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

[iamlamad]

Salty wrote;

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.

 

Salty, I think you need to camp out on 1 Thes. 5 until you get it. You don't at this point in time.

 

Did you completely miss Paul's paradigm? He compares the fates of two groups of people, those living in the darkness and those living in the light of the gospel AT THE TIME OF THE RAPTURE. (Don't miss that last point!)

 

It will be those living in DARKNESS that must enter the Day of the Lord with the great, worldwide earthquake (6th seal) SUDDEN DESTRUCTION which begins the wrath of God, just as John wrote: "the day of His wrath has come."

 

What then happens to those living in the light of the gospel? They get RAPTURED and so get to "live together with Him."

 

John did not get to see the rapture from where he was in heaven. But he did get to see the effects of the rapture: he saw the raptured church IN HEAVEN right after the 6th seal.

 

Just to keep your thinking straight, after that comes the 7th seal.

Then the first 6 trumpets during the first half of the week,

Then the 7th trumpet that marks the midpoint of the week.

Then the fleeing and the battle in the heavenlies.

Then the man of sin turning Beast.

Then the angels flying with the everlasting gospel.

Then days of great tribulation such as has never been seen on the earth.

Then God will begin pouring out the vials of His wrath with the associated plagues to SHORTEN those days of GT.

Finally the 7th vial ends the week. The Old testament saints rise here.

Then the marriage and marriage supper take place in heaven.

FINALLY Jesus gets on His white horse, the BRIDE gets on their white horses, the Angels get on THEIR white horses and ALL return to earth to the Battle of Armageddon.

 

There will be a LOT of water over the dam, so to speak, between the pretrib rapture of the church (just before the 6th seal) and the day Jesus returns on the white horse.

 

What part of this don't you get?

 

LAMAD

[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.

 

Agreed; We don't. The pretrib rapture will be a PART of the "first resurrection."

 

LAMAD

[iamlamad]

Argosy, I have a question:

 

Suppose for a moment that the Olivet discourse never took place, so Matthew 24 did not exit, or the counterparts in Mark and Luke.

 

If you did not have Mat. 24 to look at, would your timing of the rapture change or be the same?

If the same, what scripture then would you base it on?

 

LAMAD

[Salty]

Salty wrote;

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.

 

Salty, I think you need to camp out on 1 Thes. 5 until you get it. You don't at this point in time.

 

Did you completely miss Paul's paradigm? He compares the fates of two groups of people, those living in the darkness and those living in the light of the gospel AT THE TIME OF THE RAPTURE. (Don't miss that last point!)

 

It will be those living in DARKNESS that must enter the Day of the Lord with the great, worldwide earthquake (6th seal) SUDDEN DESTRUCTION which begins the wrath of God, just as John wrote: "the day of His wrath has come."

 

What then happens to those living in the light of the gospel? They get RAPTURED and so get to "live together with Him."

 

John did not get to see the rapture from where he was in heaven. But he did get to see the effects of the rapture: he saw the raptured church IN HEAVEN right after the 6th seal.

 

Just to keep your thinking straight, after that comes the 7th seal.

Then the first 6 trumpets during the first half of the week,

Then the 7th trumpet that marks the midpoint of the week.

Then the fleeing and the battle in the heavenlies.

Then the man of sin turning Beast.

Then the angels flying with the everlasting gospel.

Then days of great tribulation such as has never been seen on the earth.

Then God will begin pouring out the vials of His wrath with the associated plagues to SHORTEN those days of GT.

Finally the 7th vial ends the week. The Old testament saints rise here.

Then the marriage and marriage supper take place in heaven.

FINALLY Jesus gets on His white horse, the BRIDE gets on their white horses, the Angels get on THEIR white horses and ALL return to earth to the Battle of Armageddon.

 

There will be a LOT of water over the dam, so to speak, between the pretrib rapture of the church (just before the 6th seal) and the day Jesus returns on the white horse.

 

What part of this don't you get?

 

LAMAD

 

Like Apostle Paul said in 2 Thess.2:1-2 about the time of Christ's coming to gather His saints, that is the "day of Christ".

 

2 Thess.2:1-2

1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

 

The phrase "day of Christ" is "day of the Lord" in the Greek there, showing Paul was speaking of the "day of the Lord" when Christ comes to gather His saints. (The word "Christ" is not there in the Greek; instead it is the Greek word 'kurios' which means 'lord').

 

This is also why Paul revealed in 1 Cor.15 that Christ's saints (His Church) still alive on earth that remain, will be 'changed' "at the twinkling of an eye", which is a "day of the Lord" event. The day of the Lord events are not about judgment upon the wicked only, it's also about Christ's gathering His alseep saints from Heaven which He brings with Him, and the change of His saints alive on earth in order to gather them. The wicked will go through that twinkling of an eye change too, as both the resurrection of life and resurrection of damnation occur on that same day per John 5:28-29.

 

If you do a deeper study in the OT prophets, especially the Book of Isaiah where Apostle Paul was pulling these events from, you might understand. But you'd have to stop listening to the pre-trib doctors first.

[ARGOSY]

 

 

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

 

I'm not really following you here, because I agree with the way in which you separate the two resurrections, and your bracketing of the "rest of the dead". But surely you see that the first resurrection occurs after the tribulation, because those resurrected have been persecuted during the beast's  rule and existence of the "image of the beast". Thus the resurrected participate in the tribulation and include tribulation saints so this is no pre-trib resurrection.

 

Yet this being the case, what then is the rapture/resurrection of 1 corinthians 15. This is clearly a rapture which includes Paul himself, and yet is clearly a resurrection event of transformed bodies. Yet according to pre-trib belief this particular resurrection of 1 Cor 15 occurs before the first resurrection of Rev 20 which occurs to those who didn't worship the image of the beast. (tribulation saints).

 

And so the pre-trib belief has to have two resurrections of the righteous when only one is described in Daniel 12 and Rev 20.

[ARGOSY]

Argosy, I have a question:

 

Suppose for a moment that the Olivet discourse never took place, so Matthew 24 did not exit, or the counterparts in Mark and Luke.

 

If you did not have Mat. 24 to look at, would your timing of the rapture change or be the same?

If the same, what scripture then would you base it on?

 

LAMAD

 

I see no reason to introduce a pre-trib rapture into the bible, if there is no verse in the bible that hints at it.   The natural assumption is that everything occurs in one final day, the day of the Lord. But additionally I would look at the wording of 1 Corinthians 15 and 1 Thess 4 and see that these "raptures" were described as occurring at the coming of Christ. In the absence of any NT doctrine hinting at two comings I see no reason to introduce two comings of Christ. In addition I would have no motivation to introduce a split resurrection into Rev 20 and Daniel 12:1-2 unless there was a verse in the bible that hinted at such a concept. And so when I read that the rapture of 1 Cor 15 is actually a resurrection as well, I would naturally associate this with the resurrection of the righteous (first resurrection of Rev 20). In addition there is a lot of flow between 1 Thess 4 and the next chapter. If you remove the artificial chapter breaks between chapter 4 and 5 we can see that the rapture flows into a description of the thief in the night and the destruction of the ungodly.

 

In addition 2 Thess 1 describes the relief for current persecutions as occurring at the second coming and not at an earlier rapture.

In addition 2 Thess 2 describes our gathering occurring after the public appearing of the antichrist on the temple, not before.

 

And of course the Olivet discourse does exist.    

I don't see why anyone would even want to introduce a doctrine of 2 more comings of Christ, two more resurrections of the righteous, two more last trumpets, two more gatherings of the elect when Jesus is seen on the clouds, two more moments when one is taken and one left behind, when they fit so well together as just one coming??  Where do pre-tribs get that from, maybe from an misunderstanding of Matthew 24:36?

[ARGOSY]

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

 

I was speaking to floatingaxe who does not seem to believe exactly as you do.  Not all pre-tribs admit to two future resurrections of the righteous and two future comings of Christ, despite the clear wording of 1 Corinthians 15.  I understand your view, I just so no need for it.  If God says there is going to be a resurrection and a lst trumpet and a gathering of the elect, I don't see the need for two resurrections, two last trumpets, and two gatherings of the elect? Why even think there's two?   What verse would cause you to introduce the concept instead of just assuming one.      If God says to me "you will become rich one day" I don't assume I will become rich twice and try to split His wording into two occasions.

[ARGOSY]

 

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

 

Hi Lamad, this is such a long post it doesn't even fit on my screen and makes it difficult to follow.   I will just quickly scan through the post and answer your best points as I see it.

 

1)Everything in the gospels was said only Jews, to assume the prophetic parts of the Olivet discourse thereby only apply to Jews would diminish the application of Jesus' eternal words to all of us.   Jesus through the gospels speaks to us all, and I believe your view is far from conclusive as to applying the Olivet discourse only to the Jews.

 

2)Regarding the 2 descriptions of the rapture, 1 Cor 15 and 1 Thess 4 do describe mainly the rapture/resurrection, I agree the focus is on the resurrection part of the coming of Christ. But I believe the placing of these events at the resurrection, and coming of Christ, and the last trumpet are already indicating a clear association with the second coming of Matthew 24.  Additionally 1 Thess 4 does then follow to 1 Thess 5 which adds to the thief in the night/day of destruction context of 1 Thessalonians. With so many overlapping events, I still do not understand why pre-tribs would even want to separate these two chapters into an earlier event, creating two resurrections, two last trumpets and two comings on the clouds.  This so-called silent rapture even has a loud trumpet and the voice of the archangel.

 

3) Regarding your "heavens" argument, the word "ouranos" has a primary meaning of "sky". The elect of Matthew 24 rise up from the earth into the sky and are gathered by the angels to one place. This is no big difference to the elect being gathered from around the earth. I believe you are splitting hairs here when the overlap of a great gathering during the moment Jesus is seen in the clouds has a pretty obvious overlap. Remember both of these also entail a resurrection as well, the elect in both gatherings receiving eternal bodies. If you cannot see the overlap, I believe you are in denial. I don't blame you, early lessons in these issues are hard to break in the face of unbiased truth.

 

4) I believe your reference to Rev 6 adds strength to my argument. Some people believe Revelation is sequential, I believe it contains multiple visions about the second coming. If you would like to place this rapture of the elect in Rev 6, I believe you are therefore placing the rapture into the second coming, which I completely agree with. This is what Rev 6 states, I see this as the second coming, not any earlier event:

 

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.

[Montana Marv]

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

[Salty]

 

Argosy, I have a question:

 

Suppose for a moment that the Olivet discourse never took place, so Matthew 24 did not exit, or the counterparts in Mark and Luke.

 

If you did not have Mat. 24 to look at, would your timing of the rapture change or be the same?

If the same, what scripture then would you base it on?

 

LAMAD

 

I see no reason to introduce a pre-trib rapture into the bible, if there is no verse in the bible that hints at it.   The natural assumption is that everything occurs in one final day, the day of the Lord. But additionally I would look at the wording of 1 Corinthians 15 and 1 Thess 4 and see that these "raptures" were described as occurring at the coming of Christ. In the absence of any NT doctrine hinting at two comings I see no reason to introduce two comings of Christ. In addition I would have no motivation to introduce a split resurrection into Rev 20 and Daniel 12:1-2 unless there was a verse in the bible that hinted at such a concept. And so when I read that the rapture of 1 Cor 15 is actually a resurrection as well, I would naturally associate this with the resurrection of the righteous (first resurrection of Rev 20). In addition there is a lot of flow between 1 Thess 4 and the next chapter. If you remove the artificial chapter breaks between chapter 4 and 5 we can see that the rapture flows into a description of the thief in the night and the destruction of the ungodly.

 

In addition 2 Thess 1 describes the relief for current persecutions as occurring at the second coming and not at an earlier rapture.

In addition 2 Thess 2 describes our gathering occurring after the public appearing of the antichrist on the temple, not before.

 

And of course the Olivet discourse does exist.    

I don't see why anyone would even want to introduce a doctrine of 2 more comings of Christ, two more resurrections of the righteous, two more last trumpets, two more gatherings of the elect when Jesus is seen on the clouds, two more moments when one is taken and one left behind, when they fit so well together as just one coming??  Where do pre-tribs get that from, maybe from an misunderstanding of Matthew 24:36?

 

 

I realize why such a doctrine as the pre-trib rapture was devised by men in the 1800's. Since it preaches a rapture prior to the great tribulation, and the Antichrist is to come at the start of the tribulation, who else does that doctrine prepare the deceived to accept in place of Christ but that coming Antichrist?

 

In Luke 17 when Jesus warned about the one taken and the other left and His Apostles asked Him "Where, Lord" those would be taken to, and He said wheresoever the carcase is, that's where the eagles will be gathered together, it's not hard to figure out the deceived will be fleeing to the Antichrist instead of waiting on Jesus' coming that will only occur later.

 

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