Mid Trib rapture anyone?

[OldCoot]

1 hour ago, iamlamad said:

Tells us the truth: Did John see Jesus at the right hand of the Father? You know He did not.

You are being hyper literal and still using a flawed argument which does not account for the entirety of scripture on the matter.

Your claim of the seals starting in the 1st century AD is based on the idea that John did not see the Yeshua at the right hand of the Father.  And because John did not see Yeshua sitting at the right hand, then the start of chapter 4 of Revelation has to be before the ascension.  

Problem 1:   The book of the Revelation was written in roughly 95AD.  This is per Polycarp who was a disciple of John.  That qualifies at primary source witness testimony in a court of law.  Iron clad.   Dr. Mark Hitchcock destroyed Preterist Hank Hanegraff's arguments in a recorded debate using this very historical fact.  The period that John was banished to Patmos was under the Emperor Domitian.  His term as Emperor was 81-96AD.  

Problem 2:  Stephen, upon being stoned to death in Acts 7, stated he saw Yeshua standing at the right hand of the Father.  We know that Stephen was stoned after Yeshua's resurrection and ascension and Acts was written before Paul's death.  And we know that this was before the first Gentile was brought into the church in Acts 10 and before Paul had his Damascus road conversion.   Paul in fact was at the Stephen stoning event.  So it was several decades before the Revelation was given to John.

Problem 3: Yeshua tells John to write down the things that he had seen  (Chapter 1), the things which are (chapters 2&3), and the things which will take place after this (chapter 4 onward).  This statement by Yeshua is confirmation that chapter 4 is after the period of the churches.  It supports the concept that the church has been removed and is represented by the 24 elders just as King David divided the priests into 24 divisions and Peter calls the church a royal priesthood.  Also, that the church is never mentioned again in Revelation after chapter 3 supports this as well.   Only in the book's final salutation by John is the church mentioned.  

So the Word pretty much disputes what you think the Word says.   And we haven't even touched on the OT passages that lend even more evidence.   This is why I wrote that you should be careful.

 

Edited June 1, 2019 by OldCoot
Spelling. Stupid spell checker!

[The Light]

9 hours ago, iamlamad said:

Quote

Sorry, my friend but this time Revelation man is right: they are NOT the same. In one the moon is blood red, meaning it is a SEEN moon. On Matthew 24 neither the sun or moon is giving light - not even the stars. This is talking about TOTAL DARKNESS.

Maybe you failed science. Let me help you. During a lunar eclipse the moon goes to TOTAL DARKNESS before it turns to as BLOOD. I will provide a video that will help educate you. Just skim through it till you find the moon going dark before it turns to a blood moon. There are lots of examples. LUNAR ECLIPSE

 

Quote

AT least one prewrather got this part right:

Apparently not!

 

Quote

the biggest sign of Christ's coming as shown in Rev. 19 is He will come when it is totally dark - not just at night, but in the day.

I see no evidence in Rev 19 that He will come in the dark.

Quote

if you would care to study, Joel 2 shows the blood moon sign in chapter 2, and then the total darkness sign in chapter 3, that fits with Matthew 24.

Already done that. I also know that the cosmic signs of Rev 6 perfectly match the signs of Matthew 24. If you would take a couple of minutes to watch the lunar eclipse video I provided then you will know that also.

Quote

Of course there is the time difference: it is very real: the 6th seal is before the start of Day of the Lord, while Matthew 24 after the trib of those days is 7 plus years AFTER the start of the Day of the Lord.

Dude you are very confused. The church is raptured before the tribulation. The tribulation period is the 1st 5 seals. Then Christ comes immediately after the tribulation to gather His elect from heaven and earth. Then the wrath of God begins. There is absolutely nothing in Matt 24 that says Jesus is coming to the earth. The ONLY reason that this is accepted is because the timeline is completely wrong and that is the only way to make it work. Try putting things where God says they go instead of where you think they go because you don't understand how to make the correct timeline work.

 

[The Light]

8 hours ago, OldCoot said:

You are being hyper literal and still using a flawed argument which does not account for the entirety of scripture on the matter.

Your claim of the seals starting in the 1st century AD is based on the idea that John did not see the Yeshua at the right hand of the Father.  And because John did not see Yeshua sitting at the right hand, then the start of chapter 4 of Revelation has to be before the ascension.  

Problem 1:   The book of the Revelation was written in roughly 95AD.  This is per Polycarp who was a disciple of John.  That qualifies at primary source witness testimony in a court of law.  Iron clad.   Dr. Mark Hitchcock destroyed Preterist Hank Hanegraff's arguments in a recorded debate using this very historical fact.  The period that John was banished to Patmos was under the Emperor Domitian.  His term as Emperor was 81-96AD.  

Problem 2:  Stephen, upon being stoned to death in Acts 7, stated he saw Yeshua standing at the right hand of the Father.  We know that Stephen was stoned after Yeshua's resurrection and ascension and Acts was written before Paul's death.  And we know that this was before the first Gentile was brought into the church in Acts 10 and before Paul had his Damascus road conversion.   Paul in fact was at the Stephen stoning event.  So it was several decades before the Revelation was given to John.

Problem 3: Yeshua tells John to write down the things that he had seen  (Chapter 1), the things which are (chapters 2&3), and the things which will take place after this (chapter 4 onward).  This statement by Yeshua is confirmation that chapter 4 is after the period of the churches.  It supports the concept that the church has been removed and is represented by the 24 elders just as King David divided the priests into 24 divisions and Peter calls the church a royal priesthood.  Also, that the church is never mentioned again in Revelation after chapter 3 supports this as well.   Only in the book's final salutation by John is the church mentioned.  

So the Word pretty much disputes what you think the Word says.   And we haven't even touched on the OT passages that lend even more evidence.   This is why I wrote that you should be careful.

 

Ba - Bam 

[iamlamad]

8 hours ago, OldCoot said:

You are being hyper literal and still using a flawed argument which does not account for the entirety of scripture on the matter.

Your claim of the seals starting in the 1st century AD is based on the idea that John did not see the Yeshua at the right hand of the Father.  And because John did not see Yeshua sitting at the right hand, then the start of chapter 4 of Revelation has to be before the ascension.  

Problem 1:   The book of the Revelation was written in roughly 95AD.  This is per Polycarp who was a disciple of John.  That qualifies at primary source witness testimony in a court of law.  Iron clad.   Dr. Mark Hitchcock destroyed Preterist Hank Hanegraff's arguments in a recorded debate using this very historical fact.  The period that John was banished to Patmos was under the Emperor Domitian.  His term as Emperor was 81-96AD.  

Problem 2:  Stephen, upon being stoned to death in Acts 7, stated he saw Yeshua standing at the right hand of the Father.  We know that Stephen was stoned after Yeshua's resurrection and ascension and Acts was written before Paul's death.  And we know that this was before the first Gentile was brought into the church in Acts 10 and before Paul had his Damascus road conversion.   Paul in fact was at the Stephen stoning event.  So it was several decades before the Revelation was given to John.

Problem 3: Yeshua tells John to write down the things that he had seen  (Chapter 1), the things which are (chapters 2&3), and the things which will take place after this (chapter 4 onward).  This statement by Yeshua is confirmation that chapter 4 is after the period of the churches.  It supports the concept that the church has been removed and is represented by the 24 elders just as King David divided the priests into 24 divisions and Peter calls the church a royal priesthood.  Also, that the church is never mentioned again in Revelation after chapter 3 supports this as well.   Only in the book's final salutation by John is the church mentioned.  

So the Word pretty much disputes what you think the Word says.   And we haven't even touched on the OT passages that lend even more evidence.   This is why I wrote that you should be careful.

When taking scripture as literal makes good sense, then it SHOULD be taken literally! If it is symbolic, such as a rider on a white horse, then we should not take it literally. Then it is to represent something else.

Since chapter 1 is John alive and seeing Jesus around 95 AD - and since chapter 21 is far far into our future, it makes good sense that SOMEWHERE in between is where we are NOW. Some want to jump into our future in Rev. 4:1 - but that is terrible exegesis! That was 95 AD when JOHN was called up to heaven. 

Use common sense here - FORGET all preconceptions! We live in the age of Grace. Judgment for the most part has been pushed off for the future. Grace and judgment hardly mixes. We find this at the 5th seal: the martyrs are crying for judgment, asking WHEN, but they are told judgment cannot come until the proper TIME for judgment - after the last martyr killed as they were - as church age martyrs. They cannot be 70th week martyrs because at that time judgment has already started. 

Since we are STILL in the age of grace, we are not yet at the 6th seal, where judgment and wrath begin.  

Therefore just common sense tells us we the church are at the time of the martyrs, people still being martyred for their stand on Jesus Christ. 

No matter how many times I read about the first seal, I simply cannot find even a hint of anything evil there. In fact, I find just the opposite, a white horse. Common sense tells me, since Jesus rides a white horse, God is simply not going to use a white horse for ANYTHING evil. Therefore this white horse in seal 1 MUST BE something righteous. 

I studied all the commentaries on the first seal. As I remember, ONLY ONE had it as the church with the gospel. Others only thought it might possibly be. As usual, the commentaries were little help. This is about where I was when I was determined to ask God and wait on His answers. 

You don't have it quite right. Jesus spoke words to me: HE asked me why John did not see Him at the right hand of the Father - when there were over a dozen verses saying that is where He should have been  - and Stephen SAW Him there.  I wonder how you would have answered had Jesus asked YOU this question? I could not answer and told Him I could not. 

Then He asked by why in that first search for one worthy "no man was found?" He put it this way: that search ended in failure to find someone  worthy open the book. He then said that if I read ahead, HE was found worthy. Then He asked me WHY He was not found in that first search. I wonder How you would have answered Him. I said I could not answer that question.

Next, He asked me why the Holy Spirit was there in the throne room, in chapter 4, when He said He would send Him down as soon as He ascended. He reminded me that at the time John saw this vision, Jesus had ascended many years before. I wonder how you would have answered Him had He asked you this question. I said I could not answer it. 

He had already said that this passage of scripture shows TIMING and THE MOVEMENT of time. I could not see this either. So I have these 5 things I had to answer, and could not answer any of them. I studied hours a day for weeks, and could not answer. Then one day He spoke again and told me to study chapter 12. I did not want to. I wanted the answers to these questions on chapters 4 & 5. I had NO IDEA He was sending me to chapter 12 to get the answers I was looking for. 

I turned by bible to chapter 12, and He gave me a synopsis of that chapter, but then pointed out that the first 5 verses were about His birth and how the devil had used King Herod to attempt to kill Him as a young child. He the said, "those first five verses were a 'history lesson' for John." I sat there thinking about "history lesson," knowing John was younger than Jesus so he would not have been alive when Jesus was born. Suddenly Jesus said, "now you can go back to chapters 4 & 5.

With "history lesson" on my mind, within a few minutes I could answer every question: this vision of the throne room was a vision of the past. 

That is how I came to understand why Jesus was not seen at the right hand of God - He was still on earth or under the earth. That is how I came to understand the Holy Spirit was there because Jesus had not yet ascended and sent Him down. That is how I came to understand why that first search for one worthy ended in failure: Jesus had not yet risen from the dead. I understood, this was a vision of the past for John in 95 AD. 

I came to understand, God wanted to show the church the BOOK. He CHOSE to begin while the book was still in the hand of Father God. To do that, God had to show John some history. After all, the book remained in God's hand UNTIL Jesus ascended. 

Then we come to chapter 5, and John got to see the moment Jesus ascended and sent the Holy Spirit down. 

Now I wonder why you can't see this. It seems in your mind it is an impossible exegesis of this passage of scripture. Yet, his scenario fits answers every question.

Problem 1 above is a moot problem: God is VERY able to show in visions the past, the present or the future or all of them together in one vision.  We KNOW John saw visions. Our difference is, you imagine John was seeing the throne room of 95 AD, while the actual text John wrote makes that seem VERY unlikely. It is much more likely John saw a vision and that it was a vision of the past. I still wonder how YOU would have answered Jesus had He asked YOU those questions. 

Problem 2 is also a moot problem - not a problem at all. Jesus was showing John a vision of the past. You seem to think this impossible, yet we KNOW God can do almost anything. Why is it so difficult for you to think God could show John things of history? God is all powerful! Can't you see the big picture: God our Father holding a book in His hands, just WAITING for someone to come forth who would be worthy to take the book and begin opening the seals?  It seems from studying the Greek that God was not clasping the book, but more like the book was just sitting on His hand, as if He is waiting for someone to take it. In fact, Jesus mentioned that Stephen SAW Him at the right hand of the Father. It is NOT a problem that it happened long before John saw this vision: this part of the vision was in the past: history to John.

This statement by Yeshua is confirmation that chapter 4 is after the period of the churches.   This is a statement of imagination. It is not seeing the book clearly without preconceptions.  It was STILL 95 AD when John was called up to heaven! TIME had not changed. All John meant by "after these things" is AFTER God finished showing John what message to give to each church, God now was going to show John something different. It is a transitional phrase to go from one vision or one part of what John was to write to something else. How can you jump 2000 years when John was very much still alive when GOd called Him up to heaven? That is terrible exegesis! LEAVE REV. 4:1 in 95 AD! 

The truth is, this statement by Yeshua is confirmation that chapter 4 is after God quit dictating the messages to the churches that were under John's care at that time: 95 AD - and now God is going to quit dictating and will begin to show John things. 

 It supports the concept that the church has been removed  ONLY be wild imagination and preconceptions. It is NOT IN THE TEXT. It is the opposite of exegesis! It is reading into it what is not there. It was JOHN called up to heaven in 95 AD. How in the world can that possibly represent the church being called up to heaven in our future? This is imagination gone to seed.  This kind of sloppy exegesis (which is really eisegesis ) is what has opened the door to people seeking for TRUTH when they KNOW pretribbers have used eisegesis. So prewrath came, and millions have gone to a posttrib belief...and pretribbers are to blame for this! 

You are right: it is only a concept from outside imposed upon the scripture: eisegesis. It was JOHN called up to heaven in 95 AD. Period and end of this story. The church was still VERY MUCH on  earth while John was called up to heaven.

is represented by the 24 elders  This is perhaps the weakest part of your argument. Perhaps you should camp out on Rev chapter 5 - the first 7 verses for a month or two. Read it over and over, meditate on it: ask God what HIS intent was. 

the church is never mentioned again in Revelation after chapter 3 supports this as well.  This is definitely your weakest argument! The church is still there. There are martyrs being added: seal 5. 

the Word pretty much disputes what you think the Word says.  I think my scenario fits what is written FAR BETTER than yours. The truth is, the written word SUPPORTS what I think and makes what you think impossible. How can you possibly image John being called up in 95 AD as the rapture of the church? Well, if you can imagine a white horse being the Antichrist, I guess you can imagine anything. 

[iamlamad]

31 minutes ago, The Light said:

Maybe you failed science. Let me help you. During a lunar eclipse the moon goes to TOTAL DARKNESS before it turns to as BLOOD. I will provide a video that will help educate you. Just skim through it till you find the moon going dark before it turns to a blood moon. There are lots of examples

Just answer this question: what good would a blood red moon be if it was INVISIBLE? The very purpose of a SIGN is that people SEE the sign. A sign would be something NOT NORMAL. Just the very words declaring a blood red moon portends it is a SEEN moon. 

On the other hand, when the sun is NOT giving light, when the norm IS light, that is a sign. The moon only reflects light. If the sun is dark, the moon is dark. What part of darkness do you not understand? 

Revelation 16:10

And the fifth angel poured out his vial upon the seat of the beast; and his kingdom was full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues for pain,

Joel 3:15

The sun and the moon shall be darkened, and the stars shall withdraw their shining.

 

When Jesus comes, it is going to be DARKNESS - not just night, but supernatural darkness.

 

Don't doubt me on this!

[iamlamad]

25 minutes ago, The Light said:

Ba - Bam 

I guess that must be the sound of ERROR. 

[iamlamad]

39 minutes ago, The Light said:

The tribulation period is the first 6 seals

How interesting. Would you agree that the days of great tribulation that Jesus spoke of would be a part of your "the tribulation?"

[OldCoot]

4 hours ago, iamlamad said:

When taking scripture as literal makes good sense, then it SHOULD be taken literally!

Not always.  When one takes one point and builds a position around it and neglects the other evidences is not sound exegesis. Your main focus and support for you argument is a negative..... John didn't see Yeshua at first so He couldn't be there, so the what John was actually viewing was a 50 day window of time in 32AD.   That is taking things to extremes.  Hyper literal.

But the internal evidence alone doesn't support that idea.  

Edited June 1, 2019 by OldCoot

[JoeCanada]

On 5/29/2019 at 11:51 PM, Revelation Man said:

Good stuff here brother......I disagree a wee bit in that I don't think any men {save Elijah/Moses maybe} are in Heaven before the Rapture. But that wasn't my point of this reply. 

 

I see you are into the Breastplates of the High Priests, the colors/stones. Now read Rev. 9 {the Two Woes} and check out the Locusts {Demons} have Breastplates of Iron {Like Rome} and the 200 Million Army have Breastplates just like the High priests of Israel as per the colors. Check it out. 

That is why I contend {one of many reasons} the 200 Million is an Angelic Army of God bringing Plagues on mankind.

Its not 200 million Chinamen.

Hi RM,

It's NOT 200 million Chinamen?......... But I thought.........O com'on..............

Ya, I totally agree.....it's not. But....IT COULD BE. China can now field an army of 200 million. But there is a problem putting them all on horses.

I did a search a while back on the number of horses in the world. If you take all the horses....the race horses, trail horses, work horses, foals, show horses, old horses, pony's...etc.....all the horses in the world don't even add up to anywhere close to even 100 million, I think somewhere around 70 million max. And they are scattered all over the world.

I believe it's a spiritual army. You say Angelic??????....well maybe. Perhaps demonic????

I'm not sure. I need to look into it some more. 

 

[Revelation Man]

On 5/31/2019 at 1:37 PM, The Light said:

I know you are a smart man, Revelation Man, but Rev 6 is just John retelling us what Jesus told us in Matthew 24.  This is the opening of the 1st 5 seals.

Matt 24

My mom had to have Emergency Surgery yesterday so I had to go to Birmingham all of the sudden. She went for a stupid test a month 1/2 ago, 5 days later the blood vessel the used busted open, she had to have surgery, been a month, the Nurse comes down yesterday and says she has infection, another surgery, all for a test she didn't need to have done !! Kinda frustrated with these doctors, found out they haven't had her on antibiotics even though shes 84,  and the home/health care place she was in for 3 weeks didn't use a Wound Vac. We were blessed the infection hadn't spread to her blood vessels.

 

Anyway.....on the Matt. 24 Exegesis I did. And by the way I would rather be led by the Spirit than smart anyday. Amen.

On 5/31/2019 at 1:37 PM, The Light said:

It's not a mistake, and I have seen few that understand.

Quote

Actually quite a few people think this way.  I could search for my Exegesis, but I find after a few months sometimes I learn new things by just going over things afresh. The timing is all wrong as per Matt. 24 matching up with the Tribulation BEFORE verse 15. The funny thing is I spent like three months on my Exegesis,  wanted to know for sure how/if these Rev. chapter six events matched up with Matt. 24, and  found out they don't.

Matt. 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple. 2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. 3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? AND what shall be the sign of thy coming, AND of the end of the world?

{{{ The Disciples asked Jesus THREE THINGS here, WHEN shall these things be, speaking about the Temple being destroyed first off, THEN what is the sign of your coming, AND what is the end of the World {or end of the age}. So when Jesus answers them he tells about the EVENTS that lead up to the SIGN of his coming, but not many actually get it, in verse 14 that ends all the signs of his coming as per the Rapture, and thus it ends the Church Age. Then we get the Tribulation which ends with the End of the Age [of man] and the signs about the Second Coming/Blood moon, Jesus appearing in the Eastern Skies. The Second Coming of Christ is with the Church to Conquer Satan. Verses 4-6 is about 70 AD, which is almost like unto the Second Coming Event shown in Zechariah 14, and there is a reason for that. If the Jews had of accepted Christ there would have been no Church Age, Jesus would have saved Israel from the Romans in 70 AD, but God knew they would reject him, that is why the Statue of Daniel and the Four Beasts have a 2000 year SKIP in the prophecy, take out the Church Age and they all fit together perfectly like a seamless dress. }}}

4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. 5 For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. 6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.

{{{ Jesus is speaking unto the Disciples here, of course. He's saying, HEY, don't allow anyone to fool you men, many will come in my name saying I am the christ, but what does this mean ? Well it means that Jesus' own prophecy was fulfilled..........via John 5:43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive........you see, the Pharisees saw that Rome was the Fourth Beast, they knew that, but they had no idea of a 2000 some odd year Church Age, so when they saw Rome about to Destroy/Sack Jerusalem, they looked for a POLITICAL KING/Messiah to rally them, and to defeat the Romans, so they put forth "Messiahs" just before 70 AD. So Jesus is warning his Disciples, do not fall for this, it will NOT BE ME, it will be a false christ they put forth. And yes, the 70 AD Event did look almost exactly like the Zechariah 14 Event where the Anti-Christ Conquers Jerusalem. So Jesus tells them, you will hear of wars and rumours of wars, DO NOT BE TROUBLED, all these things have to come to pass, BUT the end IS NOT YET....in other Gospels is says the end is BY AND BY. So Jesus is warning his very Disciples not to come back to Jerusalem when they here the christ has come and there is a war, he says the end is LATER ON....NOT NOW....Thus if they had come back to Jerusalem, they probably would have been killed by the Romans at that time. So these false christs are ones the Jews/Pharisees put forth hoping to be saved as the Prophecy says will happen, Jesus will save the Jews, see Rev. 16. }}}

7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. 8 All these are the beginning of sorrows. 9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.10 And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.

{{{ This is describing the Church Age AND the Disciples coming DEATHS !! After 70 AD, Jesus starts describing the Church Age Troubles the Church will go through. He describes it as a Woman in BIRTH/Sorrows/Labor Pains. So we had 2000 some odd years of Wars....more wars.....famines.....pestilences and earthquakes etc. etc. This is NOT the Great Tribulation of course, this BIRTHS the 70th week. That is why Jesus describes it as the SORROWS of a Woman in birth, the baby is not here, but the SIGNS are all around you, she's in LABOR !! But this is not, nor can it be about the 70th week Tribulation. Jesus tells the Disciples they will DELIVER YOU UP to be killed, this is SPECIFICALLY ABOUT Jesus' Disciples coming deaths. So this is the START of the Sorrows. }}}

11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. 12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. 13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

{{{ Now Jesus tells about a SECOND subset group of FALSE PROPHETS....the first mention was false christs, because the Pharisees put forth false christs to save themselves, they forced forth men to be the Messiah, thus Jesus' prophecy was spot on, I come in the Father's name and you don't receive/accept me, but another comes in his own name and you {Pharisees} will accept him. The 2nd subset was about bad preachers/teachers over the 2000 year Church Age, and even about some Rabbis no doubt. People like Robert Tilton, David Koresh and Jim Jones, down through the ages or Church Age. This is why EACH Mention is a about a different PERIOD OF TIME "SPECIFICALLY".............Verse 5 is about 70 AD..................verse 11 is about the 2000 some odd year Church Age.......................and verse 24 is about THE False Prophet and THE Anti-Christ, thus they PERFORM MIRACLES !! This helps one understand the TIMING, one has to get the THREE MENTIONS to get the chapter is about three specific time periods. Now Jesus is about to finish up the Sign of his coming.....it started with Nation vs. Nation or may wars getting more frequent, pestilences, earthquakes, famines etc. etc., then the Disciples were killed and false prophets are teaching and preaching, now we are getting CLOSE to where we are NOW....SIN will abound {it does now}, and the love of many has WAXED COLD.....NOW !! {Abortion/Homosexualty etc.} But he that endures until the end the same shall be SAVED.....This verse is where many get confused, this is not speaking about people who ENDURE the coming Tribulation, Jesus is saying that all people in the 2000 some odd year Church Age MUST ENDURE to the end of one's life, and they will be saved, Paul said we have to run the race until the very end, he called it a Marathon. This isn't about enduring the Anti-Christ, he's going to kill everybody except the Jews in Petra whom God protects. Then verse 14 tells us the LAST SIGN of his coming, the Gospel must be preached in ALL THE WORLD, then Jesus comes for the Church !! Verses 36-51 is actually about the Rapture, but Matthew had no concept of it. Thus these verses BIRTH THE 70TH WEEK. }}}

 

Matt. 24:15-31 is about the Tribulation, and the Second Coming. Thus the 3rd question is answered, what will be the End, Jesus then gives the signs of the Second Coming also.

Edited June 2, 2019 by Revelation Man