Defense of the Mid Trib Rapture

[Last Daze]

8 hours ago, ghtan said:

Glad to meet someone who is willing to discuss these views without taking things personally. To me, Seal 5 indicates that the seals are not God's judgments. Those who are slain asks God, "How long until you judge the inhabitants of the earth?" If the seals were God's judgments, wouldn't he reply something like, "What do you think is happening now? I am judging the earth." Instead, God tells them to wait a little longer. It implies that his judgments will follow, likely in the form of the trumpet plagues. The church will be removed before the latter. PS. Can't find Mark 21:36 in my bible.    

I tend to agree.  I don't necessarily see elements of divine judgment in the first six seals, especially the fifth as you indicate.   The sixth seal tells of the desire to be hidden from the coming wrath, indicating it is still future.

• And they said to the mountains and to the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the presence of Him who sits on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb; for the great day of their wrath has come, and who is able to stand?”  Revelation 6:16-17

Then the seventh seal is opened and begins the series of the seven plagues which are God's judgment on those who have aligned themselves with the false prophet.

[OldCoot]

1 hour ago, Last Daze said:

I tend to agree.  I don't necessarily see elements of divine judgment in the first six seals, especially the fifth as you indicate.   The sixth seal tells of the desire to be hidden from the coming wrath, indicating it is still future.

• And they said to the mountains and to the rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the presence of Him who sits on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb; for the great day of their wrath has come, and who is able to stand?”  Revelation 6:16-17

Then the seventh seal is opened and begins the series of the seven plagues which are God's judgment on those who have aligned themselves with the false prophet.

I can see how one could view it that way based on the wording arraignment of the text. But since it is the Lamb who is opening the seals to begin with, I have come to hold that they would only happen by His doing so and therefore He is the source behind these.  More of an action than just an enlightening of events happening.

 

10 hours ago, ghtan said:

Glad to meet someone who is willing to discuss these views without taking things personally. To me, Seal 5 indicates that the seals are not God's judgments. Those who are slain asks God, "How long until you judge the inhabitants of the earth?" If the seals were God's judgments, wouldn't he reply something like, "What do you think is happening now? I am judging the earth." Instead, God tells them to wait a little longer. It implies that his judgments will follow, likely in the form of the trumpet plagues. The church will be removed before the latter. PS. Can't find Mark 21:36 in my bible.    

Indeed, we should be able to share our differing views on these things without condemnation of each other.  I am not so sure that one can associate Judge and Wrath interchangeably, even in the context you mention.  One is a determination and one is an action.  Given that the entire period is designed to drive Israel to the wall and recognize their Messiah (Hosea 5:15 - 6:1 and Matthew 23:39) and to persuade the rest of the peoples of the earth to turn to the One True God, I see even the events of the seals as being associated with punishment for unbelief.  Kind of a "you want to go your own way, then fine, I will allow it and you can deal with the consequences".  They just intensify more and more in severity as the period progresses.  To the point where God is becoming so disgusted with these people that events are intensified.  Those that take the mark later, become finally judged in doing so.  They cannot be redeemed because they took the mark, so are destined for destruction.

It is a bad time, no matter how one views it.  And the complexity makes it so that all of us probably have certain aspects to it wrong.  We each see these events in limitation of our human frailty and the amount of clarification we are given.   No matter how this plays out, I must keep my trust in the one true God that He is faithful and remembers His promises to those He loves.   I will be disappointed if a removal does not occur before these events, but that will only mean I had certain aspects wrong, not that God is unfaithful.   I still keep hope that there is a removal before these events, not for my sake alone, but for all the brothers and sisters.

Edited September 16, 2017 by OldCoot
Darn Spell checker!

[Last Daze]

3 hours ago, OldCoot said:

I can see how one could view it that way based on the wording arraignment of the text. But since it is the Lamb who is opening the seals to begin with, I have come to hold that they would only happen by His doing so and therefore He is the source behind these.  More of an action than just an enlightening of events happening.

I can see that.  It's everything in His timing.  He sets things in motion.  I don't think that necessitates that they be judgments though, maybe more an indication of "the fullness of time."

In a general sense, the scroll with the seven seals unfolds the events that lead to the ultimate regime change.  Only the Lamb was found worthy to be given the dominion over Earth that Satan usurped from Adam and Eve, so it makes sense that He determines the progression of those events.

[ghtan]

20 hours ago, OldCoot said:

I can see how one could view it that way based on the wording arraignment of the text. But since it is the Lamb who is opening the seals to begin with, I have come to hold that they would only happen by His doing so and therefore He is the source behind these.  More of an action than just an enlightening of events happening.

 

Indeed, we should be able to share our differing views on these things without condemnation of each other.  I am not so sure that one can associate Judge and Wrath interchangeably, even in the context you mention.  One is a determination and one is an action.  Given that the entire period is designed to drive Israel to the wall and recognize their Messiah (Hosea 5:15 - 6:1 and Matthew 23:39) and to persuade the rest of the peoples of the earth to turn to the One True God, I see even the events of the seals as being associated with punishment for unbelief.  Kind of a "you want to go your own way, then fine, I will allow it and you can deal with the consequences".  They just intensify more and more in severity as the period progresses.  To the point where God is becoming so disgusted with these people that events are intensified.  Those that take the mark later, become finally judged in doing so.  They cannot be redeemed because they took the mark, so are destined for destruction.

It is a bad time, no matter how one views it.  And the complexity makes it so that all of us probably have certain aspects to it wrong.  We each see these events in limitation of our human frailty and the amount of clarification we are given.   No matter how this plays out, I must keep my trust in the one true God that He is faithful and remembers His promises to those He loves.   I will be disappointed if a removal does not occur before these events, but that will only mean I had certain aspects wrong, not that God is unfaithful.   I still keep hope that there is a removal before these events, not for my sake alone, but for all the brothers and sisters.

Agree there is a difference between judging and wrath. But often in the bible the former leads to the latter. Hence it is significant that “judge” in the fifth seal is followed by “wrath” in the sixth. On the other hand, the text nowhere suggests that the first seal starts off that wrath. Indeed, wouldn't that be putting the cart before the horse? That the Lamb initiates the events does not mean the church will escape them. He surely must have initiated many other events in history. Context is key and in this respect the conversation in seal 5 is important. Interested to know how you interpret that conversation.   

I too wish the rapture will happen before Seal 1 - who wouldn't want to escape persecution - but unfortunately the text suggests otherwise to me. The consolation is that I think I will less likely be caught by surprise this way.

[OldCoot]

5 hours ago, ghtan said:

Agree there is a difference between judging and wrath. But often in the bible the former leads to the latter. Hence it is significant that “judge” in the fifth seal is followed by “wrath” in the sixth. On the other hand, the text nowhere suggests that the first seal starts off that wrath. Indeed, wouldn't that be putting the cart before the horse? That the Lamb initiates the events does not mean the church will escape them. He surely must have initiated many other events in history. Context is key and in this respect the conversation in seal 5 is important. Interested to know how you interpret that conversation.   

I too wish the rapture will happen before Seal 1 - who wouldn't want to escape persecution - but unfortunately the text suggests otherwise to me. The consolation is that I think I will less likely be caught by surprise this way.

Well, if one only looks at The Revelation, the text might suggest what you state.  When viewed in context of other scripture, especially the many passages in both OT and NT,  then not so much.  It would  be really nice, for our limited human minds, to have these things lined up like a systematic theology text so there would be no doubt the details.  But the Lord spread things out, precept upon precept, line upon line, for us to search out and learn more of Him in the process.  

Just like Revelation itself is not simply a chronology of events, but an overlay.  Kinda like an overhead projector (showing my age since overhead projectors are not common) where one lays one film down to show one thing, then lays another film down on top of that to lend clarity to the first.  And repeat the process until a complete picture comes into view.  Maybe a PowerPoint analogy gets that idea across!

For instance, Revelation 12.  I see that not as just a piece of the Gr Trib, but an entire 7 year overlay from a different perspective.  It has been generally held that the woman is Mary and the child the Messiah, which is true on a singular level, but on a corporate level it represents Israel and the Church, the body of Messiah. For one thing, the child is born and immediately and forcibly snatched up (harpazo) to the throne room of God before the Red Dragon (Satan) can devour it.  It does say the child will rule with a rod of iron and implies the Messiah, but Rev 2:26-27 says that all who overcome will rule with a rod of iron with Him.   Yeshua was never forcibly snatched up at His birth or His ascension. 

When one compares all of that to passages in the OT that show Israel "in labor" and giving birth before or immediately at the start of the Time of Jacob's trouble, Time of Great Tribulation, etc it paints a clearer picture.  And what is Israel giving birth to?  Those passages say both a male child and a nation.  Passages like Isaiah 66:7-8, Jeremiah 30:5-7, Jeremiah 6:22-24, etc.  The believers are the body of Messiah and also a Holy Nation per Peter 2:9.

While individual believers it can be said we are "born again" or renewed, the Church as a collective is not.  it was conceived at Pentacost by the seed of the Holy Spirit coming down and making a new creation, the Church.  And where did that happen?  In Israel.  The Body of Messiah (church) has been developing and growing since, like a new child in the womb, and the time is at hand for it to be born.  And when it is delivered, it is forcibly snatched up to the throne room of God per Revelation 12:5.  

Not a common perspective on these events, but certainly a viable alternative to commonly held perceptions on the events.  And it supports a early removal of the righteous either before or at the start of the Great Tribulation period.

 

[ghtan]

14 hours ago, OldCoot said:

Well, if one only looks at The Revelation, the text might suggest what you state.  When viewed in context of other scripture, especially the many passages in both OT and NT,  then not so much.  It would  be really nice, for our limited human minds, to have these things lined up like a systematic theology text so there would be no doubt the details.  But the Lord spread things out, precept upon precept, line upon line, for us to search out and learn more of Him in the process.  

Just like Revelation itself is not simply a chronology of events, but an overlay.  Kinda like an overhead projector (showing my age since overhead projectors are not common) where one lays one film down to show one thing, then lays another film down on top of that to lend clarity to the first.  And repeat the process until a complete picture comes into view.  Maybe a PowerPoint analogy gets that idea across!

For instance, Revelation 12.  I see that not as just a piece of the Gr Trib, but an entire 7 year overlay from a different perspective.  It has been generally held that the woman is Mary and the child the Messiah, which is true on a singular level, but on a corporate level it represents Israel and the Church, the body of Messiah. For one thing, the child is born and immediately and forcibly snatched up (harpazo) to the throne room of God before the Red Dragon (Satan) can devour it.  It does say the child will rule with a rod of iron and implies the Messiah, but Rev 2:26-27 says that all who overcome will rule with a rod of iron with Him.   Yeshua was never forcibly snatched up at His birth or His ascension. 

When one compares all of that to passages in the OT that show Israel "in labor" and giving birth before or immediately at the start of the Time of Jacob's trouble, Time of Great Tribulation, etc it paints a clearer picture.  And what is Israel giving birth to?  Those passages say both a male child and a nation.  Passages like Isaiah 66:7-8, Jeremiah 30:5-7, Jeremiah 6:22-24, etc.  The believers are the body of Messiah and also a Holy Nation per Peter 2:9.

While individual believers it can be said we are "born again" or renewed, the Church as a collective is not.  it was conceived at Pentacost by the seed of the Holy Spirit coming down and making a new creation, the Church.  And where did that happen?  In Israel.  The Body of Messiah (church) has been developing and growing since, like a new child in the womb, and the time is at hand for it to be born.  And when it is delivered, it is forcibly snatched up to the throne room of God per Revelation 12:5.  

Not a common perspective on these events, but certainly a viable alternative to commonly held perceptions on the events.  And it supports a early removal of the righteous either before or at the start of the Great Tribulation period.

 

I find Revelation is actually not a difficult book to understand. But it is when we try to conform Revelation to passages in the other parts of the bible, particularly the OT, that confusion arises. I think we should use Revelation to help us understand OT prophecy rather than the other way around, just as we use the NT to help us understand OT messianic passages and not the other way around. Makes sense to me because Revelation is the most updated and in-depth edition of the end time given to us by God. The latest edition of any work is always the clearest.

As for Rev 12:5, I am surprised you quote this to support a pre-trib view. It is more often used by mid-trib to support their view (though not by me). Reason being ch 12 is in the middle of the book, not at the beginning. But if you think the male child is the end-time church, then the woman must be end-time Israel. One must be consistent on these matters. But how can it be said that end-time Israel gives birth to the end-time church? It cannot.  

 

 

[HAZARD]

3 minutes ago, ghtan said:

I find Revelation is actually not a difficult book to understand. But it is when we try to conform Revelation to passages in the other parts of the bible, particularly the OT, that confusion arises. I think we should use Revelation to help us understand OT prophecy rather than the other way around, just as we use the NT to help us understand OT messianic passages and not the other way around. Makes sense to me because Revelation is the most updated and in-depth edition of the end time given to us by God. The latest edition of any work is always the clearest.

As for Rev 12:5, I am surprised you quote this to support a pre-trib view. It is more often used by mid-trib to support their view (though not by me). Reason being ch 12 is in the middle of the book, not at the beginning. But if you think the male child is the end-time church, then the woman must be end-time Israel. One must be consistent on these matters. But how can it be said that end-time Israel gives birth to the end-time church? It cannot.  

 

 

Hi ghtan.

The purpose of Revelation was to show, not hide from His servants, events from John's day into all eternity (Rev. 21-22). Events of the whole church age (Rev. 1-3) Events in Heaven (Rev. 4-5) Events of the future tribulation of Daniel's 70th Week (Rev. 6-19) Events of the Millennium (Rev. 20) Events of the eternal new heavens and the new earth (Rev. 21-22).

"Unto His servant John," The book was transmitted from God to Christ, to the angel, to John, to the churches, to us (Rev.1:11).

The key to interpretation of the book of Revelation, "Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter" (Rev. 1:19). "The things which thou hast seen"; that is, Christ in the midst of the seven candlesticks (Rev. 1:12-18, 20), as seen by John before he began to write.

"The things which are:" that is, the things concerning to churches then existent and those which should exist throughout the Church Age to the rapture. This division takes in only Rev. 3. "The things which shall be hereafter"; that is, the things which shall come to pass after the rapture of the church. This division includes all of the events of Rev. 4-22. One has only to believe this threefold natural division as given by Christ to understand the book fully, especially as to the time of the fulfilment of all the things of each division. The moment these divisions are forgotten and the reader begins to disarrange them and insert certain things into the one or the other that are not a part of the division, he will become confused as to the divine order of these "things" which are so clearly given in consecutive order, and he will miss the true intent of these "things" written therein.

To further prove that everything in Rev. 4-22 must be after the churches, and there after the rapture of the church, we have this fact confirmed in Rev. 4:1. After John had recorded the vision of Christ in Rev. 1, completing the first division of the book, he was told in Rev. 4:1 that he was to see "things which MUST BE hereafter," that is, after the things of the churches of the second division of the book. Therefore, if everything from Rev. 4:1 on through the rest of the book MUST BE after the churches, then all the events of Rev. 4-22 must be after the churches. If they MUST BE after the churches, then they cannot happen during the time of the churches. If they cannot happen during the time of the churches, then the church is no longer on the Earth during the fulfilment of the things which MUST BE after the churches.

[ghtan]

6 hours ago, HAZARD said:

Hi ghtan.

The purpose of Revelation was to show, not hide from His servants, events from John's day into all eternity (Rev. 21-22). Events of the whole church age (Rev. 1-3) Events in Heaven (Rev. 4-5) Events of the future tribulation of Daniel's 70th Week (Rev. 6-19) Events of the Millennium (Rev. 20) Events of the eternal new heavens and the new earth (Rev. 21-22).

"Unto His servant John," The book was transmitted from God to Christ, to the angel, to John, to the churches, to us (Rev.1:11).

The key to interpretation of the book of Revelation, "Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter" (Rev. 1:19). "The things which thou hast seen"; that is, Christ in the midst of the seven candlesticks (Rev. 1:12-18, 20), as seen by John before he began to write.

"The things which are:" that is, the things concerning to churches then existent and those which should exist throughout the Church Age to the rapture. This division takes in only Rev. 3. "The things which shall be hereafter"; that is, the things which shall come to pass after the rapture of the church. This division includes all of the events of Rev. 4-22. One has only to believe this threefold natural division as given by Christ to understand the book fully, especially as to the time of the fulfilment of all the things of each division. The moment these divisions are forgotten and the reader begins to disarrange them and insert certain things into the one or the other that are not a part of the division, he will become confused as to the divine order of these "things" which are so clearly given in consecutive order, and he will miss the true intent of these "things" written therein.

To further prove that everything in Rev. 4-22 must be after the churches, and there after the rapture of the church, we have this fact confirmed in Rev. 4:1. After John had recorded the vision of Christ in Rev. 1, completing the first division of the book, he was told in Rev. 4:1 that he was to see "things which MUST BE hereafter," that is, after the things of the churches of the second division of the book. Therefore, if everything from Rev. 4:1 on through the rest of the book MUST BE after the churches, then all the events of Rev. 4-22 must be after the churches. If they MUST BE after the churches, then they cannot happen during the time of the churches. If they cannot happen during the time of the churches, then the church is no longer on the Earth during the fulfilment of the things which MUST BE after the churches.

Hi Hazard,

I believe all futurists accept that chs 4-22 expand “what must happen hereafter” of 1:19. But apart from pre-trib, other futurists do not interpret “hereafter” as “after the churches.” Because the text does not say that. Instead, “hereafter” normally means “after this” (see ESV) i.e. pointing to the future. So in 4:1 John is told that he will be shown the future in the visions to follow. We need not read more into it than what is there.

[OldCoot]

7 hours ago, ghtan said:

As for Rev 12:5, I am surprised you quote this to support a pre-trib view. It is more often used by mid-trib to support their view (though not by me). Reason being ch 12 is in the middle of the book, not at the beginning. But if you think the male child is the end-time church, then the woman must be end-time Israel. One must be consistent on these matters. But how can it be said that end-time Israel gives birth to the end-time church? It cannot.  

 

Similar to what I stated before.. taken by itself, Revelation 12 might give that impression of Mid.  It is all those passages in the OT that state Israel gives birth as soon as the labor pains start or even a little before that is the kicker for looking at this as pre.  One passage in the OT I gave unequivocally states that these labor pains are the start of time of Jacob's Trouble, in Jeremiah, which has been rightly associated with the 70th week of Daniel or GT.  Where in that same passage is says Israel will be saved out of it. Thereby supporting this is the time of the GT.   The woman in Rev 12, described as she is, is a description of Israel from clear back in Genesis.   And according to Isaiah, the birth happens as soon as Israel starts labor.   And that same passage, Israel is giving birth to a nation.  Peter was very clear when he said the church is a holy nation.

The male child is the body of Christ, also what the church is called in many NT passages.  Paul elaborates many times that the believers are all parts the body.  And like the child is to rule with a rod of iron, Revelation 2:26-27 says that those who overcome will also rule beside Messiah with a rod of Iron.  

And that child is forcibly snatched up to the throne of God,  similar to John in Chapter 4.  That is the meaning of the Greek word harpazo which "caught up" is translated from in Rev 12:5.  Yeshua was never "forcibly snatched up" at either his birth or at the ascension.  Again, this has to mean the body of Messiah, the Church.  And it happens when the birth pains (GT period) begin.  Not in the middle or end of them.

Just take a closer look at the various passages.  The problem is, many do not really study OT eschatology, which is all the Bereans had when they  were commended by Paul for searching the scriptures daily to see if what he taught them was true, Acts 17:10-11.   And the Torah prescribes that a issue can only be confirmed on the testimony of two witnesses.  We have those two... the OT and the NT.  And The Revelation refers back to virtually every other book in the Bible except Ruth.  

Another problem is seeing The Revelation as only in sequential order.  Like Messiah, it is multi dimensional. I assert that many passages are like overlays of a power point presentation or putting layers of overlay film on an overhead projector.  Chapters 11-15 are parenthetical overlays that add clarity to the many events the previous chapters just like overlays on a powerpoint or overhead projector presentation.  

[Amazing Horse]

It would be quite strange for God to have 3,5 year wedding feast instead of 7 year wedding feast when most of things in revelation is said to be 7 times .