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

[Salty]

I don't agree with what you said.  The 6th Seal is NOT the Second Coming.  The 7 Trumpets come out of the 7th Seal and the 7 Bowls come out of the 7th Trumpet.  None of the S, T, or B's are the Second Coming.  Armageddon follows the 7th Bowl,  The Second Coming follows Armageddon.

 

 

In Christ

Montana Marv

 

 

You're free to disagree with me all you want.

[ARGOSY]

ARGOSY

 

Your quote from above:  

 

12 And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.14 And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

 

I can't believe that some people don't see the second coming in those verses, it makes it difficult to have a biblical discussion with someone who fails to see the obvious in a verse.

 

Because it isn't there;  For the great day of his wrath is come.  The Trumpet and Bowl judgments (wrath judgments) come out after the 6th Seal.  The 6th Seal and the 7th Bowl are two different events.

 

In Christ

Montana Marv

 

At this stage I will let the readers decide, because I obviously have no common ground with you regarding the way in which we believe in the literal wording of this section of the bible. Will the world really experience this worldwide event, and then experience another similar worldwide event at the second coming a few years later:  Rev 6:

12 And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind. And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places. And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

 

That wording is clearly a second coming event to me.

[ARGOSY]

 

 

We shouldn't be afraid to warn those on the pre-trib rapture about that warning, even if they refuse to listen.

 

True,  my concern is for their discouragement levels during the persecution of the great tribulation. Its going to be tough enough to endure that short 3.5 year period, but to start off with a huge disappointment that there's no pre-trib rapture would be pretty disappointing. Maybe the antichrist fakes a rapture too, to really make us feel left behind and alone. Its best to stay close to Christians during that time so even if church meetings stop occurring through being made illegal gatherings, we can still encourage eachother for that 3.5 years. After all we are not judged based on our deeds, but based on faith. If we rely on Jesus to save our souls, we need never fear being left behind, and if we find ourselves still here, that's ok because though our bodies may be persecuted we will still partake of the resurrection because of what Jesus did, not through our works.  

[ARGOSY]

Perhaps you can explain how you will get to the marriage and supper.

 

LAMAD

 

 

Sure. We will be resurrected and join in the wedding feast. Later on that day, we will come down in holy procession with the angels during the battle of Revelation 19.  This occurs on the day of the Lord. Some say these two events will occur a few weeks apart, I tend to believe it all occurs  on one day, but whichever way it occurs, the resurrection occurs towards the end of the tribulation.

[ARGOSY]

 

 

If John tells us there are only two resurrections; one for the just and one for the unjust, then of necessity all the righteous must be a part of this "first" resurrection. Pure logic tells us this. Since John does not pinpoint a specific time for this, I see it as different groups being resurrected at different times. I see no conflict here with Paul's resurrection of the dead in Christ 7 plus years earlier.

 

LAMAD

 

 

I understand that you see no conflict. But I would like you to be open to the point that you have believed a doctrine that was popular in the church during our formative Christian years, and we always tend to believe what we were first taught.   The fact that the so-called two resurrections of the righteous overlap so well, as one resurrection, and this overlap spreads to about five different events should make one start to question if it is all one resurrection?  You have chosen to split one event into two events, if you had given one verse in 1 Cor 15 or 1 Thess 4 which would show it cannot overlap the Matthew 24 gathering of the elect then you would have a point. If you had showed one other verse in the bible where we see a verse describing an earlier gathering, then you would have a point.

 

In the absence of both, it really does appear you have turned a biblical description of one event into a description of two events. Maybe meditate on this, open only to God's truth?  Its so easy to confuse the truth with the psychological strength of a doctrine from our formative Christian years.

[ARGOSY]

Argosy, you have done as good a job defending a posttrib rapture as anyone else I have read. I would say you did as well as could be done. You did it without anger. I congratulate you on that.

 

In my opinion, it is very difficult to defend a false doctrine when no scripture is taken out of context.

 

Lamad

 

Thanks for the compliment and the civil discussion.  I feel you haven't yet faced the contradictions of 2 Thess 1 and 2 Thess 2 where in context there is a direct contradiction of your view with the bible.

[iamlamad]

 

Perhaps you can explain how you will get to the marriage and supper.

 

LAMAD

 

 

Sure. We will be resurrected and join in the wedding feast. Later on that day, we will come down in holy procession with the angels during the battle of Revelation 19.  This occurs on the day of the Lord. Some say these two events will occur a few weeks apart, I tend to believe it all occurs  on one day, but whichever way it occurs, the resurrection occurs towards the end of the tribulation.

 

So in your mind there is a second and third coming too - but your stay in heaven will be very short. Then you must see a coming not mentioned by John somewhere between the early verses of chapter 19?

 

When I read the first few verses of Rev. 19, I see the bride already there. It talks of "much people" there, and a "great multitude." The next verse says :"the marriage of the Lamb is come." That tells me that the Bride is already in heaven.

 

When I take the entire book of Revelation as the context, trying to find when the Bride arrived (1 Thes. 4) I know she arrived before Rev. 7 where John saw the great crowd around the throne, too large to number. Neither can I find any coming of Jesus except in Chapter 19, after the wedding and supper.

 

I don't know how they do it, but some see a coming at the 7th trumpet. Now you see a coming somewhere between verses 1-6 in chapter 19. I see absolutely nothing there to even hint of His coming twice in one chapter; once before the wedding to get the Bride, and then right after the wedding, the coming we see written.

 

I agree that the marriage is IN the Day of the Lord, but it seems like you think the Day of the Lord BEGINS here. Is this what you believe?

 

LAMAD

[iamlamad]

 

Argosy, you have done as good a job defending a posttrib rapture as anyone else I have read. I would say you did as well as could be done. You did it without anger. I congratulate you on that.

 

In my opinion, it is very difficult to defend a false doctrine when no scripture is taken out of context.

 

Lamad

 

Thanks for the compliment and the civil discussion.  I feel you haven't yet faced the contradictions of 2 Thess 1 and 2 Thess 2 where in context there is a direct contradiction of your view with the bible.

 

I have done it so many times, I forget where. I think the KJV translators did a great disservice to the body of Christ in 2 Thes. 2, coming up with a translation of apostasia that does not fit the context of the passage.

 

There are four points I see as key to understanding what Paul wrote there. The first is that the very theme of this passage is the gathering or rapture of the saints. Before I mention the other three, I want to say that this passage is ambiguous at best, because Paul seemed to have left out words that are added by the translators. Next, some Greek texts say the "Day of the Lord," while others say "the day of Christ." I don't know if in the mind of Paul these are the same or not. I can only assume they are. After all, Christ is Lord.

 

First notice that in verse 3b, the man of sin "is revealed." If he is, then he was previous to the "is." Many translators use this word "is." Then Paul tells us what the man of sin will do once he is revealed, or what he does as he is revealed, proving Paul meant "he is revealed." (not in reality of Paul's time, but in Paul's argument.)

 

Next, I see Paul really emphasizing that he cannot be revealed until the one restraining is taken out of the way. He tells us this in verse 6, then again in verses 7 & 8. Therefore, what we read in verse 4, him setting in the temple pretending to be God,  cannot possibly happen until verse 7 happens: the one restraining being "taken out of the way." Since Paul wrote that he IS revealed in 3b, the only logical conclusion I can come to is that the one restraining IS "taken out of the way" in verse 3a. it can really be no other way. Therefore the key to understand the intent of the Author here is to understand WHAT or WHO is "taken out of the way" in verse 3a.

 

I cannot see a "falling away" as something being "taken out of the way." This phrase, if words mean anything, is that the one restraining is being moved by something else. What else could Paul have meant by "apostasia?"  If we go to the first translations into English, we find they used the word "Departing." So "that day," the "day of the Lord" or the "Day of His wrath," CANNOT COME until there come a departing first. Then, AFTER the departing, the one restraining "taken out of the way," then the man of sin will be free to be revealed. However, we must realize Paul wrote this as a way to know when the Day of the Lord begins. In other words, people will be watching for this departure or departing as a SIGN. We cannot miss Paul's emphasis: this is not any ordinary departing, it is a very SIGNIFICANT departing, one all will notice in an instant of time. AGain, a "falling away" (from what we do not know for that information is not in the word apostasia) does not measure up to anything significant that someone could say, "THERE is what Paul was talking about."

 

So we know that this will be a very significant departing of something or someone who is restraining the man of sin, PREVENTING his revealing until the proper time. Now, what was Paul's theme? It was the gathering. When the rapture takes place, will there be a very significant "departing?" Certainly there will be - a departing that all will know in one minute that something very signifacant happened. Young children will disappear around the world. Born again adults will disappear. This will be very significant.

 

Some argue that the rapture could not be in that Greek word, apostasia. However, there are some Greek experts that tells us this world certainly could mean a SPACIAL departure, where a group from a whole is moved somewhere else. From what I read of the two words this compound word came from, Apo and Stasism I agree.

 

When people finally come to understand that the Day of the Lord begins as a DARK day, a day of destruction, and they finally believe that John wrote it in the right place, after the great earthquake at the 6th seal, then realize the Day of the Lord is NOT synonomous with the rapture. In fact, when we understand 1 Thes, 5, we see that the rapture comes as the trigger for the day, meaning it comes BEFORE the day of wrath, because God did not set any appointment for us with His wrath.

 

I am sure that Paul did not change his mind on the timing of the rapture between his two letters to the Thessalonians. Therefore I do not see 2 thes, 2 as any kind of challenge to the pretrib rapture Paul teaches us in his first letter. However, it is a difficult passage to grasp. Most just read over it quickly and think Paul is telling us that before the rapture can come (the day of the Lord) the falling away and the man of sin revealed must come first. There are two immediate problems with this: the Day of the Lord is NOT synonomous with with His coming, or with the rapture. Next, there is only one thing that must come first, and that is the departing or apostasia.

 

Another big mistake people make here is not understand WHY these people were upset and unsettled. Paul had taught them that the rapture would come first, before the Day (exactly what is taught in 1 Thes. 5) but now they have been told that the Day had arrived and they were IN the Day of the Lord, yet still here on the earth. Certainly this would make people upset! This is the classic argument of the posttribbers: that when the days of GT arrive and we are still here, we will be VERY UPSET. Well, this is exactly where these people were at that moment in time: they thought they had been LEFT BEHIND. Of course they were unsettled. So Paul's argument is to show them how to tell for SURE when the Day of the Lord is here: when they see the man of sin, they will KNOW the DAy of the Lord has come, and they are in it.

 

LAMAD

Edited July 20, 2014 by iamlamad

[ENOCH2010]

Lamad the great multitude John saw in heaven is being added to daily, every time a Christian dies, part of him goes to be with the Lord. This great multitude wasn't raptured to heaven as a group, they go there upon their death.  

[Montana Marv]

Lamad the great multitude John saw in heaven is being added to daily, every time a Christian dies, part of him goes to be with the Lord. This great multitude wasn't raptured to heaven as a group, they go there upon their death.  

Where do you come up with this idea.

 

This multitude John saw was on earth;  These are they who have come out of the Great Tribulation.   So this leaves out anyone who has died over the past 2000 or so years.  So this is not the Church.  And this is after the 144,000 were sealed.  Once the Great Tribulation is over and Armageddon is finished, the Second Coming happens, Christ is now on earth to set up His Kingdom and rule on earth for 1000 years.  Those (the Multitude) who come out of the Great Tribulation go directly into the Mill to be ruled with a rod of iron by Christ.  Chastised by Christ with a rod of iron; and this for the Church.  No way.

 

In Christ

Montana Marv