Scriptures Regarding the Pre Great Tribulation Rapture

[timtofly]

Additionally, John does not write in chronological order in his gospel nor in Revelation. He writes with repeating themes. What happens later chapters does not necessarily occur after the earlier chapters. At times, John is simply explaining on themes he introduced earlier.

This is not mentioned anywhere in the book of Revelation.

I smell a con and a human interpretation not found in Scripture, but only in the imagination of men's minds.

Who needs Satan to deceive humans, when Christians deceive other Christians and themselves by saying God hath not surely said it this way, but if you change God's Word and read it this way, it make more sense on a sinful human level, than in How God actually said it would happen?

 

[timtofly]

To make it about a 1000 year reign of Christ on earth misses the context.

A reign on earth is the only context after a period of tribulation.

Are we to assume that John is referring to Christians prior to the birth of Christ, who were beheaded during a never mentined Great Tribulation, and people who never even heard of Christ who was not born yet, will now reign for thousands of years with Jesus after His birth, death, resurrection, and ascension into heaven?

Revelation 20 mentions nothing about reigning on earth during tribulation, nor reigning in heaven while others are on earth in great tribulation. These people mentioned in Revelation 20:4 did not remain faithful, but had their head chopped off to avoid the mark. No one could endure until the end. They either received the mark or chopped off their head. Only those without a head received life again. No one who endured were even mentioned. So you are adding words and thoughts into the chapter that are not even mentioned. How is not having a head enduring until the end in any imagined scenario, even possible? I thought enduring until the end meant while a person still had a head?

You have added to the text of Revelation 20 that some remained faithful even to the death, while assuming others remained faithful until the end. This is all an assumption, as no one could remain to the end, unless they had received the mark. This mark was not something physical given by humans. This mark was spiritual meaning that person had been removed from the Lamb's book of life by God, so a physical mark that others could see, given by God, as a spiritual mark showing one could no longer be redeemed. In order to be redeemed one had to chop off their head. That was the only decision made in faith, with no one ever experiencing a resurrection from such a decision. We know the end result, they may have been able to read Revelation 20, who knows. But it was still an act of faith, not something that happened to a Christian. They were not martyred. The only means of escape was to chop one's head off. If one chose to keep their head, then God would place the mark on that person.

At that point, only two types of humans were left on the earth. Those with a mark, and those without a head. It would be impossible to endure until the end of this period of time without a head, as that means they were dead, and not enduring.

This verse describes that point exactly:

"I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years."

This verse never mentions any one still alive, but only those who were beheaded. Nor does it say they died while reigning with Christ. The reigning was after they were beheaded, and also after being made alive. They had to actually live first after being beheaded, to be able to reign. They did not reign while still beheaded, nor prior to being beheaded.

You cannot just change the order of these words around and form some kind of theory that says, "It would make more sense if we changed these words around to make a different point than the one John actually wrote".

 

[canadyjd]

If you really believe that, then you dont understand what I believe.

Matthew 25 is definitive. Jesus stated His return (2nd coming) will occur AFTER a great tribulation that had never been seen before and will never be seen again.He will appear in the clouds, sound of the trumpet, angels collect the elect, and then follows the great throne judgement.

The view of a pre-trib rapture was introduced in the 19th century by folks that founded the modern charismatic movement, as well at the church of Christ (Cambelites?)

Historically, the church held to post trib rapture.

Scripture testifies the throne of Jesus is in heaven and is eternal. If I thought for a second you would actually read the passages that prove it, would quote a few.

But since your complete misunderstanding of my views are on full display in the prior post, I really believe it would be a waste of time.

Peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

This is not mentioned anywhere in the book of Revelation.

I smell a con and a human interpretation not found in Scripture, but only in the imagination of men's minds.

Who needs Satan to deceive humans, when Christians deceive other Christians and themselves by saying God hath not surely said it this way, but if you change God's Word and read it this way, it make more sense on a sinful human level, than in How God actually said it would happen?

I’m all done with you.

Peace to you

 

[Brudford]

The Rapture: An American Prosperity Gospel - Orthodoxidation

At this point in redemptive history, nearly most of the educated Christian world has heard of or has been taught of the impending Rapture—the glorious day in which the Lord will take up His Elect and deliver them from the Great Tribulation to follow. During the time of the Great Tribulation...

orthodoxidation.com

If anyone is interested here is the link to the Christian Orthodox view of the Rapture , they call it the Ultimate Prosperity Theology .
Being raised in the Southern Baptist Church and taught the Rapture I never believed Christians would be Raptured before the Tribulation .
All it took for me was to read Revelation 6:9-11 where believers had been slain in the very beginning of the Tribulation period
for the word of God and their testimony . If all the Christians are Raptured up in the air to meet Jesus why were these souls left on earth to be
slain ? Get a good Greek / Hebrew concordance and start to look at the translations of verses and words used by many Churches to prove the pre-tribulation Rapture , you might be surprised what you discover .

 

[Jope]

I'll try one more time.
Let's take a look in Mark 13 at the part of the passage prior to what I gave you in the above:

" But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judæa flee to the mountains:
15 and let him that is on the housetop not go down into the house, neither enter [therein], to take any thing out of his house:
16 and let him that is in the field not turn back again for to take up his garment.
17 But woe to them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
18 And pray ye that your flight be not in the winter.
19 For [in] those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be.
20 And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect’s sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days.
21 And then if any man shall say to you, Lo, here [is] Christ; or, lo, [he is] there; believe [him] not:
22 for false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect. 23 But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things." ( Mark 13:14-22 ).

According to the above, and including the whole of Mark 13:14-27, I see the abomination of desolation ( Anti-christ ) that is spoken of in Daniel taking place
Then comes the Tribulation.
Immediately after that, Christ sends forth His angels to gather His elect from the four corners of both Heaven and earth.

Putting all that together and using what is spoken of in both Matthew 24 and Mark 13 as an overall framework, I plug in the events of Zechariah 10 through Zechariah 14, plus 1 Thessalonians 4 and Revelation 19 ( as well as many others ) as they are described.
So, after years of study I now clearly see ( but did not always ):

First comes Anti-Christ, then comes "the Great Tribulation", then comes His second coming and "Rapture" where we are caught up together with Him in the clouds, and His elect then come to the earth with Him to rule and reign for 1,000 years... with Him sitting on His father David's physical throne at Jerusalem, His Father God is still in Heaven on His throne, and Christ is in the new temple spoken of in Ezekiel.

You don't see that when you read the words for yourself?
OK.


Nevertheless, I wish you well, sir.

Greetings.

The problem with the Olivet Discourse is that there are numerous indications that the sermon is preached to Jewish saints. If the sermon is for the Church to follow today, then, do you pray the Matthew 24:20 prayer?

Mt 24:20 NIV
Pray that your flight [out of Jerusalem] will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath.

Do you live in Israel?

Paul says that the Church isn't to follow Moses (Galatians). Paul also ministered to the Church, whose geographic territory went beyond Jerusalem and the land of Israel.

Jesus said that the Church was a future entity during His earthly ministry: "I will build my Church" (Mt. 16:18). He also prioritized Israel over the Gentiles.

Mt 10 NIV
5 These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. 6 Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.

Mt 15 NIV
24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”
25 The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said.
26 He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”
27 “Yes it is, Lord,” she said. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.”
28 Then Jesus said to her, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment.

Paul said that the revelation of the mystery of Christ's body, the Church, wasn't made known to saints prior (Eph 3:5).

Eph 3:5 NIV
which was not made known to people in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God's holy apostles and prophets

Paul had a distinct revelation (Gal. 1:11-12, 16-22) or the prototype of the Christian revelation of the Church (Eph 3:1-6; 5:30-32), which Peter evidently didn't understand (Gal. 2:1-2, 11; 2 Peter 3:15-16; Acts 10:14).

And if you still don't see a distinction between the audience in the Olivet Discourse and the recipients of the Pauline Corinthian and Thessalonian epistles, maybe you could give a description as to what Jesus is talking about in the Olivet Discourse about birth pains:

Mt 24 NIV
7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains.

Peter believes the Church has already been born (1 Pet. 1:23).

1 Pet 1:23 ESV
since you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God;

Do you believe the Church is born a third time?

Also, Luke 21:28 talks about redemption coming at the second coming of Christ,

Luke 21:28 NIV
When these things begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.

and Romans 11:25-29 distinctly mentions this redemption coming at this time, too, for Israel and not the Church: to apply this passage to one people, ie, the Church, as Covenant theologians do, doesn't fit with the narrative.

Romans 11:25-29 NIV
25 I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: [the Church] has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in, 26 and in this way all [the Church] will be saved. As it is written:
“The deliverer will come from Zion;
he will turn godlessness away from Jacob.
27 And this is my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.”
28 As far as the gospel is concerned, [the Church] are enemies for your sake; but as far as election is concerned, [the Church] are loved on account of the patriarchs, 29 for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.

However, in distinction to this, 1 Peter 1:18-20 says the Church has already been redeemed.

So the passages about the rapture, to the Church (1 Corinthians 15; 1 Thessalonians 4), shouldn't be applied to the future Jewish saints who will experience the reality of the Olivet Discourse. Neither should the passages describing the advent of Christ to the Jewish nation be applied to the Church.

 

[shodan]

Key Scriptures in Context Paul, the Parousia & his Epistles

 

[Dave G]

The problem with the Olivet Discourse is that there are numerous indications that the sermon is preached to Jewish saints. If the sermon is for the Church to follow today, then, do you pray the Matthew 24:20 prayer?

No, because the context does not warrant it.

Paul says that the Church isn't to follow Moses (Galatians)

I agree.

And if you still don't see a distinction between the audience in the Olivet Discourse and the recipients of the Pauline Corinthian and Thessalonian epistles, maybe you could give a description as to what Jesus is talking about in the Olivet Discourse about birth pains:

I do see a distinction in the audiences.
Yet, I also see that the timing of the events of what the Lord described to His apostles, is still clearly in view... is it not?
He still described future events in a linear fashion, whether or not who He was speaking to was Jew or Gentile.

In other words, what He described to the 12 ( and others ) in Matthew 24 and Mark 13 is a timetable that involves ( and will involve ) all of God's elect, both Jew and Gentile.

For example, the destruction of the temple involves the Jews...
The arrival of AntiChrist and his subsequent entering into the temple in Jerusalem and defiling it by sitting in the mercy seat ( the abomination of desolation, see Daniel 8:9-14, Daniel 8:23-25, Daniel 9:27, Daniel 11:36-39, ) involves the entire world, believers and unbelievers alike.
That is when, according to Matthew 24 and Mark 13, the Tribulation begins.

After that Tribulation,
The sending forth of God's angels to gather His elect involves all who have been called into the fellowship of the saints ...
Both those that are in Heaven, and those who are yet alive on the earth; those of us who are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord .

 

[Dave G]

Do you believe the Church is born a third time?

No, I do not.

So the passages about the rapture, to the Church (1 Corinthians 15; 1 Thessalonians 4), shouldn't be applied to the future Jewish saints who will experience the reality of the Olivet Discourse.

I disagree.
Again, the language ( at least in Mark 13 ) refers to "God's elect", as a group.

" And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven."

Not just Jews or Gentiles.

Neither should the passages describing the advent of Christ to the Jewish nation be applied to the Church.

On that we appear to agree.

 

[Marooncat79]

The LORD, HIMSELF Shall be revealed from heaven w a shout

Post Mill baby

 

[Jope]

No, because the context does not warrant it.

I agree.

I do see a distinction in the audiences.
Yet, I also see that the timing of the events of what the Lord described to His apostles, is still clearly in view... is it not?
He still described future events in a linear fashion, whether or not who He was speaking to was Jew or Gentile.

In other words, what He described to the 12 ( and others ) in Matthew 24 and Mark 13 is a timetable that involves ( and will involve ) all of God's elect, both Jew and Gentile.

For example, the destruction of the temple involves the Jews...
The arrival of AntiChrist and his subsequent entering into the temple in Jerusalem and defiling it by sitting in the mercy seat ( the abomination of desolation, see Daniel 8:9-14, Daniel 8:23-25, Daniel 9:27, Daniel 11:36-39, ) involves the entire world, believers and unbelievers alike.
That is when, according to Matthew 24 and Mark 13, the Tribulation begins.

After that Tribulation,
The sending forth of God's angels to gather His elect involves all who have been called into the fellowship of the saints ...
Both those that are in Heaven, and those who are yet alive on the earth; those of us who are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord .

I see that you are a Robert Gundry posttribulationalist, who saw the Church and Israel as separate and going through the tribulation together. One of my biggest criticisms of that view has always been, how is it decided which group you belong to? The Church or Israel?

Another criticism I have is the discrepancy regarding imminence: if there are seven years until the Lord returns, then it is no longer imminent. The pre-tribulation rapure of the Church view is able to work around this, in that, the passages where the Lord mentions imminency, he is referring to the rapture of the Church, not the worldwide visible advent to Jerusalem described in the Olivet Discourse and Zechariah 14:1-4, Psalm 2, Daniel, etc.

Another criticism I have is that the Church is told a few times it does not have wrath stored up against it (Pr. 16:4; 1 Thess 1:10; 5:9; etc.). The OT prophets (Zechariah in particular, Ch. 12 verse 10) mentions the Jews piercing their Messiah. The Church never pierced Christ. When Jesus says, "forgive them, for they know not what they do" (Luke 23:34), he is speaking of Israel. The Jews do have tribulation stored up against them, as per the Pentateuch, and other prophets, e.g., Jeremiah.

Deut 28:15
If, however, you do not obey the LORD your God by carefully following all His commandments and statutes I am giving you today, all these curses will come upon you and overtake you

Deut 32:22 KJV
For a fire is kindled in My anger, And shall burn to the lowest hell;
It shall consume the earth with her increase, And set on fire the foundations of the mountains.

Jer 30:7 NIV
How awful that day will be!
No other will be like it.
It will be a time of trouble for Jacob,
but he will be saved out of it.

And yet another criticism, is that Israel is distinguished from the Church a few times in scripture. One of them being Jesus' own words, I am sent to Israel, not the Gentiles (Mt. 15:24), and I will build my church (Mt. 16:18); another being Paul's chapter in Romans 11, verse 7 stating that Israel hasn't found what she has been looking for: if this is speaking of the Church, what was it that she was searching for that she hasn't found? Verses 25 to 29 of the same chapter also just simply can't fit and make zero sense if the Church is Israel (I have shown this above in my previous post); and another Pauline verse, 1 Cor. 10:32, also distinguishes between the Church, Israel and the Gentiles.

There are other criticisms I have but let's just stop here.

 

[Dave G]

I see that you are a Robert Gundry posttribulationalist, who saw the Church and Israel as separate and going through the tribulation together

I have no idea who Robert Grundy is...
What I've described is what I see when I read and understand the Scriptures for myself, with no help from men.

I do see the Church and Israel ( as an earthly nation ) as separate...yet I also see the Church as being made up of both Jews and Gentiles...as I've said before.

One of my biggest criticisms of that view has always been, how is it decided which group you belong to? The Church or Israel?

I guess I don't understand where the potential for confusion comes from.
Gentile believers are Gentile elect, Jewish believers are Jewish elect, and then there's the nation;
Made up of mostly unbelieving descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Always has been.

 

[Dave G]

Another criticism I have is the discrepancy regarding imminence: if there are seven years until the Lord returns, then it is no longer imminent. The pre-tribulation rapure of the Church view is able to work around this, in that, the passages where the Lord mentions imminency, he is referring to the rapture of the Church, not the worldwide visible advent to Jerusalem described in the Olivet Discourse and Zechariah 14:1-4, Psalm 2, Daniel, etc.

From the Lord's point of view, it is indeed "imminent"...
Right around the corner, so to speak.

Another criticism I have is that the Church is told a few times it does not have wrath stored up against it (Pr. 16:4; 1 Thess 1:10; 5:9; etc.).

It doesn't, and never did.

The OT prophets (Zechariah in particular, Ch. 12 verse 10) mentions the Jews piercing their Messiah. The Church never pierced Christ. When Jesus says, "forgive them, for they know not what they do" (Luke 23:34), he is speaking of Israel. The Jews do have tribulation stored up against them, as per the Pentateuch, and other prophets, e.g., Jeremiah.

I agree...
God's children did not pierce their Saviour.
But we would have, given the fact that outside of God's grace, none of His people would have ever come to love Him as we do.

I also see that most of that prophesied tribulation for Israel, as a nation, is nearly at an end.

 

[Dave G]

And yet another criticism, is that Israel is distinguished from the Church a few times in scripture. One of them being Jesus' own words, I am sent to Israel, not the Gentiles (Mt. 15:24), and I will build my church (Mt. 16:18); another being Paul's chapter in Romans 11, verse 7 stating that Israel hasn't found what she has been looking for: if this is speaking of the Church, what was it that she was searching for that she hasn't found? Verses 25 to 29 of the same chapter also just simply can't fit and make zero sense if the Church is Israel (I have shown this above in my previous post); and another Pauline verse, 1 Cor. 10:32, also distinguishes between the Church, Israel and the Gentiles.

Perhaps more time in God's word is in order.
For example, I've been a believer for over 46 years, and most of what I've come to understand from the Scriptures was mostly cleared up only within roughly the past 10 to 15 years or so.

There are other criticisms I have but let's just stop here.

OK.
I wish you well, and may God bless you richly in your studies.

 

[Jope]

Again, the language ( at least in Mark 13 ) refers to "God's elect", as a group.

" And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven."

Not just Jews or Gentiles.

John MacArthur distinguished between the elect nation of Israel and the elect individual Christian of the Church.

 

[canadyjd]

peace to you

 

[MrW]

The Rapture: An American Prosperity Gospel - Orthodoxidation

At this point in redemptive history, nearly most of the educated Christian world has heard of or has been taught of the impending Rapture—the glorious day in which the Lord will take up His Elect and deliver them from the Great Tribulation to follow. During the time of the Great Tribulation...

orthodoxidation.com

If anyone is interested here is the link to the Christian Orthodox view of the Rapture , they call it the Ultimate Prosperity Theology .
Being raised in the Southern Baptist Church and taught the Rapture I never believed Christians would be Raptured before the Tribulation .
All it took for me was to read Revelation 6:9-11 where believers had been slain in the very beginning of the Tribulation period
for the word of God and their testimony . If all the Christians are Raptured up in the air to meet Jesus why were these souls left on earth to be
slain ? Get a good Greek / Hebrew concordance and start to look at the translations of verses and words used by many Churches to prove the pre-tribulation Rapture , you might be surprised what you discover .

Seems obvious they realized the Christians were right and had been translated to Heaven. They then became Christians themselves, post-rapture, and many are beheaded for their refusal of anti-Christ and for being new Christians.