The Imminency Of Christ's Sign Return For The Rapture Of The Church

[Diaste]

16 hours ago, not an echo said:

The following better conveys how I would express things concerning our salvation:  We become born-again, saved, children of God, Christians, a part of Christ's Church, a new creature, spiritual children of Abraham, etc., "or we have no inheritance."  The same is so for those who are Israel, in accord with what Paul said, "For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel" (Rom. 9:6).  When an Israelite gets saved, for that individual, any distinction stops there.  But otherwise, there are some differences.  In connection with God's covenant promise to Abraham, God used the Israelite Nation (in connection with the Old Testament) and now is using the Christian Church (in connection with the New Testament) to effect this end.  And, when God gets ready to wrap everything up, He's got some things slated for those who were a part of the former and the latter. 

It has become a curious thing for me that you seem to have a disdain for any understanding that would indicate a distinction between the Nation of Israel and the Christian Church. 

Mine is a very basic understanding.  Dispensationalism is more involved.  I have tried before to convey to you (and others) that I am not a dispensationalist and I certainly don't have any kind of dispensationalist aggenda.  Personally, I'm kinda feeling that what may have happened here is that too much has been made of this by those who hold to it, and too big of a thing is being made out of this by those who reject it.  And Diaste, I'm really not meaning to be negative on something that may be of real importance to you.  I'm just trying to understand all the undercurrents a little better.  As far as what the distinctions I speak of really mean to me, the following may help to illustrate:

That is not the distinction. People seem to get hung up on that all the time and it's not what I'm saying. There is a nation of Israel. This is the promised land and it's home for the Jews. There is spiritual Israel, the seed of Abraham. Paul says, "If you are in Christ you are the seed of Abraham and heirs according to the promise."  This is the only way we have the promises, by being counted as the seed of Abraham.

Paul says in Romans and Ephesians we are grafted into the natural olive tree which is spiritual Israel. 

So there are two groups in God's eyes: Spiritual Israel and the nation of Israel. There is not a third entity called 'the christian church'. That's the conclusion of dispensationalism from the idea there is an age of grace and an age of law. It's has always been grace and the Law only served to show sin to be sin. The Law never saved a single soul yet grace will save everyone. Noah for example was saved by grace and he was well before the Law. Abraham was before the Law and he was righteous. Many others as well. So to say grace as an age now exists where it didn't before is incorrect. Then the whole idea of dispensationalism and a 'christian church of the age of grace' falls apart.

What has happened is God has accepted all in the name of Jesus and adopted them into the family which already existed, which family is the seed of Abraham, and grafted those in Christ into the natural Olive tree, which is spiritual Israel. He did not create a new entity called the 'christian church'.

 

 

[Montana Marv]

4 hours ago, Diaste said:

What has happened is God has accepted all in the name of Jesus and adopted them into the family which already existed, which family is the seed of Abraham, and grafted those in Christ into the natural Olive tree, which is spiritual Israel. He did not create a new entity called the 'christian church'.

The thing is that there are other branches which were not pulled out. (Rom 11:17 -  If some of the branches have been broken off.  You or We the gentiles of the Church have been grafted in among the others (other branches, which have not been pulled out), Israel has been yanked out because of unbelief.  Israel is but one or two of many branches of that olive tree.  So this olive tree is not Israel, but many of it's branches are Israel.  The root Jesus Christ nourishes the tree.

Just thought of this after the above paragraph; it may mean nothing.  But maybe this Olive Tree represents or is similar to the Tree of Life.

In Christ

Montana Marv

[Diaste]

18 hours ago, Montana Marv said:

The thing is that there are other branches which were not pulled out. (Rom 11:17 -  If some of the branches have been broken off.  You or We the gentiles of the Church have been grafted in among the others (other branches, which have not been pulled out), Israel has been yanked out because of unbelief.  Israel is but one or two of many branches of that olive tree.  So this olive tree is not Israel, but many of it's branches are Israel.  The root Jesus Christ nourishes the tree.

Just thought of this after the above paragraph; it may mean nothing.  But maybe this Olive Tree represents or is similar to the Tree of Life.

In Christ

Montana Marv

The root is Christ, the tree is spiritual Israel, the branches are believers. A believer is grafted into the tree of spiritual Israel. Being a Jew means nothing if one is not of  Israel. 

[not an echo]

On 9/11/2020 at 5:36 AM, Diaste said:

On 9/10/2020 at 2:13 PM, not an echo said:

We know that many, myself included, see the sounding of the 7th Trumpet as marking the mid-point of Daniel's 70th Week.  

You'll have to help me out here. Don't believe I have heard this before.

Hello Diaste,

As I was doing a little scanning, I noticed that I had overlooked this post of yours.

In reflection, I believe this is a view more commonly held by those of the mid-trib rapture persuasion, however, I may not word everything exactly as they would.  Without going back and researching it afresh, those who are mid-trib and see the 7th Trumpet as being the Trump of God, the Last Trump, or the rapture trumpet, see this as happening at the mid-point of Daniel's 70th Week, hence, support for their position.  And, to me, this would be logical, if true.

I differ in that I see the sounding of the 7th Trumpet as indeed happening at the mid-point of Daniel's 70th Week, but I do not see the 7th Trumpet as being the Trump of God or the Last Trump spoken of by Paul.  My plan for the moment is to speak to this in my reply following this one.

So, as I said above, while "many, myself included, see the sounding of the 7th Trumpet as marking the mid-point of Daniel's 70th Week",  I differ concerning the 7th Trumpet/Trump of God question.  I hope you see what I am meaning, and I hope I am not misrepresenting what those believe who are of the mid-trib persuasion.  I haven't looked in that direction in a while and sometimes me ole memory doesn't serve me like I wish it did.

On 9/11/2020 at 5:36 AM, Diaste said:

Quote

Whereas I can kinda see where you have been coming from, I'm not able to see the thing of blending the 7th Trumpet with the 6th Seal.  These puzzle pieces do not go together just because there is a side that fits.  But, I believe that there may be something here that will help us all come a little closer to getting this thing in true focus.  Maybe not, but I'm trying, which I believe the Father would have us to do.  Hey---and just so you know---even if we come to a place where we do see things more eye to eye, I'm still kinda savoring the thing of pushing you into the Crystal River.  Might as well get ready

For starters Paul speak to the last trump near the coming of the Lord at the end of the age. We know of one trump that is clearly the last trump during the end of the age near to the return of Jesus; the 7th trump. If this is indeed the last trump Paul is referring to then it must come near to the 6th seal as this is when the sign of Jesus appearing occurs and it is said the wrath of the Lamb and the wrath of the One on the throne begins. Therefore the 7th trump will occur in between the 6th and 7th seal.

Some out there try to find yet another trump as the last trump citing things like "the trump of God" and "the Lord will sound the trump" and say this is different than an angel sounding a trump, and that an angel holding a trump makes the trump 'of the angel' and not the 'trump of God'. 

God giving a command to sound the trump is God sounding the trump, it's by His command, His plan, His obligation and responsibility; therefore He sounded the trump by command. When president Trump gave the order to kill the Iranian General he didn't pull the trigger or push the button to send the bullet or the missile and take out the General; but it is said, "When the President killed the General..." No one credits the service member with the command, the plan or the kill. Same thing.

And it is the trump of God no matter who is holding the trump as the angels were given the trumps. They didn't make the trumps in their basement. They didn't save their money and go down and buy then from the Trumpet Store; they are given the trumps, from God, therefore they are the trumps of God.

Concerning your view that the 7th Trumpet is sounded "in between the 6th and 7th seal",  I believe I have discussed this with you in the past, but it has been a while.  A real struggle for me being able to see what you are here putting forth is the thing of the chronological order of The Revelation and something that is much more clear to me.

For example, it sure seems that there is lots of evidence that we should understand the order of The Revelation as being chronological.  I mean, is it not entirely logical that if the 1st Letter pertains to those to whom it is addressed, and the 2nd Letter pertains to those to whom it is addressed, and this holds true through the 7th Letter, that we have a pattern?  Is it not entirely logical that if the 1st Seal is removed and what then happens is revealed, and the 2nd Seal is removed and what then happens is revealed, and this holds true through the 7th Seal, that we have another pattern, even a continuation of a pattern?  Is it not entirely logical that if the 1st Trumpet is sounded and what then happens is revealed, and the 2nd Trumpet is sounded and what then happens is revealed, and this holds true through the 7th Trumpet, that we have another pattern, even another continuation of a pattern?  Is it not entirely logical that at this point, with such a pattern, that it would be prudent to consider whether there is yet a continuation of this pattern, or a pattern?  As I see it, we have just such a pattern here, and it is so in our face that to depart from it is tantamount to kicking dust on it, to throwing it out the window, or even denying the very thing that Christ, in Scripture, is trying to establish for us.  So, I'm just not able to reach this thing of the 7th Trumpet being sounded between the 6th and 7th Seal.  I'm not even close.

Rather, the very apparent chronological order of The Revelation is preserved and more easily observed when we understand all the prophetic points of convergence that come together at the sounding of the 6th Seal and the trumpet that is sounded at this time (Matt. 24:31) as being the Trump of God (I Thess. 4:16), or The Last Trump (I Cor. 15:51-52).  So, I do understand that the 7th Trumpet being the last trumpet numerically gives us something to look at and consider, but having looked at it and considered it for years, I keep coming away not seeing it as the Trump of God or The Last Trump of which Paul speaks.  Further, I see the Trump of God as being one of a kind, instead of one in a series, as the 7th Trumpet is.  Still further, in consideration of something that we find in Numbers 10:1-10, I can see there being a last trumpet calling an assembly (the Trump of God) and a last trumpet sounding an alarm (the 7th Trumpet).  I have mentioned all of this before, but it is buried in some thread somewhere back there.   And still further, I see the 7th Trumpet as heralding the period of which Revelation 11:15-19 is an overview and of which chapters 12-20 expound.  As I see it, there are all kinds of problems connected with the 7th Trumpet sounding concurrent with the rapture.  I don't see a 7th Trumpet rapture at all.  But, I can easily see a 6th Seal rapture, and the Trump of God, or Last Trump being sounded concurrent with its opening.  Hope you will look closer at this.

Got to go for now.  Hopefully I will be able to do some more catching up tonight.

Edited February 2, 2023 by not an echo

[not an echo]

On 9/12/2020 at 6:25 AM, Diaste said:

On 9/12/2020 at 12:01 AM, not an echo said:

I just can't get on board with you here Diaste.  We have got to know that what Jesus said about the temple would have the disciples curious in a big time way.  This would be huge, very huge.  If He had of "given a sermon on the Mount before the question was asked,"  I submit that they would have been too preoccupied with other thoughts for anything else to register.  If the President has an inside scoop that the U.S. Capital is going to be utterly destroyed and He says something about this to his staff, do you they they are going to be much interested in anything else till they know more about this?  In accord with both Matthew and Mark's accounts, the disciples' first question is reflective of their concern:  "Tell us, when shall these things be?" (Matt. 24:3, Mk. 13:4).  Moreover, Luke's account reinforces the context of their question, as the place of their asking of the question and Jesus' answering of it is not by him given, but just the dialog.  It matters less if it was on the Mount of Olives or along the way that the disciples asked Jesus this question, and more what was going on in their minds and how He answered them.  And, what did they have on their mind?  They were done ready to be the big wigs in Jesus' administration!  The temple complex was fixing to be their new stomping grounds---in their minds.  Hey, they were "IN" and basking in their aspirations concerning it all---what they thought was going to be their new world.  They didn't have a clue.  And now, Jesus is saying that the temple is coming down, every single stone of it!  Whaaat!!!  I don't know if there is a real good place to stop, but I've got to stop somewhere.  I guess I'll push the pause button here.

It's a fact. We have no clue about the passage of time between Jesus' egress from the Temple to when the Olivet discourse was given. It's purely speculation to make up a story based on wishes and hope. Was the private meeting after the Sermon on the Mount? When did Jesus exit the Temple and give the 70 AD prophecy? Who knew what and when and why? These questions must be answered by evidence, not hopeless guesses.

I guess I kinda got confused by the way you worded your reply.  You had said, "It's clear the Temple prophecy was given earlier and is not connected to the Olivet Discourse. Jesus may have given a sermon on the Mount before the question was asked."  When you said "sermon on the Mount" my mind went to the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5-7), and not what Jesus said in His Olivet Discourse, or His sermon on the Mount of Olives!   I had thought that you were giving a hypothetical example of something that Jesus could have done.  So, we weren't quite on the same wave length here.  Not sure if this will change what you were thinking when you made your reply, so for now, I will just leave it with the clarification.

You also said concerning the disciples' conversation with Jesus that "Since the time is not recorded it could have been the next day, a week later, a month. We don't know."  I think we can know that it wasn't a week later or a month, as Jesus had already made His triumphal entry, which was the week He was crucified, and we have other parameters.  We also have the disciples' first question, "When shall these things be?" (Matt. 24:3).  It's really not a desire of mine to argue about this, but when we have three accounts of this, and no indications of anything otherwise, we have a pretty good basis upon which to deduce what their opening question concerned, don't you think?

On 9/12/2020 at 6:25 AM, Diaste said:

On 9/12/2020 at 12:01 AM, not an echo said:

Concerning your question, "How is it then we are told He is near when these things take place but then that nearness is 7 years away?"  consider:  On a 2000 mile trip, if I am seven miles away from my destination, I am near.  On a 2000 hour project, if I am seven hours away from completion, I am near completion.  It's often a relative thing.  If 2000 years has passed since Christ's First Advent, if He makes a Sign Appearance some seven years before His Second Advent, His Second Advent is near.  For those who end up taking the mark of the beast, seven years will end up being a little too near.

True, and I have argued for the relative nature of time in certain context. The problem is no such separation as you suggest can be seen here:

"Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 

And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: 

and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, 

and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31And 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."

Immediately. And then. And then. And they will see...

"Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 

And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: 

and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, 

and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 

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."

All of it takes place right then.

I fully agree.  But, according to my understanding and what will harmonize with all of Scripture, none of what here takes place is of Christ's Second Advent.  None of it.  This is His Sign Appearance, which happens at the opening of the 6th Seal.  His Second Advent happens in the period heralded by the 7th Trumpet.

As far as I know, everyone (myself included) accepts what Jesus says just prior to this (Matt. 24:23-28) as being His Second Advent.  But, then He turns His attention to an event that He speaks of as "the sign of the Son of man in heaven" (Matt. 24:29).  If this is also His Second Advent, why would He use the word sign in connection with it when His substance will be right before everyone?  From another angle, if what He refers to as "the sign of the Son of man in heaven" is of His Second Advent, how would signs relating to the sun, the moon, and the stars at this time even rate an honorable mention?  With His Second Advent being "as the lightning" and what John sees in Revelation 19:11-16, whatever else might be happening skyward would seem to pale into utter insignificance.  Really, what relevance would any kind of sign have in the face of Christ's Second Advent?  But, connected with His Sign Appearance and the rapture, such makes perfect sense and squares with everything related to the 6th Seal.

Let me reinforce that I see Christ's Sign Appearance as being imminent, and when He makes this appearance, it is going to happen very, very quickly and then He is going to be gone---with the Church.  In my concept of what will fit Scripture, what those who are left behind will experience will be on the order of a glimpse of Him "with power and great glory" (Matt. 24:30).  The next time Jesus is seen by anyone, whether it be His Sign Appearance, His Second Advent, whether it be the raptured Church, the 144,000 sealed Jews, many eyes, or every eye, He is going to be seen "with power and great glory."  Concerning His Sign Appearance being on the order of a glimpse, to me, this is an easy take away, as the resurrection and the rapture will happen in "a moment, in the twinkling of an eye" (I Cor. 15:52), and Jesus, as a "thief" (Matt. 24:40-44) is not going to be hanging around.  He's gonna make the scene, the goods are gonna be gathered, and He's gonna be gone.  But, He'll be back!  In the interval, the period of the Day of the Lord will have commenced and Daniel's 70th Week will be fulfilled.  And, it is not going to be a good time for those who remain on planet Earth.  In my experience, when these pieces of the prophetic puzzle are assembled thus, everything fits remarkably.  I know that for you to try to see this puzzle as I have assembled it will involve you having to move or rearrange some of the pieces you have had in place.  But, I hope you will give it a try.  And, if one on my pieces is not fitting quite as good as I think it is, please continue to let me know.  Hey, I believe the Father is fine with us trying to get it right---and helping each other.

Edited February 2, 2023 by not an echo

[not an echo]

On 9/13/2020 at 9:25 AM, RonaldBruno said:

On 7/4/2020 at 9:59 PM, not an echo said:

Concerning the teaching that Christ's return for the Church is imminent, I have long believed that He can come at any time and have often expressed this with words such as, "even before I finish this sentence!"  Understandably, if so, it would seem that this teaching should also hold for all centuries of the Church Era, from the first century to the actual century of His return.

Did the first century Christians believe that Christ's return for the Church was imminent?  Consider Paul's words in I Thessalonians 4:

 13  But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

 14  For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with Him.

 15  For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

 16  For the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God:  and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

 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.

 18  Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

Should Paul's words be taken as applying to the Thessalonians personally?  I believe so.  Consider the very next verses, which open chapter five:

  1   But of the times and 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.

  3   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.

  4   BUT YE, BRETHREN, are not in darkness, that that day should OVERTAKE YOU as a thief.

Notice also that in the above joining references, Paul made a very close connection between the rapture and the Day of the Lord, which he says, "so cometh as a thief in the night" (vs. 2).  We know that when Christ returns for the rapture of the Church, He will come suddenly and unexpectedly, or as a "thief" (Matt. 24:42-44;  Mk. 13:32-37;  Lk. 12:39-40).  Indeed, because the rapture and the beginning of the Day of the Lord so closely coincide, the Day of the Lord will come just as suddenly and unexpectedly, again, as Paul says, "as a thief in the night."  These words support that there will be no sign(s) that will indicate that Christ's return, nor the Day of the Lord, is on the verge of taking place.  To the contrary, Jesus said that "in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh" (Matt. 24:44).  This world will by no means be expecting the rapture event, nor be prepared for the Day of the Lord, which scripturally can commence right afterwards---even on the same day.  But, we as Christians should be ever watchful and ready, knowing that this can happen at any time.

 

You claim there won't be preceding signs? What about what we are going through right now: pestilence, lawlessness ...?

Matt. 24:6-14 informs us of preceding signs before his return, the last one being the gospel being preached to every nation - then the end will come. NO OTHER CENTURY COULD HAVE CLAIMED THAT PREREQUISITE SIGN. 

So the big question is, "Are we experiencing the period of time referred to as the "beginning of sorrows"?

We see pestilence that has crippled the world with fear of a virus.

We see lawlessness in the streets that has also threatened to grow in November.

We also have a peace treaty made with UAE and just the other day an additional country joining.

There is no argument that the gospel has recently been preached to every nation and tribe.

So we as Christians are not in the dark about these things pertaining to His return. The world will interpret these events as nothing that hasn't happened before, natural, normal, especially wars and pestilence, famine and earthquakes. This is somewhat reasonable, but we see them happening more frequently. The 20th century certainly had more deaths due to wars than the previous 1800 years combined.

I'm not sure about this observation, but another thread revealed a very interesting insight about the 1st Horseman. He goes out to conquer and is given a crown. Coronavirus got it's name because it looks like a crown. This virus, in a sense went out and conquered the world, not completely defeating us, but at no time in history did any thing like this have an effect and render us capive and impotent, as prisoners, panicked and cowering in fear and in hiding. Certainly Satan is behind this! It wasn't meant to defeat us ... there are three more horsemen and they will kill 1/3 of the population.

 

In the midst of these catasptrophes an angel is still spreading the gospel. (Rev. 14:6)

So idea that nothing precedes the rapture is certainly at odds with what  Jesus said.

Another thing to add to this conundrum is the the true placement of the "Last Trumpet". It's blown by an angel, not a man during some earthly trumpet feast. It is Trumpet #7.

The Pre-tribbers must deny and refute this, because it messes up their whole theology. Don't bother trying, it is a no win argument - been there. So just take all this with you. As things happen (events pile up that we can identify as 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th trumpet events) and we are still here, you will concede and gladly get on board with #7.

Hello Ronald,

Hope all is well with you and yours.  I believe this may be my first response to you.  Hope it is helpful.

Concerning, "You claim there won't be preceding signs",  I believe you may have misunderstood where I was coming from.  My statement was, "These words support that there will be no sign(s) that will indicate that Christ's return, nor the Day of the Lord, is on the verge of taking place."  On the other hand, I believe there are plenty of signs that confirm that Jesus sure knew what He was talking about, and you mention some of these.

Let me go a little further.  As I understand Scripture, what Jesus warned of in the first part of His Olivet Discourse correlates with the first four seals of The Revelation and has been taking place since the first century.  But, none of what has happened, or will happen, goes into the category of a sign of the time of Christ's return for the rapture.  Rather, all that has and is happening should be regarded as continuing conformations of the truth that He is indeed going to return.

To illustrate, I copied and pasted the following from a post of mine on page 3 of this thread.  Consider:  Let's say you were going to have to leave your young son for some indefinite period of time and wanted to prepare him for some of the things that would lie ahead in his future until you returned.  You could say...

"Now son, I've got to be leaving for a pretty good while, and I'm not for sure just when I will be coming back, but I am.  And when I do, have your things ready because I'm just gonna spring in one day and grab you up and we're gonna be off to Disneyworld.  In the mean time remember these things:  Life is full of sunny and rainy days, but it takes such for the flowers to bloom.  And...you are going to encounter lots of different kinds of people in this life, some who will make good friends and some who will not, so be careful.  And...you will be faced with having to say 'Yes' or 'No' to all kinds of temptations and however it may seem at the time, things will always turn out better if you just say 'No.'  And...if you meet a little girl that sweeps you off your feet, this doesn't necessarily mean she's the one, so give it some time."

Now, with all of this information, he would have nothing upon which to base the time of your springing in, other than he could surely suppose that the time would be getting closer!  However, when the things began to come to pass that you had spoken of, it would be reinforced for him that Dad sure knew what he was talking about!  The fulfilling of the things you had told your young son would become something that would keep his hope alive concerning your future return---continuing signs, or confirmations, that you are indeed coming back!  On the other hand, if what you had said did not come to pass, or ceased to hold true, he would have legitimate reasons to wonder.

The facts of history from the first century unto our day align with the opening portion of Jesus' Olivet Discourse and substantiate that our Lord sure knew what He was talking about!  These facts should bear up our hope and strengthen our faith.  We who truly believe in the imminency of Christ's return are not looking for any unfulfilled sign(s) to first be fulfilled.  Nor are we looking for any sign(s) that will help toward pinpointing the time of His return.  However, we do have for signs the continued fulfilling of the things He warned of, which are continuing confirmations that He is indeed coming back!

Concerning your statement, "Another thing to add to this conundrum is the the true placement of the 'Last Trumpet'",  I just happened to speak some concerning my understanding of this a couple of posts back in a reply I made to Diaste.  Hope you will consider what I said there.  Here's a link (https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/255168-the-imminency-of-christs-sign-return-for-the-rapture-of-the-church/?do=findComment&comment=3279411).

Concerning your statement, "The Pre-tribbers must deny and refute this, because it messes up their whole theology. Don't bother trying, it is a no win argument - been there",  I was raised under the tutelage of what might be considered orthodox pre-trib thought, and it's a long story (of course!), but I see about everything differently now, except I am still pre-Daniel's 70th Week in my rapture understanding.  I would like to invite you to consider my thread, A Totally Different Pre-Daniel's 70th Week Rapture Interpretation (https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/253935-a-totally-different-pre-daniels-70th-week-rapture-interpretation/).  In my second post of that thread, I keep a running list of threads I have that relate to my different interpretation, or view.  I really try to avoid any semblance of being argumentative about it.  I prefer to just share, discuss, explain, and clarify---in a prayerful and mature Christian matter.  And, I'm definitely alright with learning too!  My hope is that we can all come to a better understanding.  Hmmm.  I believe that would be pleasing to our Father as well!

Gotta go for now...

Edited February 2, 2023 by not an echo
add links

[RonaldBruno]

9 hours ago, not an echo said:

Concerning your statement, "Another thing to add to this conundrum is the the true placement of the "Last Trumpet," I just happened to speak some concerning my understanding of this a couple of posts back in a reply I made to Diaste.  Hope you will consider what I said there.  Here's a link (https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/255168-the-imminency-of-christs-sign-return-for-the-rapture-of-the-church/?do=findComment&comment=3279411).

You have a misconception on the Mid-Trib view ... at least my Mid-Trib view. I do not adhere to Daniels 70th week, gap theory. Grabriel gave a prediction to the exact time of Christ's First Coming. Christ died AFTER the 69th week and half way through the 70th week.

Daniel 24 states the 70 weeks are determined for your people and your holy city:  To finish trangression >>> Jesus died for our sins ; To make an end of sins >>> Those who put their faith in Christ are spiritually cleansed of all sins; To atone for wickedness >>> Jesus did make the final atonement; To bring in everlasting righteousness >>> He did;  To seal up vision and prophecy >>> It was sealed in the scroll that was handed to him; To anoint the most Holy >>> Jesus. This 70 weeks were accomplished.

"Know therefore and understand, That from the going forth of the command To restore and build Jerusalem Until Messiah the Prince, there shall be seven weeks an d sixty-two weeks ..." Dan. 9:25 >>> That's 69 weeks up to the entrance and beginning of Jesus ministry! Meaning the 70th week starts his ministry! Verse 26 also confirms that Messiah will be cut off after the 69 weeks, not during. The verse eludes to a later time that speaks of _  another _  "prince to come"  will destroy the Temple (70AD) among other desolations.

What people interpret as actions by the Antichrist are things that Christ fulfilled.

"He confirmed a covenant with many for one week". >>>Christ brought a covenant. His ministry was btw exactly 3 1/2 years which confirms the following: "In the middle of the seven He will put an end to sacrifice and offering" >>> He did, He offered Himself as the final sacrifice.

9 hours ago, not an echo said:

We who truly believe in the imminency of Christ's return are not looking for any unfulfilled sign(s) to first be fulfilled.  Nor are we looking for any sign(s) that will help toward pinpointing the time of His return. 

So you are saying the passage in Matthew 24;6-14 has been happening since the first century and throughout history? "The beginning of sorrows" is also translated as the birth pangs. The birth pangs began in 1948, when Israel became a nation again. Some might argue 1967 when Jerusalem was recaptured; but birth pangs don't cover the last 1900 years as you may think. To put a nail on the head, you can say wars, famines, pestilence, earthquakes have occurred throughout, but you can't say verse 14 happened throughout. The gospel has just recently been preached to every nation and tongue - within the last few years ... but maybe not, maybe this year or next? Jesus said the end would come when that happens. That is a preceding sign, a final birth pang - the water is about to break.

[not an echo]

On 9/15/2020 at 4:28 PM, JohnR7 said:

On 9/15/2020 at 10:43 AM, not an echo said:

This is reinforced by his teaching that "We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed" (I Cor. 15:51). 

This is talking about the resurrection when our Body is raised up. That is different from the rapture when our body returns to the dust it came from.  

Hello JohnR7 (and all),

In seeking an understanding that will harmonize with what Paul says elsewhere, I see both the resurrection and the rapture being spoken of here.  Consider further what Paul says in I Corinthians 15 (and my notes in parenthesis):

 51  Behold, I shew you a mystery;  We shall not all sleep (souls in Heaven/bodies in the grave), but we shall all be changed (whether awake or asleep),

 52  In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump:  for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead (those asleep) shall be raised (their body resurrected) incorruptible, and we shall be changed (when raptured/Phil.3:21).

 53  For this corruptible (whether awake or asleep) must put on incorruption (our new body), and this mortal (those still awake) must put on immortality (which will happen when raptured).

 54  So when this corruptible (whether awake or asleep) shall have put on incorruption (our new body), and this mortal (those still awake) shall have put on immortality (which will happen when raptured), then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

This understanding harmonizes with what Paul says in I Thessalonians 4.  Consider what he says there (and my notes in parenthesis):

 13  But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep (souls in Heaven/bodies in the grave), that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

 14  For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep (souls in Heaven/bodies in the grave) in Jesus will God bring with Him (their souls).

 15  For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain (evident) unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent (precede) them which are asleep (evident).

 16  For the Lord Himself shall descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God:  and the dead (the bodies of those asleep) in Christ shall rise first (be resurrected):

 17  Then we which are alive and remain (evident) shall be caught up (seized or gathered by the angels concurrent with our change/Phil. 3:21/i.e., raptured) together with them (those who returned with Christ, now in their resurrection bodies) in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air:  and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

 18  Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

According to my understanding and what will harmonize with Scripture, what Paul is speaking about will happen during the event of the appearance of "the sign of the Son of man in heaven" (Matt. 24:29-31).  Many prophetic points of convergence indicate that this will occur with the opening of the 6th Seal (Rev. 6:12-7:17).  The cry of those left behind indicates that "the great day of His wrath is come" (Rev. 6:17), which is the Day of the Lord (Acts 2:20).  A help to me has been to understand that the Seven Sealed Book could rightly be entitled THE DAY OF THE LORD, for that is what this book is all about (https://www.worthychristianforums.com/topic/249265-a-title-suggestion-for-the-seven-sealed-book/).  I see the 7th Seal as being opened the same day that the 6th Seal is opened, meaning the Day of the Lord will have begun indeed.  Moreover, Paul makes a connection of his above words (I Thess. 4:13-18) with the beginning of the Day of the Lord (I Thess. 5:1-2).  The "sudden destruction" (I Thess. 5:3a) that he speaks of at this time is what those left behind at the opening of the 6th Seal will be suddenly faced with.  They "shall not escape" (I Thess. 5:3b).  As could be expected, those that do escape (those that make up the Church/Lk. 21:35-36) are seen in the interlude relating to the 6th Seal (Rev. 7:9-17).  All of this will come upon the world suddenly and unexpectedly, or "as a thief in the night" (I Thess. 5:2;  Matt. 24:36-43).  Relating to all of this, Jesus said, "Therefore be ye also ready:  for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh" (Matt. 24:44).  This supports that the opening of the 6th Seal, Christ's Sign Appearance, and the rapture of the Church is imminent---meaning it could happen before I push Submit Repl...

Edited February 2, 2023 by not an echo
add link

[not an echo]

On 9/16/2020 at 5:13 AM, Diaste said:

On 9/15/2020 at 12:14 PM, not an echo said:

The following better conveys how I would express things concerning our salvation:  We become born-again, saved, children of God, Christians, a part of Christ's Church, a new creature, spiritual children of Abraham, etc., "or we have no inheritance."  The same is so for those who are Israel, in accord with what Paul said, "For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel" (Rom. 9:6).  When an Israelite gets saved, for that individual, any distinction stops there.  But otherwise, there are some differences.  In connection with God's covenant promise to Abraham, God used the Israelite Nation (in connection with the Old Testament) and now is using the Christian Church (in connection with the New Testament) to effect this end.  And, when God gets ready to wrap everything up, He's got some things slated for those who were a part of the former and the latter. 

It has become a curious thing for me that you seem to have a disdain for any understanding that would indicate a distinction between the Nation of Israel and the Christian Church. 

Mine is a very basic understanding.  Dispensationalism is more involved.  I have tried before to convey to you (and others) that I am not a dispensationalist and I certainly don't have any kind of dispensationalist aggenda.  Personally, I'm kinda feeling that what may have happened here is that too much has been made of this by those who hold to it, and too big of a thing is being made out of this by those who reject it.  And Diaste, I'm really not meaning to be negative on something that may be of real importance to you.  I'm just trying to understand all the undercurrents a little better.  As far as what the distinctions I speak of really mean to me, the following may help to illustrate:

That is not the distinction. People seem to get hung up on that all the time and it's not what I'm saying. There is a nation of Israel. This is the promised land and it's home for the Jews. There is spiritual Israel, the seed of Abraham. Paul says, "If you are in Christ you are the seed of Abraham and heirs according to the promise."  This is the only way we have the promises, by being counted as the seed of Abraham.

Paul says in Romans and Ephesians we are grafted into the natural olive tree which is spiritual Israel. 

So there are two groups in God's eyes: Spiritual Israel and the nation of Israel. There is not a third entity called 'the christian church'. That's the conclusion of dispensationalism from the idea there is an age of grace and an age of law. It's has always been grace and the Law only served to show sin to be sin. The Law never saved a single soul yet grace will save everyone. Noah for example was saved by grace and he was well before the Law. Abraham was before the Law and he was righteous. Many others as well. So to say grace as an age now exists where it didn't before is incorrect. Then the whole idea of dispensationalism and a 'christian church of the age of grace' falls apart.

What has happened is God has accepted all in the name of Jesus and adopted them into the family which already existed, which family is the seed of Abraham, and grafted those in Christ into the natural Olive tree, which is spiritual Israel. He did not create a new entity called the 'christian church'.

I can agree with you on some of what you are saying, especially concerning all the saved "being counted as the seed of Abraham" and "It's has always been grace" and "grace will save everyone." Yes!   Beyond this, I hope I'm not reading into what you are saying more than is there, but yours seems to me to be a very curious and precarious position.  I say precarious, because whatever we are believing about any subject in the Bible, our understanding must harmonize with everything the Bible says on the subject.  And, concerning the Church, I'm just not able to get a good handle on what you are seeing and saying concerning it---other than negativism and the dismissing of it.

My use of the phrase Christian Church has nothing to do with anything other than trying to convey that I am speaking of the New Testament Church, or the Church of which 3000 unsaved Israelites became a part on the Day of Pentecost, or simply the Church that is spoken of so much in the New Testament.  I have gotten kinda in the habit of using this qualifer so that I don't have to come back and comment on what Stephen said in Acts 7 concerning "the church in the wilderness" (vs. 38).  And now, it looks like I've done gone and got myself into another tangle!  But please note, I never said anything about a "christian church of the age of grace."  All the "age of grace" and "age of law" terminology is not me.  I am not an echo.   But, I'm all fine with talking about the Old Testament and the New Testament or the Old Covenant and the New Covenant.  And, with that understanding, I feel that my statement, "In connection with God's covenant promise to Abraham, God used the Israelite Nation (in connection with the Old Testament) and now is using the Christian Church (in connection with the New Testament) to effect this end" represents a solid biblical statement relating to this subject.

Concerning Paul's parable of the Olive Tree, some things that stand out to me are these:  First of all, it is rooted in God's grace, and the trunk of the tree is the Abrahamic Covenant.  In the days of the Old Testament, because of the growth of the Israelite Nation, the biggest part of the branches on the tree were Israelites---by far.  But, there were also some Gentiles.  Corresponding to this, because of God's work of grafting and the growth of the Christian Church, the biggest part of the branches have become Gentiles---by far.  But, there have also been some Israelites.  And there is more, but I'm desirous to move on.

Now, this thing of grafting is kinda interesting and I believe there may be something here that will help us.  I don't know much about olive trees and the grafting of a wild olive branch into a domesticated olive tree.  But, with other trees, like an apple tree, if you graft a Gala branch into a Golden Delicious tree, you are gonna have Gala apples growing on the same tree with Golden Delicious apples.  Interestingly, the only thing that is gonna grow on the Gala branch is Galas.  You can even cut away the Golden Delicious branches and graft a bunch of Gala branches in and have mostly, and I guess conceivably, only Gala apples growing on the tree instead of Golden Delicious.  The trunk is fine with either.  And, we know that the Galas are gonna stay Galas and the Golden Delicious are gonna stay Golden Delicious.  But, they are all apples!  Kinda like with saved Israelites (Golden Delicious) and save Gentiles (Galas).  But, we are all humans (apples), or in this case, children of God (good apples)!  Of course, there are a lot of bad apples, but that's a different subject.

On the thing of saved Gentiles being considered "spiritual Israel",  as long as it is realized that this is just in a spiritual sense, I believe I'm all alright with this thought, and Paul may have had this on his mind in his closing remarks to the Galatians (6:16).  I just don't understand all the majoring on this, without any balance concerning the Church.  The New Testament certainly majors on the church and how that a saved Jew becomes a part of this entity...oops, body (Eph. 1:22-23;  I Cor. 12:12-27).      

Edited February 2, 2023 by not an echo

[Diaste]

4 hours ago, not an echo said:

I can agree with you on some of what you are saying, especially concerning all the saved "being counted as the seed of Abraham" and "It's has always been grace" and "grace will save everyone." Yes!   Beyond this, I hope I'm not reading into what you are saying more than is there, but yours seems to me to be a very curious and precarious position.  I say precarious, because whatever we are believing about any subject in the Bible, our understanding must harmonize with everything the Bible says on the subject.  And, concerning the Church, I'm just not able to get a good handle on what you are seeing and saying concerning it---other than negativism and the dismissing of it.

My use of the phrase Christian Church has nothing to do with anything other than trying to convey that I am speaking of the New Testament Church, or the Church of which 3000 unsaved Israelites became a part on the Day of Pentecost, or simply the Church that is spoken of so much in the New Testament.  I have gotten kinda in the habit of using this qualifer so that I don't have to come back and comment on what Stephen said in Acts 7 concerning "the church in the wilderness" (vs. 38).  And now, it looks like I've done gone and got myself into another tangle!  But please note, I never said anything about a "christian church of the age of grace."  All the "age of grace" and "age of law" terminology is not me.  I am not an echo.   But, I'm all fine with talking about the Old Testament and the New Testament or the Old Covenant and the New Covenant.  And, with that understanding, I feel that my statement, "In connection with God's covenant promise to Abraham, God used the Israelite Nation (in connection with the Old Testament) and now is using the Christian Church (in connection with the New Testament) to effect this end" represents a solid biblical statement relating to this subject.

Concerning Paul's parable of the Olive Tree, some things that stand out to me are these:  First of all, it is rooted in God's grace, and the trunk of the tree is the Abrahamic Covenant.  In the days of the Old Testament, because of the growth of the Israelite Nation, the biggest part of the branches on the tree were Israelites---by far.  But, there were also some Gentiles.  Corresponding to this, because of God's work of grafting and the growth of the Christian Church, the biggest part of the branches have become Gentiles---by far.  But, there have also been some Israelites.  And there is more, but I'm desirous to move on.

Now, this thing of grafting is kinda interesting and I believe there may be something here that will help us.  I don't know much about olive trees and the grafting of a wild olive branch into a domesticated olive tree.  But, with other trees, like an apple tree, if you graft a Gala branch into a Golden Delicious tree, you are gonna have Gala apples growing on the same tree with Golden Delicious apples.  Interestingly, the only thing that is gonna grow on the Gala branch is Galas.  You can even cut away the Golden Delicious branches and graft a bunch of Gala branches in and have mostly, and I guess conceivably, only Gala apples growing on the tree instead of Golden Delicious.  The trunk is fine with either.  And, we know that the Galas are gonna stay Galas and the Golden Delicious are gonna stay Golden Delicious.  But, they are all apples!  Kinda like with saved Israelites (Golden Delicious) and save Gentiles (Galas).  But, we are all humans (apples), or in this case, children of God (good apples)!  Of course, there are a lot of bad apples, but that's a different subject.

On the thing of saved Gentiles being considered "spiritual Israel,"  as long as it is realized that this is just in a spiritual sense, I believe I'm all alright with this thought, and Paul may have had this on his mind in his closing remarks to the Galatians (6:16).  I just don't understand all the majoring on this, without any balance concerning the Church.  The New Testament certainly majors on the church and how that a saved Jew becomes a part of this entity...oops, body (Eph. 1:22-23;  I Cor. 12:12-27).      

I'm not dismissive of the 'church' concept. I'm opposed to the idea of the 'christian church' as distinct from God's word on the idea. When Paul says all in Christ are the seed of Abraham there is no distinction of any attribute other than 'in Christ'. Paul says there is no such thing as Jew or Gentile in Christ as all are one. That's the church. And it's not 'christian'; it's in Christ. Another distinction is any unbeliever changing their way to the mind of Christ is not of the 'christian church' but of the natural olive tree, in Christ, adopted into God's family, the seed of Abraham and not into some entity that cannot exist except for Root and Branch. The real problem is the elevation of the status of the 'christian church' to that which it is not given. 

The 'christian church' will find this out soon enough.