The Day of the Lord, will the church be raptured?

[iamlamad]

Argosy wrote:

Thanks , you put forward a pretty decent argument regarding the various descriptions of the resurrection.  Although I respect your view, I believe the wording regarding the resurrection of the righteous is more obviously describing one particular resurrection , and I include the resurrection of the two witnesses in the timing of that one resurrection. I'm sure its obvious to you too that Jesus' own resurrection is not included in the resurrection of Daniel 12:1-2 and Rev 20. I do not believe the resurrection of the righteous is staggered.

 

Let's look.

 

⁴ And I saw thrones and they that sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them. And I saw the souls of them that had been beheaded for the witness of Jesus and for the Word of God, and who had not worshiped the beast, nor his image, nor had received his mark upon their foreheads or on their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. (KJ21)

⁴ Then I saw thrones, and sitting on them were those to whom authority to act as judges and to pass sentence was entrusted. Also I saw the souls of those who had been slain with axes [beheaded] for their witnessing to Jesus and [for preaching and testifying] for the Word of God, and who had refused to pay homage to the beast or his statue and had not accepted his mark or permitted it to be stamped on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived again and ruled with Christ (the Messiah) a thousand years. (Amp)

 

⁴ And I saw thrones and they that sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them.

 

This is the first group John saw. Who are they? WHEN were they resurrected? John does not give us ONE HINT here as to when these were resurrected; Only that they are there as judges. They may be limited only to New Testament saints. Commentators seem to agree that these are church age saints reigning as judges.

 

And I saw the souls of them that had been beheaded for the witness of Jesus and for the Word of God, and who had not worshiped the beast, nor his image, nor had received his mark upon their foreheads or on their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

 

This is clearly a SECOND group, and not a part of the first group. Since it says "they lived" I am sure they were resurrected, and were not there only as souls without a body. Again there is not a hint of a time for this resurrection, except that it must be after the days of great tribulation.

 

⁴ And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. ^[5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.] This is the first resurrection.

 

I am convinced this is the way John meant this: the first part of verse 5 is written as a parenthesis. So we could read it like this for clarity:

 

⁴ And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.This is the first resurrection. [ ⁵ But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.]

 

Who does the "THEY" refer to: "THEY lived and reighned with Christ..."  I believe they refers to BOTH groups.

 

So what does the pronoun "this" refer back to?  It could refer to only those who were beheaded. Or it could refer to both groups John saw judging. One thing that is missing: John does not tell us WHEN this first resurrection actually took place: all he shows us are those resurrected.

 

⁶ Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years

 

AGain John talks about both groups all those who took part in the first resurrection. This is really the only information given on the "first resurrection." The bottom line? John never tells us WHEN. It is VERY POSSIBLE with the language John uses that the first group was resurrected long before the second group.  Certainly what John writes does not preclude a resurrection before this. What happened to the Old Testament saints that rose? Are any of those reigning with Christ? John may have included them in the first group, but we certainly cannot be dogmatic. For sure Daniel will be there somewhere!

 

I truly see NOTHING here that would preclude a pretrib rapture and those dead in Christ being a part of this first resurrection. If ALL the righteous are included, then I cannot see leaving Jesus out. After all, He was the "firstfruits," which gives the very impression that there will be second, third, fourth, etc. We then will be partakers in the very same resurrection Jesus took part in.

 

I believe the wording regarding the resurrection of the righteous is more obviously describing one particular resurrection

 

I agree, one for ALL the righteous, and one for all the unrighteous.

 

I do not see this as an argument at all for posttrib.

 

LAMAD

[iamlamad]

Argosy wrote:

You refer to 1 Thess 4 and 5 as referring to this "sudden coming".  It is here that you must tread very lightly because as a post-tribber I believe chapter 4 and chapter 5 are associated and are describing the rapture/resurrection on the day of the Lord.  If you as a pre-tribber associate chapter 4 and 5 as the same day, this completely ruins your entire theology. Because chapter 4 describes the rapture and chapter 5 describes the "thief in the night" which occurs on a day of sudden destruction.  So the very verses you use to prove the "sudden" thief in the night are actually referring to the day of the Lord, and you still need to show me this other "sudden" rapture that you claim occurs earlier.  Kindly post any verse that refers to a sudden rapture before the day of the Lord.

 

It seems you think Paul changed subjects in chapter 5. I don't think so; I think he gives us his TIMING for the rapture. Indeed, the rapture is very much included in chapter 5.

 

First I wondered what Paul's "sudden destruction" was. As always when I wonder, I meditate on it and pray in the spirit a lot, waiting on God to answer. I don't just use my imagination and my human reasoning. I got stuck for a while on Matt. 27: "The earth did quake...and the graves were opened." I noticed that Matthew was setting a precident: that when those long dead were risen, it caused an earthquake. That made perfect sense to me, for I have often wondered about this: will God bring those bodies together on the atomic level, or maybe even on the Quark level. Take Abraham: at this time he had been dead a VERY long time, and the atoms that once made up his body could have been scattered over many thousands of acres. Some could have been hundreds of feet down. Some could have traveled to the bottom of the sea. All I know for sure, on some level, God will bring those parts of the dead bodies together in a split second, and it will cause a very great earthquake. WHO rose from the dead when Jesus rose? Who was this verse in Matthew referring to? I believe it was the ELDERS of the Old Covenant - the very same elders John saw around the throne.

 

There was a man that got to visit heaven around 1900. He spent considerable time in heaven. Once while speaking with Abraham he mentioned that Abraham seemed to look different that many of the other saints there. Abraham told him that some of the elders rose when Jesus rose, and got there resurrection bodies then. I believe this to be true. It fits with what the bible tells us.

 

Then I discovered that when the two witnesses rose, even after being dead 3 1/2 days, there was an associated earthquake. 

 

With two verses telling me this, I am convinced that when the dead in Christ rise, it will cause a GREAT, worldwide earthquake, and this earthquake will be Paul's "sudden destruction." Paul equates his sudden destruction with the start of the Day of the Lord. This is how and why I see the rapture event as the TRIGGER for the Day of the Lord.  If the trigger comes SUDDENLY, then the boom (sudden destruction) comes suddenly..."as a thief in the night." They are tied together and cannot be separated. John is in perfect agreement, writing "the day of His wrath has come." Why? WHAT EVENT made John write that? It was this great earthquake, and then the signs of the son and moon.

 

Now notice Paul's perfect paradigm. He will compare two groups of people and what happens with each group at this sudden event of the rapture.

 

First the sinner: those living in darkness:

 For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.

 

What is their outcome at this sudden event? It is sudden destruction. They will not escape.

But what about the righteous? What is their outcome at this sudden event?

 

For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.

 

What is Paul saying? Those who suffered the sudden destruction WERE "appointed to wrath." Therefore the sudden destruction IS the start of God's wrath, just as John wrote. But those living in the light are NOT appointed to wrath. So what ARE those living in the light appointed to? Paul tells us: those not appointed to wrath get "salvation." What kind of Salvation, Paul? He tells us very plainly: we should live together with Him. HOW Paul? HOW do we live together with Him? Of course by the rapture. THAT is how we live together with Him. Paul is still writing of the rapture. What did He write in chapter 4?

So shall we ever be with the Lord.

We should live together with Him

So shall we ever be with the Lord.

We shold live together with Him.

 

These phrases are saying the same thing, just different words.

 

Paul never quit talking about the rapture, but went on to show us the TIMING of the rapture in comparison to the Day of the Lord or the day of His wrath. So the rapture is NOT "in" the day of the Lord. The rapture is the TRIGGER for the Day of the Lord. Therefore it must come FIRST. One cannot just pull one of these verses out of its context. The THEME of this entire passage is the rapture of the church.

 

I also got stuck on the message to those under the altar at the 5th seal. How could all those still to be martyred be killed in the same manner, if some were beheaded, others were stoned, others were crucified. It did not make sense that all the rest should be killed "as they were." Or "as they themselves had been."  "They had to wait until the complete number of the Lord’s other servants and followers would be killed." What would make the complete number? Esv puts it: "until the number of their fellow servants and their brothers should be complete, who were to be killed as they themselves had been." Several tramslations say "the full number."

 

I finally understood what would make the full number. These were all killed as church age saints, members of the body of Christ. What would make the full number? It would be the very last one before the rapture of the church ENDS the church age, when the fullness of the Gentiles will have come in. So in essense they under the altar at the 5th seal were told they must wait until the rapture of the church at the 6th seal. In other words, they had to wait for the VERY NEXT EVENT John was going to mention. This was no accident. The Revelation if very chronological.

 

then when in Rev. 7 John saw the raptured church in heaven, that kind of clinches the nail for me.

 

Finally, I see the marraige and supper taking place IN HEAVEN. Since I know this is true, I also know a posttrib rapture would make it impossible for the bride to make it to her own marriage.

 

LAMAD

[iamlamad]

Argosy wrote:

Regarding your reference to 1 Cor 15 and  1 Thess 4 and 5, please indicate to me why you would place them before Jesus comes on a day of destruction. 1 Thess 5 clearly associates the thief in the night with a day of destruction, and the other two chapters associate the rapture with the coming of Christ. You still need to explain to me why you think those descriptions of the rapture occur earlier? Why on earth would you be tempted to place them BEFORE the obvious "thief in the night" gathering of the elect at the coming of Christ in Matthew 24???? What biblical motivation have you got to do such a thing when there is such a blatant OVERLAP of the events at the coming of Christ in those rapture verses and the coming of Christ in Matthew 24. This is the entire crux of the pre-trib rapture debate, what is your scriptural reason for splitting an event that is so obviously the same??   I need an answer here. Your attempt to describe the gathering of Matthew 24 as somehow different just because the angels are doing the gathering I feel is far from conclusive, as if we can all fly like Superman the moment we leave the graves. I see no contradiction when the angels collect the resurrected. This is after all where the pre-tribbers get their "left behind" idea from, its the Matthew 24 description of some being left behind. So some naive pre-tribbers already associate the left behind description and the thief in the night description of Matthew 24 with the rapture, as do all post-tribbers. So your position that the desciptions are entirely different fails to convince in the evidence of the many who clearly do see the similarities. Nevertheless, there is nothing in the text of 1 Cor 15 and 1 Thess 4 which even hints at an earlier rapture.

 

Here is the big difference: when I read Matthew 24 and the associated passages in Mark and Luke (I think they all came from one discourse) I see Jesus speaking to JEWISH men about the end of THEIR age. Yes, they did end up as members of the body of Christ, but they did not know anything about that at the time. They asked about Jesus coming. What they knew of His coming then was His coming to set up His kingdom. That is the coming they were referring to. There is nothing to indicate that at that time Jesus knew anything of His coming FOR His bride. Neither is there any words there that would indicate He was talking about the church at all. For example, when people are hauled into a synagogue, that speaks of Jews, not members of the Gentile church. They also ask about the end of the world.  What will be at the "end of the world?" Of course the last 7 years will be the 70th week of Daniel. Jesus mentioned the abomination. We know that that event divides the week into two halves, so again it is speaking of DANIEL. Did you not notice what Daniel wrote?  "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city..." Notice THY PEOPLE and Jerusalem. This is pointing to ISRAEL, not the church.

 

Then, when I see that the gathering in Matthew 24 gathers from the HEAVENS, I know this is not speaking of Paul's rapture that gathers from the earth. It MUST be speaking of some other gathering. I wonder, is God not allowed to mention any other gathering but what people pounce on it and declare it must be Paul's rapture?

 

Therefore when I read of the gathering in Matthew 24, I don't even see a possibility of it being Paul's rapture.

NOT EVEN A POSSIBILITY!

 

please indicate to me why you would place them before Jesus comes on a day of destruction.

 

It is not me that places them before the destruction; it is PAUL in 1 Thes. 4 THEY get the destruction, while WE get to "live together with Him." That is by way of RAPTURE which is what Paul is talking about. Do you see ANYTHING in 1 Thes. or in 1 Cor. 15 that would indicate Jesus is coming to destroy anything? I don't. I see Him coming for ONE PURPOSE: to get His bride, and return to heaven WITH His bride.

 

1 Thess 5 clearly associates the thief in the night with a day of destruction,

 

Agreed: but Paul shows us that the sinners get the destruction but those living in the light get raptured and so have no appointment with the destruction.

 

You still need to explain to me why you think those descriptions of the rapture occur earlier? Why on earth would you be tempted to place them BEFORE the obvious "thief in the night" gathering of the elect at the coming of Christ in Matthew 24????

 

First mistake is to include Matthew 24 here. The gathering in Matthew 24 cannot possibly be Paul's rapture, for it gathers from HEAVEN. (I did not make this up: go and read it.)  I will ignore that part of this. Again I back the timing on PAUL's timing. The sinners get the sudden destruction of God's wrath, while the saint gets raptured and get to live together with Him. (So shall we ever be with the Lord [after the rapture.])

 

What biblical motivation have you got to do such a thing when there is such a blatant OVERLAP of the events at the coming of Christ in those rapture verses and the coming of Christ in Matthew 24.

 

This "overlap" is only in the mind of posttrib believers and does not exist in reality. Let's look together:

 

³¹ And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

Darby: "from [the one] extremity of [the] heavens to [the other] extremity of them."

DRA:  "from the farthest parts of the heavens to the utmost bounds of them."

 

Granted, this is "ouranos" which can be the 2nd heaven or the 3rd heaven. Why was this word chosen versus a gathering from the earth? I think because this is a DIFFERENT gathering. The entire chapter is pointed to the Jews and the end of THEIR age, not the church. Now let's see where Paul's "gathering" is from.

 

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.

 

Together

..gathering

 

This is Paul's gathering. These people came from UNDER the earth and ON the earth, but are "together" in the clouds. Therefore it is remotely possible that a gathering from the heavens would fit, if by it was meant clouds.

 

Really the ONLY THING that would cause anyone to put this gathering in Matthew 24 with paul's gathering is the word gathering. Again, is God not allowed to have any other kind of gathering but what people POUNCE on it and declare it to be Paul's gathering?

 

Next the TIMING prevents it from being Paul's gathering. John did not mention "the day of His wrath has come" in chapter 19, after the 70th week, but in chapter 6 BEFORE the week. John did not see the great crowd in heaven in chapter 19, but in chapter 7, BEFORE the 70th week even begins. Therefore, the real question should be "how can you even think that Matthew 24 should be associated with 1 Thes. 4? There is NOTHING that ties them together and MUCH that keeps them separate.

 

Nevertheless, there is nothing in the text of 1 Cor 15 and 1 Thess 4 which even hints at an earlier rapture.

 

I just mentioned several things! Let's go through them again:

 

WHERE in relation to the Day of the Lord does Paul put His rapture?

...Answer: He puts his rapture just before the Day of the Lord as the TRIGGER for the Day. WHERE is the start of the Day in Revelation? Is it in chapter 19 where you wish it would be? NO NO NO! It is in chapter 6 where GOD wanted it to be. Therefore the timing Paul is talking about is in chapter 6, not chapter 19 of Revelation. Read it again: it is the sudden destruction that Paul says is the start of God's wrath.

 

WHERE does John see the raptured church in Revelation?

...Answer: chapter 7 which is BEFORE the 70th week has even begun.

 

The ONLY place to find the timing of Paul's rapture is in Paul's writing or in Revelation. Trying to find it elsewhere will lead to false doctrine.

 

I will change your comment slightly:

 

"Nevertheless, there is nothing in the text of Matthew 24 which even hints that is is Paul's rapture.

 

Indeed, it cannot be because it does not fit. In Matthew 24 the Day of the Lord had to begin before the abomination, because that is where Revelation puts it.  When we study the first trumpet judgments they fill perfectly as God's destruction of the world. Of course the trumpet judgments are a part of God's wrath. His wrath begins with the great earthquake at the 6th seal (Paul's sudden destruction) and continues on to the time Jesus decends WITH His saints on the white horse.

 

LAMAD

Edited July 17, 2014 by iamlamad

[Floatingaxe]

 

 

The bible teaches two different resurrections at two different points for two different people groups. The Church, including Jewish believers, and then later, the wicked dead from the beginning of time.

 

 

This is true, but then why do pre-tribs believe that there is another pre-trib resurrection  before the first resurrection?   Pre-tribs always claim 1 Corinthians 15 is the pre-trib rapture, and yet this chapter is all about us receiving our resurrection bodies.

 

 

We don't.

[iamlamad]

 

 

The bible teaches two different resurrections at two different points for two different people groups. The Church, including Jewish believers, and then later, the wicked dead from the beginning of time.

 

 

This is true, but then why do pre-tribs believe that there is another pre-trib resurrection  before the first resurrection?   Pre-tribs always claim 1 Corinthians 15 is the pre-trib rapture, and yet this chapter is all about us receiving our resurrection bodies.

 

There is no contradiction: the "first resurrection" includes all the resurrections of the righteous in which Jesus was the very first. And if you will note: John does not give any TIMING to his "first" resurrection. We just know it happened sometime previous to chapter 20.

 

LAMAD

[iamlamad]

 

 

"when God's Word does not speak of but one time of Christ's return, which is on 'the day of the Lord'. "

 

Why would you say this when it is simply NOT TRUE? Go back and read 1 Thes. 5 again and again and again until you get it. There Paul tells us that the rapture is what TRIGGERS the Day of the Lord. And Paul is very clear that that is a COMING of the Lord. The truth is, the Bible certainly speaks of two more returns of Christ. One will be IN the Day of the Lord, but the first will be the trigger for the Day.

 

Did you ever wonder what Paul's "sudden destruction" is, that will catch ALL on the earth as a snare? This sudden destruction cannot be separated from the dead in Christ rising and those alive being caught up. It is the dead in Christ rising that causes a mighty, worldwide earthquake, and this earthquake IS Paul's sudden destruction. So while the righteous get "salvation" and get raptured, the sinners get the sudden destruction. Paul tells us this sudden destruction is the start of the Day of the Lord, and God's wrath. He goes on to say that God did not set any appointment for the righteous with His wrath. Notice in Mat. 27 "the earth did quake...and the graves were opened gives us a strong hint that when the long dead are resurrected, it causes an earthquake. If you will notice, when the two witnesses are raised, there was a great earthquake then too. When the dead in Christ are resurrected, it will cause a worldwide earthquake.

 

This sudden destruction earthquake is found at the 6th seal in Revelation. It is no accident that John then saw the raptured church in heaven in Rev. 7, just after the 6th seal.

 

In 2 Thes. 2, they THOUGHT they were IN the day of the Lord, when, in fact, they were not. They were very upset, because Paul had taught them of a PRETRIB rapture, and they thought they had MISSED it. Paul's method of correcting their thinking was to show them how to know for SURE when someone would be IN the Day of the Lord. If one sees the man of sin revealed and enter the temple and declare he is god, that is PROOF POSITIVE that the day of the Lord had started and one is IN it. However, there is someone restraining this revealing, and first, before he can be revealed, that one restraining must be taken out of the way. If you will notice, in verse 3b the man of sin IS REVEALED (in Paul's argument) so in 3a the one restraining MUST BE taken out of the way. In fact the first translators into English translated apostasia as the departing. It is the best translation. Paul is not telling us the gathering is IN the day of the Lord at all; he is telling us that the departing must come FIRST, and then the day of the Lord will come. He did not change his mind from his first letter.

 

LAMAD

 

 

Heb.9:28

So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for Him shall He appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

 

What you're... saying... is simply not true. The above verse says a "second time" He will appear to those who look for Him unto Salvation, so that definitely means His Church. Notice that is NOT a third time, nor any multiple rapture idea. There was His 1st coming, and then there will be His 2nd coming, and that's it. He is not coming and then going back to Heaven and then back to earth again like some bouncing ball.

 

Although 1 Thess.5 does not give the detail like 1 Thess.4 does, Paul is continuing the subject from 1 Thess.4 about the saints still on earth on the "day of the Lord", which is when Jesus returns to gather His Church.

 

 

Rev. 16:15

Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.

 

1 Thess.5:1

1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.

2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

 

2 Pet.3:10

But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

 

Since the pre-trib rapture theory loves to twist that "as a thief in the night" metaphor our Lord Jesus and His Apostles gave, there's the Biblical evidence of what timing God's Word associates it with, i.e., "the day of the Lord".

 

So your disagreement is NOT... with me, your disagreement is against the Scriptures on the timing of the "day of the Lord".

 

It seems your counting is lacking today.

 

He came once to die.

He will come a SECOND time FOR His bride as per 1 Thes. 4:16 BEFORE the day of the Lord and as a TRIGGER for that Day.

He will come a THIRD time WITH His saints on a white horse.

 

Plain and simple.

 

"Paul is continuing the subject from 1 Thess.4 about the saints still on earth on the "day of the Lord", which is when Jesus returns to gather His Church."

 

How could you be so far off what what Paul really said? Paul wrote that THEY (those in darkness) get the sudden destruction wrath of God because God set an appointment for THEM for His wrath.

 

WE that love the light don't get an appointment set for us, for we get raptured before the Sudden Destruction start of the Day of the Lord hits.

This is all plain and simple:

THEY get the Day of the Lord, which begins with the sudden destruction.

WE get raptured and get to "live together with Him."

 

Why is this so difficult?

 

LAMAD

Edited July 17, 2014 by iamlamad

[Salty]

Like I said, your disagreement is not with me, it is against those Scriptures in God's Word that define the time of Christ's coming "as a thief" as "the day of the Lord".

[ARGOSY]

 

 

 

The bible teaches two different resurrections at two different points for two different people groups. The Church, including Jewish believers, and then later, the wicked dead from the beginning of time.

 

 

This is true, but then why do pre-tribs believe that there is another pre-trib resurrection  before the first resurrection?   Pre-tribs always claim 1 Corinthians 15 is the pre-trib rapture, and yet this chapter is all about us receiving our resurrection bodies.

 

 

We don't.

 

 

1 Corinthians 15 is clearly the rapture and also clearly the resurrection. 

 

52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

 

These verses use resurrection wording in the context of a resurrection chapter. The so-called pre-trib rapture is definitely also a resurrection. Yet we know that there is also a resurrection when the antichrist dies as per Daniel 12:1-2. and this resurrection is also described in Rev 20 as the first resurrection relating to tribulation saints martyred by the beast.  So any pre-trib view that wishes to retain some semblance of being scripturally based has to have a staggered resurrection.  Or deny the resurrection context of the 1 Corinthians 15 rapture, which is impossible to deny given the context of the chapter.

[iamlamad]

The bible teaches two different resurrections at two different points for two different people groups. The Church, including Jewish believers, and then later, the wicked dead from the beginning of time.

This is true, but then why do pre-tribs believe that there is another pre-trib resurrection  before the first resurrection?   Pre-tribs always claim 1 Corinthians 15 is the pre-trib rapture, and yet this chapter is all about us receiving our resurrection bodies.

 

We don't.

 

1 Corinthians 15 is clearly the rapture and also clearly the resurrection. 

 

52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

 

These verses use resurrection wording in the context of a resurrection chapter. The so-called pre-trib rapture is definitely also a resurrection. Yet we know that there is also a resurrection when the antichrist dies as per Daniel 12:1-2. and this resurrection is also described in Rev 20 as the first resurrection relating to tribulation saints martyred by the beast.  So any pre-trib view that wishes to retain some semblance of being scripturally based has to have a staggered resurrection.  Or deny the resurrection context of the 1 Corinthians 15 rapture, which is impossible to deny given the context of the chapter.

 

Why is this such a struggle for you? The bride of Christ gets resurrected at the 6th seal timing, BEFORE the Old Testament saints are resurrected at the 7th vial timing. And BOTH resurrections are a part of John's "first" resurrection - since it is the resurrection for all believers. OF COURSE 1 Cor. 15 is a resurrection, just as 1 thes. 4 is a resurrection.

 

Dan. 12:1 is about the days of great tribulation that will begin shortly after the abomination at the midpoint of the week. Verse 2, although it seems it is at the same time, is AFTER those days of great tribulation. Verse 2 is speaking of the Old Testament saints.

 

This all might be easier to understand if you pictured the entire church age, from the days of Paul right up to Paul's rapture, as a parenthesis of time inserted between the 69th and 70th week of Daniel. It is the age of Grace. Certainly God has dealt with the church in a different manner than any time previous to this age. It was certainly God's will that ISRAEL receive their Messiah after He rose from the dead, as a nation. If that had happened, there would have been no church age. As it happened, they REJECTED Their own messiah, so God turned to the Gentiles.

 

LAMAD

Edited July 17, 2014 by iamlamad

[iamlamad]

Like I said, your disagreement is not with me, it is against those Scriptures in God's Word that define the time of Christ's coming "as a thief" as "the day of the Lord".

You have this backwards: it is YOUR theory that is against those Scriptures in God's word that define the time of Christ's coming.

 

The bible is very clear:

 

JESUS comes as a thief.

The Day of the Lord comes as a thief.

 

WHY does the Day of the Lord come as a thief? It is simply because when JESUS comes as a thief FOR His bride, as seen in 1 thes. 4 & 5, this coming and rapture of the Bride is the TRIGGER for the Day of the Lord.

 

The truth of scripture is that the church is raptured BEFORE the Day of the Lord. Not ON the day, not IN the day, but BEFORE the day.

 

LAMAD

Edited July 17, 2014 by iamlamad