Are the Tribulation Saints and Old Testament Saints Raptured After they are Resurrected at the Second coming?

[Diaste]

17 hours ago, transmogrified said:

So here God is showing John the bride and then he describes her as a city...but the details of the city describes in an analogy what the bride is made up...she (the bride of Christ) has 12 foundations and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb...this means New Testament saints...then she is shown to have 12 gates and on the twelve gates are the names of the twelve tribes of Israel...this is showing Old Testament saints...but see, this is the BRIDE, the one and only BRIDE of Christ...pre trib attempts at the impossible of making God have two brides which is preposterous.

It's more than that with walls and, great size and how nations walk into the city.

17 hours ago, transmogrified said:

...Paul said there is ONE BODY...this is even more clear when looking at the Olive tree analogy given by Paul...Jesus said 'I am the true vine, and ye are the branches...' WHEN did he say this? Did he say you will BE the branches after my death, burial and resurrection? Of course not...Even in the analogy Paul gave he said Israel was the natural branches and they were broken off because of unbelief...do you see that? Pre trib and others point to the olive tree as if Israel is the tree and we are somehow grafted into Israel...NO...NO...NO...absolutely not...we are heirs together with Israel...the commonwealth of Israel... JESUS IS THE VINE...NOT ISRAEL!!!

I do see. I'm amazed someone else sees it.

17 hours ago, transmogrified said:

So what does that mean? It means the true believers of the Old Testament were IN CHRIST EVEN BEFORE WE WERE...as it is easy to see we were LATER grafted in, but the point is, what were we grafted into? We were grafted INTO CHRIST, the same JESUS CHRIST that they were broken off of because of their unbelief...

But anyway, this is one of the reasons why it can be said that because they were the natural branches and were in Christ back then it is also apparent they died in Christ, just as they were living in Christ...

This is also seen when they are grafted back into the vine at the second coming...it says God will pour out upon them the spirit of grace and supplication and BY ACCEPTING JESUS AT THAT TIME, THEY ARE AGAIN GRAFTED INTO THE SAME JESUS, THE SAME TRUE VINE, THE SAME OLIVE TREE,  THAT THEY WERE BROKEN OFF FROM...

Fact.

17 hours ago, transmogrified said:

So rather than having two brides, we have ONE TREE and two branches...this eliminates all the confusion...and Paul said he would not have us ignorant of this mystery, lest we be wise in our own conceits...and guess what has happened because of being ignorant of this mystery? We have a massive amount of people who are wise in their own conceits.

ONE BRIDE, ONE CHURCH, ONE BODY...and we can see even with what Paul said that we are what? We are all baptized into that one body...we are all grafted into that that one body that already existed before Jesus came and died on the cross.

So seeing we have ONLY ONE BRIDE consisting of both Old and New Testament saints, it would only make sense that John saw ONE BRIDE that had 12 gates and 12 foundations...not one bride having 12 gates and another bride having 12 foundations...but as ridiculous as this sounds, this is just one more fallacy that shows up because of injecting a rapture into the picture before the time...you end up having two comings, two judgments, an additional trip up to heaven, Jesus coming with only part of the saints, some of the saints are not changed at all, and some of them do not ascend up to heaven...

 

17 hours ago, transmogrified said:

Rev. 22:9-14

'Bride' is mentioned in verse 17. I don't see Bride of the Lamb.

17 hours ago, transmogrified said:

 

Yes, in this setting God specifically tells John 'I will show you the bride, the lambs wife...and then he sees this city...it is not a physical building he is marrying...his wife, or his people, is being described as a city...

And yet...

17 hours ago, transmogrified said:

Yes, so the word 'hagios' can be misleading in the sense that it allegedly carries the meaning of 'angels' rather than 'saints.' But the word 'hagios' is one transliteration of 'holy' or 'saint' but there is a difference between a transliteration and a translation...a different translation implies a different meaning, whereas a transliteration is a grammatical construct making it applicable to a receptor language...but the meaning stays the same...

As far as I know a transliteration represents letters in the target for the letters of origin. Hagiais would the transliteration of ἁγίαις.

17 hours ago, transmogrified said:

 

RSV - "Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads,

With myriads being the noun and holy the modifier. Not clear here that it's anything other than a group described as holy. Doesn't have to be 'saints'.

17 hours ago, transmogrified said:

But we must take some of these versions with a grain of salt, knowing that in order to copyright a version some words must be changed or added and sometimes the words may make a statement more clear with today's English or the chosen word may actually obscure it.

For example if the original wording was he would come with 'someone' and these who he was coming with were also being described as being 'holy' then it could be understood to mean both angels and saints, or just angels, or just saints, but in the absence of the word 'ones' the word would revert to being a noun itself, i.e. he would be referring to 'saints' and no one else. This is not to say he is not coming with angels as well, but this would not be the verse that would show that.

This link in Bible Hub https://biblehub.com/text/jude/1-14.htm shows the word 'ones' in the phrase 'amidst holy ones,' is in brackets meaning it was added by the translators  ....

Text Analysis

Go to Parallel Greek

Strong's Greek English Morphology 4395 [e] Προεφήτευσεν* Proephēteusen Prophesied V-AIA-3S 1161 [e] δὲ de then Conj 2532 [e] καὶ kai also Conj 3778 [e] τούτοις toutois as to these DPro-DMP 1442 [e] ἕβδομος hebdomos [the] seventh Adj-NMS 575 [e] ἀπὸ apo from Prep 76 [e] Ἀδὰμ Adam Adam, N-GMS 1802 [e] Ἑνὼχ Henōch Enoch, N-NMS 3004 [e] λέγων legōn saying: V-PPA-NMS 3708 [e] Ἰδοὺ Idou Behold, V-AMA-2S 2064 [e] ἦλθεν ēlthen has come V-AIA-3S 2962 [e] Κύριος Kyrios [the] Lord N-NMS 1722 [e] ἐν en amidst Prep 40 [e] ἁγίαις hagiais holy [ones] Adj-DFP 3461 [e] μυριάσιν myriasin myriads N-DFP 846 [e] αὐτοῦ, autou of His, PPro-GM3S

Also in Strongs the word [ones] is in brackets

holy [ones]
ἁγίαις (hagiais)
Adjective - Dative Feminine Plural
Strong's Greek 40: Set apart by (or for) God, holy, sacred. From hagos; sacred.

Also the NASB adds the word 'ones' to their translation then uses the word 'hagios' as an adjective that would then describe these 'ones,' whoever they may be, as being 'holy.'

Well, it's down to two choices and both are living beings. He's not coming with a myriad of Ford Broncos. The idea is sound as the myriads are Holy, the myriads are living beings, and each living being is an individual; 'ones' making up the whole myriad. It's not the elects saints and it's not 'not' the elect saints. 

As you said, you cannot tell for sure from this alone. All we know is it's a lot, big group, and they are holy and going to execute judgement. 

17 hours ago, transmogrified said:

One scripture that might be used to counter that the saints are referred to here is in Isaiah  ...

I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with me: for I will tread them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury; and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment.

At what seems to be face value no one would be coming with him to execute vengeance, but Jude plainly states he would come WITH then thousands of his saints TO EXECUTE JUDGEMENT UPON ALL..The enigma is done away with when we read that he is not saying no one came with him, but rather that the people that were not with him were in fact the object of his wrath. Of course this is referring to Armageddon where he slays the armies of the beast and the blood comes up to the horses bridles...as it states, 'of the people there was none with me...for I will tread THEM (the people who were not with him, i.e. the armies of the beast) in mine anger...'

That may be, but I won't read in what's not there. This seems like a non-evidence in my mind. Plenty of scripture with direct statements to deal with without having to find implication.

17 hours ago, transmogrified said:

 

In Revelation 19 :19 it also states the beast makes war against him that sat upon the horse, and against his army.

The one scripture in Revelation 19:14 states the 'armies' (plural) that were in heaven followed him, which seems to imply there would be more than one army, one being the army of saints and the other one of angels...but of course this may be a translator choice of words, because the same word 'army' (singular) is used in Rev. 19: 19. There may be some grammatical reason for one being singular and the other plural, but seeing that both groups are coming with Jesus, it would make sense that they could be referred to as singular and also in the plural.

Maybe because fighting forces are made up of several armies. We may be seeing the collective armies in one and a specific army in the other, IDK, that's just off the top of my head, too early in the morning, and not even my second cup of coffee.

 

17 hours ago, transmogrified said:

Also in Psalm 149: 6 it states:

"Let the high praises of God be in their moutb, and a two edged sword in their hand; to execute vengeance upon the heathen, and punishments upon the people; To bind their kings with chains, their nobles with fetters of iron; To execute upon them the juidgment written; this honour have all his saints. Praise ye the Lord.'

Yes, the saints will live and reign over the earth with Christ. The saints will have power and authority and sit in judgement. That does not equate to the saints fighting a bloody war. 

I have a position of authority. I did not build the company nor establish the position. I was just found to be the right fit for that which already existed.

Jesus will put down the rebellion and install His people in positions of His choosing. That does not require the ones placed in authority to be the army in whole or part. They could be. I just don't see it.

In none of the passages concerning the gathering do we see a coming back, but a rescue from a hostage situation. Jesus literally saves the hostages at the moment of His return, then destroys the kidnappers. 

I don't see Him conscripting then arming the victims to fight and kill the kidnappers. The ones rescued alive at the 2nd coming could not come back so they could not be in the army. At the 2nd advent is also when the dead in Christ are raised, a moment before the living are taken up.

There is no primary resurrection of the saints before this. While there may be some saints already in heaven[Enoch and Elijah, et al, for example], there has been no general resurrection before the 2nd advent. Jesus says in John, 'at the last day' is when the resurrection takes place. There are no saints in heaven to come back as a vast army since the saints have neither been resurrected nor snatched from the deadly clutches of the evil one prior to the 2nd advent or the last day.

So I don't see how there could be 'myriads' of elect saints in heaven returning with Jesus in an enormous army when the saints are only resurrected and rescued when Jesus comes with the army. 

"At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven,c and all the tribes of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.d 31And He will send out His angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather His elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other."

 

 

[The Light]

21 hours ago, transmogrified said:

 

So rather than having two brides, we have ONE TREE and two branches...this eliminates all the confusion..

 

Eliminating all confusion also eliminates the correct answer.

There are two brides.

[Uriah]

I don't mean to butt in... I don't think Jesus is the kind of man that would want His wife to fight His battles. 

"Saints" is used in scripture for angels. They are the "armies of heaven", he is the "Lord of hosts" (armies). 

The Israelites had, "armies" and it was obviously referring to "divisions".

 

[FreeGrace]

On 8/30/2023 at 11:03 PM, transmogrified said:

The Issue here is scripture specifically states that when the Lord comes All his saints will be with him..Zech. 14: 5 '...and the Lord my God shall come and all the saints with thee,' also Paul says in 1 Thess. 3:13 that when he comes it will be with all his saints.

  First is the word 'church' allegedly ONLY refers to those who live and die from Pentecost to the alleged pre trib rapture, then how would it be that both Zech. and Paul are saying all his SAINTS are coming with him, rather than saying when he comes, all the 'church' will be with him?

   And remember he is saying ALL his saints, so if the 'church' is sometimes referred to as saints, and then also those who die during the tribulation are called saints then both Zech. and Paul are not making these types of distinctions.

   Although Pre Trib states that Old Testament Saints and Tribulation saints will be resurrected, this does not also mean raptured, as resurrection and being caught up are two different things. This can be seen in the two prophets...they are first resurrected and then stand on their feet...after this has happened they then hear a voice calling them up to heaven...hence they were first resurrected then after that they were raptured.

    If the Old Testament Saints and the Tribulation are then only resurrected and yet not raptured that means they would not be among the saints who descend from heaven...hence Jesus would not be returning with ALL his saints, but only with PART of his saints.

    It is stated that 1 Thess. 4 is when Christ comes FOR his church, meaning the dead and the living are caught up to heaven...the dead did not get up there just because they were just resurrected...the only way they got up was that they were first resurrected and then caught up. To sum it up, they can't COME DOWN with Jesus if they weren't first UP THERE and they couldn't get UP THERE if they had not been caught up...so if the trib saints and old testament saints are just resurrected but not caught up, that means they would not be UP there, hence they could not COME DOWN here when Jesus comes. Is there one rapture for the 'church' to get up there, and then another one for the trib saints to get up there, or how did they get up there?

The short answer to the question of the thread is "no".  In fact, there will be NO rapture for any believer.  

What will occur, according to the Bible is that all believers (those who belong to Him) will be resurrected (receive glorified immortal physical bodies) and that will occur "when He comes" (the Second Advent).  All from 1 Cor 15:23 - But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.

"Christ the firstfruits" refers to the fact that Jesus is the FIRST human to receive a glorified immortal physical body, as Acts 26:23 says -  that the Messiah would suffer and, as the first to rise from the dead, would bring the message of light to his own people and to the Gentiles.”

There are examples of other humans who came back from death, but they didn't receive glorified immortal physical bodies, or Acts 26:23 is wrong.

Since the resurrection of all believers will be at the Second Advent, no believer is then taken to heaven, because Jesus has returned to earth as King to reign for 1,000 years, the Millennial Reign.  

[transmogrified]

4 hours ago, Diaste said:

23 hours ago, transmogrified said:

Rev. 22:9-14

'Bride' is mentioned in verse 17. I don't see Bride of the Lamb.

Sorry I meant Rev 21:9-14 “ I will show you the bride, The lambs wife” 

 

4 hours ago, Diaste said:

It's not the elects saints and it's not 'not' the elect saints. 

I don’t know what you mean here… 

5 hours ago, Diaste said:

As far as I know a transliteration represents letters in the target for the letters of origin. Hagiais would the transliteration of ἁγίαις

What I was meaning is that the word “hagios” is never translated “angels” but when hagios is used without a noun it is translated “saints.” 
 

In a context were there is a noun such as “angel” or “covenant” or “place” it then is used to identify that angel, or covenant or place as being  HOLY… but when used without a noun it is translated “saints”.

This is why the KJV translated it saints because there was no “ones” in the Greek, as the translators themselves added the word “ones” into the text which then turned the word hagios back into describing what the “ones” were, rather than leaving it as it was which would mean they were saints and not angels … 

Strongs  defines the Hebrew word for saints as including an angel but this is an error as I looked through every reference to the word “quados” and it is never translated angel.

Strong's Definitions: קָדוֹשׁ qâdôwsh,kaw-doshe'; or קָדֹשׁ qâdôsh; from H6942; sacred (ceremonially or morally); (as noun) God (by eminence), an angel, a saint, a sanctuary:—holy (One), saint.

psalms 50:5

Gather my saints together unto me; those that have made a covenant with me by sacrifice.

These are redeemed believers that are gathered to him.. not angels.. and they come down from heaven because that is where Jesus is.. He brings those that sleep in Jesus WITH HIM… Those that sleep in Jesus are not angels..they are resurrected saints and they are gathered to Jesus - This is the gathering Paul is talking about when he said “our gathering together unto him”..

They come down with Jesus meaning they FOLLOWED him, meaning he went BEFORE them, meaning THEY WERE BEHIND HIM…

The bride descended out of heaven meaning she was in heaven.. there was a voice of MUCH PEOPLE (not angels) in heaven.. (Rev.19:1) The only way these people got up there was they were caught up there.. I.e. raptured, I.e. ascended up off the ground up into heaven just like the two witnesses ascended up to heaven in a cloud..

[The Light]

On 10/10/2023 at 9:53 AM, transmogrified said:

 

ALL ARE CHANGED AT THE LAST TRUMP… in order to come back with Jesus you have to in immortal bodies… Pre trib does not even have all of trib saints changed and none of them ascend up because they allegedly missed the rapture.. all this is false… 

The bride is all the saints and they all descended down from heaven meaning they all had to get up there first… 

 

All are not changed at the Last Trump BTW.

So you have correctly proved that the Pre trib model is incorrect.

You do realize this does not prove that there is no pretribulation rapture, don't you?

[transmogrified]

12 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

The short answer to the question of the thread is "no".  In fact, there will be NO rapture for any believer.  

Yes there is a resurrection in which all are changed in a moment in a twinkling of an eye, at the last trump...The change to both the living and the dead happens at the same time...i.e. the dead are resurrected and changed into immortal bodies at the same time the living are changed into immortal bodies...

However the change into immortal bodies is not the same as ascending up to heaven...just like the two witnesses...they were FIRST resurrected and stood upon their feet...at this time they received their immortal bodies, however they were still standing on the ground until they heard the voice saying come up hither, and it was THEN that they ascended up to heaven in a cloud.

Jesus was FIRST resurrected and then 40 days later he ascended up to heaven...so being glorified does not mean ascension up into heaven, however resurrection into glorified bodies IS NOT the end of the story...the dead in Christ RISE first (into heaven) ...remember, both groups had already been changed into immortal bodies, but neither group, dead or living, had yet ascended up..so that is why it says the dead in Christ RISE first, meaning both groups, dead and living, do rise up to heaven, but the dead in Christ rise first, then we which are alive and remain are CAUGHT up together with them to meet the Lord IN THE AIR...So the dead go up to heaven and then Jesus brings THOSE THAT SLEEP WITH HIM, as they are DESCENDING down to the earth...

The only way they can be descending down from heaven with Jesus is that they had to first be caught up there into heaven, so IT IS NOT JUST BEING RESURRECTED, that he is talking about..the same Bible that says we will be resurrected ALSO says the living believers will be CAUGHT UP together with them, to  meet the Lord  in the air.

The same word for the man child being caught up to God and his throne which is Jesus ascending up into heaven is the same word 'caught up' where it says we will be caught up...the much people in heaven in Rev. 19:1 had to be caught up, or ascend up there in order to get there...it is completely false to say there will be no rapture, or not ascension, or no catching up  for any believer...ABSOLUTELY FALSE...

[transmogrified]

9 hours ago, The Light said:

All are not changed at the Last Trump BTW.

ABSOLUTELY FALSE...ALL WILL BE CHANGED AT THE LAST TRUMP...

Paul said we all shall all be changed at the last trump...saying all will not be changed at the last trump is ABSOLUTELY FALSE...

9 hours ago, The Light said:

So you have correctly proved that the Pre trib model is incorrect.

Yes indeed...

 

9 hours ago, The Light said:

You do realize this does not prove that there is no pretribulation rapture, don't you?

ABSOLUTELY CONTRADICTORY STATEMENT...I just proved the pre-tribulation model to be false does not mean  the pre tribulation model has not been proven false.

[transmogrified]

13 hours ago, Uriah said:

"Saints" is used in scripture for angels.

Saint is not the same word for angels..."Saints" is NOT used in scripture for angels.

Saint is 'hagios' in Greek and 'qados' in Hebrew...angel is 'angelos' in Greek and 'malak' in Hebrew...they are not interchangeable...

Hagios is used to denote a person, place, or thing

to be holy, but when it used alone it means 'saint', not angel...

13 hours ago, Uriah said:

The Israelites had, "armies" and it was obviously referring to "divisions".

The Israelites had armies divided by rank but the Israelites were flesh and blood humans, not angels.

[The Light]

2 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

ABSOLUTELY FALSE...ALL WILL BE CHANGED AT THE LAST TRUMP...

First off, I'm pretty sure you don't know when the last trump takes place in the book of Revelation.

Secondly, if all are changed at the last trump, what are you going to do with this?

Daniel 12

1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

 

2 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

Paul said we all shall all be changed at the last trump...saying all will not be changed at the last trump is ABSOLUTELY FALSE...

1 Corinthians 15

51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

In 1 Corinthians 15 it says the dead and alive are changed at the last trump, in the twinkling of an eye.

1 Thessalonians 4

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.

In 1 Thes 4 we see the dead in Christ rising first. THEN the alive that remain are caught up. This cannot happen at the twinkling of an eye at the last trump.

Therefore, all are not changed at the last trump.

2 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

 

Yes indeed...

Good job on that logic.

2 minutes ago, transmogrified said:

ABSOLUTELY CONTRADICTORY STATEMENT...I just proved the pre-tribulation model to be false does not mean  the pre tribulation model has not been proven false.

You correctly proved that the pretribulation model is incorrect. You did not prove that there is not a pretribulation rapture.