result in nonsense."

I find this to be a good rule of thumb to follow, IF one doesn't neglect the exception to the rule that Cooper included from the "Unless" and onward. It's like standing on a precipice and one could fall off on either side. One could make the error of taking something too literally and missing something intended by the author to be a figure of speech, OR one could make the error of thinking an ordinary thing to say was the author using some metaphor for something else!

It's rather a tight rope to walk, but I would sooner err on the side of being too literal than too allegorical; so, if I must make an error, I will continue to choose to take something too literally. It still seems to me to be the more favorable of the two.

In the Messiah's love,

Roy

[~candice~]

Thanks, I read this

I used to be a premillennial, pretribulational rapturist every bit as staunch as Tim LaHaye.

to mean you are now no longer premil or pretrib, but I understand now you meant differently.

[Retrobyter]

Shalom, candice.

Thanks, I read this

I used to be a premillennial, pretribulational rapturist every bit as staunch as Tim LaHaye.

to mean you are now no longer premil or pretrib, but I understand now you meant differently.

Yes, but please understand also that, although I am premillennial, I am not pretribulational rapturist any more. In fact, I don't believe there are "seven years" left. I believe that the "Tribulation" has been going on for almost 2,000 years, and that 1/2 of the 70th seven of Dani'el 9:24-27 is already past. The first 3.5 years - the first 1/2 of the 70th seven - was fulfilled in the "earthly ministry" of Yeshua` during His first advent. Therefore, while the "Tribulation" is still going and and will continue until Yeshua` returns and rescues the nation Isra'el from captivity, from slavery and from an attempted massacre, the 70th seven only has 3.5 years left. So, what COULD I be?

I can't be pretribulational rapturist because there's no way that the Rapture could occur before the "Tribulation" nor could it be seven years prior to Yeshua`s Second Coming!

I refuse to be a Full Preterist because there's too much allegory and assumed figurative language in its explanation of the fulfillment of Matthew 24 and 25, Mark 13, and Luke 21 as well as Dani'el and the book of Revelation!

I cannot be a posttribulational rapturist because much of Revelation occurs AFTER and DURING the Second Coming. I believe that the Second Coming of Yeshua` haMashiach is more of a period of time than a single event. The seven bowl judgments are PART of the Second Coming! The "Rapture" is PART of the Second Coming as a first stage to the Coming! The transporting of God's people TO ISRA'EL will take some time, even though the transformation process itself will be in the "twinkling of an eye." The "Rapture" is NOT for "escapism!" Its purpose is NOT to avoid God's Wrath; its purpose is to transport His believers to ISRA'EL as His army to aid in the rescue operation!

I cannot be a Pre-Wrath Rapturist because they still believe in a seven-year period that is divided in two where the second half is called the 'Wrath of God" or the "Great Tribulation."

I might be called a form of Partial Preterist in the sense that I believe some of the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled in the first century and part of it will be fulfilled in the 3.5 years prior to the Second Coming of the Messiah, but there's already a position called "Partial Preterist" that I cannot accept because they say that too much has already been fulfilled in the first century, especially in the book of Revelation with only the last 2 or 3 chapters left to be fulfilled!

So, what AM I? All I can definitely say is that I'm a premillennialist.

[~candice~]

Shalom, candice.

Thanks, I read this

I used to be a premillennial, pretribulational rapturist every bit as staunch as Tim LaHaye.

to mean you are now no longer premil or pretrib, but I understand now you meant differently.

Yes, but please understand also that, although I am premillennial, I am not pretribulational rapturist any more. In fact, I don't believe there are "seven years" left. I believe that the "Tribulation" has been going on for almost 2,000 years, and that 1/2 of the 70th seven of Dani'el 9:24-27 is already past. The first 3.5 years - the first 1/2 of the 70th seven - was fulfilled in the "earthly ministry" of Yeshua` during His first advent. Therefore, while the "Tribulation" is still going and and will continue until Yeshua` returns and rescues the nation Isra'el from captivity, from slavery and from an attempted massacre, the 70th seven only has 3.5 years left. So, what COULD I be?

I can't be pretribulational rapturist because there's no way that the Rapture could occur before the "Tribulation" nor could it be seven years prior to Yeshua`s Second Coming!

I refuse to be a Full Preterist because there's too much allegory and assumed figurative language in its explanation of the fulfillment of Matthew 24 and 25, Mark 13, and Luke 21 as well as Dani'el and the book of Revelation!

I cannot be a posttribulational rapturist because much of Revelation occurs AFTER and DURING the Second Coming. I believe that the Second Coming of Yeshua` haMashiach is more of a period of time than a single event. The seven bowl judgments are PART of the Second Coming! The "Rapture" is PART of the Second Coming as a first stage to the Coming! The transporting of God's people TO ISRA'EL will take some time, even though the transformation process itself will be in the "twinkling of an eye." The "Rapture" is NOT for "escapism!" Its purpose is NOT to avoid God's Wrath; its purpose is to transport His believers to ISRA'EL as His army to aid in the rescue operation!

I cannot be a Pre-Wrath Rapturist because they still believe in a seven-year period that is divided in two where the second half is called the 'Wrath of God" or the "Great Tribulation."

I might be called a form of Partial Preterist in the sense that I believe some of the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled in the first century and part of it will be fulfilled in the 3.5 years prior to the Second Coming of the Messiah, but there's already a position called "Partial Preterist" that I cannot accept because they say that too much has already been fulfilled in the first century, especially in the book of Revelation with only the last 2 or 3 chapters left to be fulfilled!

So, what AM I? All I can definitely say is that I'm a premillennialist.

This is rather interesting. I agree the tribulation has already started, and waxes and wanes but has been going on since Christ's return, and will continue until His second return. I find it unfathomable to be post mill, to me that logic is so warped I cannot begin to comprehend it. So I am left with a "post trib" (well, I have SOME issues with that position, but it's close enough) rapture and Christ's return before the Millennial reign (of which, I am not sure of the length). As for the 7 years, I really don't study it that much. Full preterism frightens me - the idea that we are in the Mill reign now seems so easily refuted. Some of what Christ said was fulfilled in the destruction of the temple in AD70 although I am not sure if that is enough to be considered a partial preterist?

[mizzdy]

Shalom, candice.

Thanks, I read this

I used to be a premillennial, pretribulational rapturist every bit as staunch as Tim LaHaye.

to mean you are now no longer premil or pretrib, but I understand now you meant differently.

Yes, but please understand also that, although I am premillennial, I am not pretribulational rapturist any more. In fact, I don't believe there are "seven years" left. I believe that the "Tribulation" has been going on for almost 2,000 years, and that 1/2 of the 70th seven of Dani'el 9:24-27 is already past. The first 3.5 years - the first 1/2 of the 70th seven - was fulfilled in the "earthly ministry" of Yeshua` during His first advent. Therefore, while the "Tribulation" is still going and and will continue until Yeshua` returns and rescues the nation Isra'el from captivity, from slavery and from an attempted massacre, the 70th seven only has 3.5 years left. So, what COULD I be?

I can't be pretribulational rapturist because there's no way that the Rapture could occur before the "Tribulation" nor could it be seven years prior to Yeshua`s Second Coming!

I refuse to be a Full Preterist because there's too much allegory and assumed figurative language in its explanation of the fulfillment of Matthew 24 and 25, Mark 13, and Luke 21 as well as Dani'el and the book of Revelation!

I cannot be a posttribulational rapturist because much of Revelation occurs AFTER and DURING the Second Coming. I believe that the Second Coming of Yeshua` haMashiach is more of a period of time than a single event. The seven bowl judgments are PART of the Second Coming! The "Rapture" is PART of the Second Coming as a first stage to the Coming! The transporting of God's people TO ISRA'EL will take some time, even though the transformation process itself will be in the "twinkling of an eye." The "Rapture" is NOT for "escapism!" Its purpose is NOT to avoid God's Wrath; its purpose is to transport His believers to ISRA'EL as His army to aid in the rescue operation!

I cannot be a Pre-Wrath Rapturist because they still believe in a seven-year period that is divided in two where the second half is called the 'Wrath of God" or the "Great Tribulation."

I might be called a form of Partial Preterist in the sense that I believe some of the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled in the first century and part of it will be fulfilled in the 3.5 years prior to the Second Coming of the Messiah, but there's already a position called "Partial Preterist" that I cannot accept because they say that too much has already been fulfilled in the first century, especially in the book of Revelation with only the last 2 or 3 chapters left to be fulfilled!

So, what AM I? All I can definitely say is that I'm a premillennialist.

This is rather interesting. I agree the tribulation has already started, and waxes and wanes but has been going on since Christ's return, and will continue until His second return. I find it unfathomable to be post mill, to me that logic is so warped I cannot begin to comprehend it. So I am left with a "post trib" (well, I have SOME issues with that position, but it's close enough) rapture and Christ's return before the Millennial reign (of which, I am not sure of the length). As for the 7 years, I really don't study it that much. Full preterism frightens me - the idea that we are in the Mill reign now seems so easily refuted. Some of what Christ said was fulfilled in the destruction of the temple in AD70 although I am not sure if that is enough to be considered a partial preterist?

There is a difference in 'tribulations', I believe we have been in a tribulation since Adam was thrown out of the garden, and with certainty since Messiah rose to the heavenly throne room. What Yeshua spoke of in Matt. 24 describes a thlipsis and a megathlipsis, a trib and a great trib. We will not be here for the orgay, the wrath which happens at His coming when we are taken up to meet Him. I guess I am 'pre-wrath' for lack of a better expression. I also see many prophecies that have dual fulfillments, just as everything God does in cyclical in nature I firmly believe there is nothing new under the sun and mankind has been through many many similar events throughout time. If we were in the millennial reign we would be with Him, wouldn't we?

shalom,

Mizz

[~candice~]

Yes Mizz, and a host of other promises we have for the Mill reign, many of which are clear as day have no been fulfilled. We cannot be in the Mill reign now.

[Retrobyter]

Shabbat shalom, mizzdy.

...

This is rather interesting. I agree the tribulation has already started, and waxes and wanes but has been going on since Christ's return, and will continue until His second return. I find it unfathomable to be post mill, to me that logic is so warped I cannot begin to comprehend it. So I am left with a "post trib" (well, I have SOME issues with that position, but it's close enough) rapture and Christ's return before the Millennial reign (of which, I am not sure of the length). As for the 7 years, I really don't study it that much. Full preterism frightens me - the idea that we are in the Mill reign now seems so easily refuted. Some of what Christ said was fulfilled in the destruction of the temple in AD70 although I am not sure if that is enough to be considered a partial preterist?

There is a difference in 'tribulations', I believe we have been in a tribulation since Adam was thrown out of the garden, and with certainty since Messiah rose to the heavenly throne room. What Yeshua spoke of in Matt. 24 describes a thlipsis and a megathlipsis, a trib and a great trib. We will not be here for the orgay, the wrath which happens at His coming when we are taken up to meet Him. I guess I am 'pre-wrath' for lack of a better expression. I also see many prophecies that have dual fulfillments, just as everything God does in cyclical in nature I firmly believe there is nothing new under the sun and mankind has been through many many similar events throughout time. If we were in the millennial reign we would be with Him, wouldn't we?

shalom,

Mizz

Mizz, the "tribulation" (Greek: "thlipsis" = "pressure") that I believe Yeshua` was talking about in Matthew 24:29 and Mark 13:24 is what HE started in Matthew 23:38:

Matthew 23:37-39

37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

KJV

This, of course, is a quotation from Psalm 118:26:

Psalm 118:22-26

22 The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.

23 This is the LORD'S doing; it is marvellous in our eyes.

24 This is the day which the LORD hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.

25 Save now (Hebrew: "howshiy`aah naa' " = Greek: "hosanna"), I beseech thee, O LORD: O LORD, I beseech thee, send now prosperity.

26 Blessed be he that cometh in the name of the LORD: we have blessed you out of the house of the LORD.

KJV

The Hebrew of this sentence in verse 26 is "Baruwkh haba' b'sheem YHVH." Literally, the phrase "Baruwkh haba' " is translated "Blessed, the-comer" but it is translated into English as "Welcome" at the airports and seaports of Isra'el (although usually in the plural)! Indeed, one might hear the phrase when one is welcomed into a Jewish home in Isra'el or into one's sukkah! Therefore, Yeshua` was saying that He would not return until the Jews of Jerusalem would WELCOME Him into their city IN THE AUTHORITY OF YAH, i.e. as the Mashiach Eloheeynu, the Messiah of our God! THAT is the "gap" that HE put in the timeline of the seventy sevens of Dani'el 9:24-27. HE left them desolate - bereft of their Messiah - until they welcome Him back! (And, they must do so "out of the house of the LORD" or out of the Temple, which therefore must be rebuilt.)

Therefore, left bereft of their Messiah and their house left desolate, they will suffer their desolation under pressure (thlipsis) until the day that Yeshua` returns.

The great pressure ("thlipsis megalee," or as you put it, "megathlipsis") was a CONDITIONAL thing! Don't get me wrong; there WILL be a "tees thlipseoos tees megalees" in the future, according to Revelation 7:14, but that is NOT what Matthew 24:21 is talking about. Yeshua` said,

Matthew 24:20-21

20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

KJV

This is a CONDITIONAL statement! Essentially, He was saying that if they did NOT pray as instructed, that THEN there would be "great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be." However, we know that the internal evidence of this chapter tells us that the details of this "tribulation" were experienced in the first century, and from history, we learn that no such "great tribulation" was experienced in the first century. Therefore, we should conclude that they were able to avoid it by praying as they were instructed and by God honoring their prayers. Yeshua` is NOT foretelling an event called the "thlipsis megalee" that will happen in OUR future; He was foretelling an event that MIGHT HAVE HAPPENED in His listeners' future, but was providentially avoided!

However, they were also promised that the pressure would not be constant but that there would be lulls and reprieves from the pressure periodically:

Matthew 24:22

22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

KJV

This is why the history of the Jews' tribulation over the last 2000 years could be categorized into inquisitions, crusades, pogroms, and even the holocaust with periods of relative peace in between these events.

While we have suffered the consequences of sin, both our own and those of others who have gone before us, those sufferings can hardly be called a "thlipsis." If they could have been, why didn't Yeshua` mention it? No, this "pressure" is distinctive and separate from the normal "groanings" of this world.