Timing of the Rapture

[canadyjd]

The reason for the rapture is doxological: to take the Bride out. The reason for the tribulation is doxological: judgment upon the world for its evil, and the calling out of multitudes to know Christ through the three great evangelistic efforts of the tribulation. The reason for the millennial reign of Christ is doxological. The theological purpose for it is to prove that only Christ can successfully rule the entire world with justice, perfect control, and love for all.


This is insulting. I'm not confused and deluded. I simply interpret Scripture literally. Why must those who do not agree with the millennial reign of Christ be so dismissive of those of us who do???

It is widely accepted among scholars, even those who are not chiliasts, that for the first three centuries of Christianity, chiliasm was not only prominent, almost no one believed otherwise until Origen and then Augustine. Why? It is the normal interpretation of prophecy, not allegorical nor "spiritual."

How do you address the words of our Lord in Matthew 24 and 25.

He answers the questions concerning “when” His return and the end of the age.

He describes the great tribulation and says “after” the tribulation He returns, His angels collect the saints and then (Matthew 25) the great throne judgment.

How do you address Paul’s teaching in Ephesians that Jew and Gentile have become “one new man” by the cross of Christ, United by God Holy Spirit? How can there be a separate future for National Israel without undoing the work of the cross, separating the “one new man” into two old entities.

And, just saying, Jesus doesn’t have to “prove” anything to anybody. His “proof” was made in the cross and by His resurrection.

Every knee shall bow, every tongue confess Christ as Lord…. He doesn’t need a thousand years to convince anyone He is Lord and God.

peace to you

 

[tyndale1946]

Don't forget the context from 2 Timothy 4:1--" I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom."

So in the context, vv. 7-8 are about the Second Coming, at which point the Lord will receive His kingdom; thus, the throne of David, at which time Christ will reign.

1 Corinthians 15: 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.

28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Now JOJ and anyone else stick your rapture in there?... Like I said, I'm done here... Brother Glen

 

[John of Japan]

1 Corinthians 15: 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.

28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Now JOJ and anyone else stick your rapture in there?... Like I said, I'm done here... Brother Glen

Why would I stick the rapture in there?? There are many passages about the 2nd coming in power and glory that are not about the rapture.

And you said you were done, then added this post. You're not done. You can't stay away....

 

[John of Japan]

How do you address the words of our Lord in Matthew 24 and 25.

This question is too general, so I can't answer it.

He answers the questions concerning “when” His return and the end of the age.

He describes the great tribulation and says “after” the tribulation He returns, His angels collect the saints and then (Matthew 25) the great throne judgment.

Okay. Your point?

How do you address Paul’s teaching in Ephesians that Jew and Gentile have become “one new man” by the cross of Christ, United by God Holy Spirit? How can there be a separate future for National Israel without undoing the work of the cross, separating the “one new man” into two old entities.

God gave the unconditional Abrahamic and Davidic covenants to ethnic Judaism. He never lies and never goes back on His Word.

Again, all prophecies of the first coming were literally fulfilled. You know this. So why would God decide to avoid literal fulfillment of prophecies about the 2nd coming?

And, just saying, Jesus doesn’t have to “prove” anything to anybody. His “proof” was made in the cross and by His resurrection.

I never said "prove." I said "doxological," meaning to glorify. Totally different.

Every knee shall bow, every tongue confess Christ as Lord…. He doesn’t need a thousand years to convince anyone He is Lord and God.

peace to you

Of course not! Never said He did.

 

[timtofly]

1 Corinthians 15: 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.

28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Now JOJ and anyone else stick your rapture in there?... Like I said, I'm done here... Brother Glen

Stick your resurrection in there.

Are you made alive now, or still dead in your sins?

Paul is not talking about a physical resurrection of the body. Paul is talking about leaving Adam's death behind and enjoying eternal life.

The firstfruits are every one from Abel to the Second Coming. They have already been made alive.

The next group are those alive on earth at the Second Coming. They will be made alive.

Then we have the issue of the Millennium. The only people in the millennium have already been made alive. The Millennium cannot be the here and now. The Millennium is the time to subdue the earth with those made alive.

"And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all."

Here is the first time that command was given when all living were already alive before death entered: Genesis 1:28

"And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth."

That command was interrupted by sin and death. It is not just about one's physical body resurrected or restored. It is the whole of creation that is still waiting to be subdued, by humans, not sin and death. The reason people take issue with population control is sin and death.

It may not take 1,000 years to subdue the earth. It may only take 700 years. The length of the reign is not the point. The point is the time Satan is totally removed from society and the population explosion that is part of God's plan before sin and death was introduced by Adam's disobedience.

When Satan is loosed he will have had 1,000 years to plan how to deceive people. But overpopulation will still be how he convinces billions to protest. I wonder if they can read the book of Revelation then, because that is exactly what happens to those protesters. They reduced the population instantly, problem raised is solved. What remains is eternal life presented to God, and creation is subdued.

So the resurrection happened at the Cross. The rapture happens at the Second Coming. After Jesus personally removes all the trash during this time called the Great Tribulation by some, Jacob's trouble by others, then Satan is bound for a thousand years. During which time the earth is subdued by living humans in the likeness of Jesus under the authority of Christ as King. There is only one group of humans, at that point; sin free, death free and enjoying everlasting righteousness. If a child is born that does not fit the mold, they are cursed and removed from among the living. Death is still the last enemy. But only when a person decides to disobey God's plan.

So there are 3 times mentioned by Paul as to when those made alive are presented to God. At the Resurrection and Ascension of Jesus. At the Second Coming. At the end when heaven and earth are once more part of God, and not a seperate creation outside of God. Of course all the sons of God will start fresh within the confines of the NHNE. That will be when those in Heaven come down in the New Jerusalem.

 

[percho]

I get the feeling, then, that you don't really want an answer back. This is more of a sermon than a response with any kind of connection to what I wrote.

I will try and make it simple. It appears to me form scripture that when one reigns with Christ it is post their having been raised out of the dead to die no more.

Has anyone been so raised out of the dead other than Christ?

 

[asterisktom]

I will try and make it simple. It appears to me form scripture that when one reigns with Christ it is post their having been raised out of the dead to die no more.

Has anyone been so raised out of the dead other than Christ?

Thank you. Yes, first of all we have Col. 3;1 and Eph. 2:6 that speak of our being raised with Christ. But the actual resurrection of the saints ("the out-resurrection from among the dead") Phil. 3:10-14 happened (past tense), I believe, at the Parousia a split second before the rapture of the surviving saints. Based on the many verses that speak of His coming in that generation and correlating it with the history of Josephus, I would place this at AD 66.

 

[John of Japan]

You want me to answer this one, and I will, but I must say that my #1 pet peeve on the BB is such long, long posts as this. I wish you could present your views succinctly.

John, your proof text does not fit with your assertion.
Just because I disagree with your futurism interpretation, it does not make me a "lesser" Christian.
Indeed, my acceptance of amillenialism actually makes me care much deeper for all humanity than futurism ever did.
However, your chosen scripture has nothing to do with your statement and isn't rational in its placement here.

This is not a correlation. A person may very well understand it, yet still not express it in a manner that is received in love.

You are using this verse out of context. Note what John is saying:
(1 John 3:1-3)
See how very much our Father loves us, for he calls us his children, and that is what we are! But the people who belong to this world don’t recognize that we are God’s children because they don’t know him. Dear friends, we are already God’s children, but he has not yet shown us what we will be like when Christ appears. But we do know that we will be like him, for we will see him as he really is. And all who have this eager expectation will keep themselves pure, just as he is pure.

The passage has nothing to do with eschatology.
One Amazon reviewer, very likely a dyed in the wool dispensationalist, didn't like Gerstner's critique of dispensationalism and that is your reasoning for thinking you are right on track in holding to dispensationalism?

I said it poorly. With that post I was not advocating my own views in particular, but only trying to present the idea that right doctrine should make us better Christians. Perhaps Titus 2:10 says it better. Both of us should be better Christians because of our theology. Good theology leads to good practice.

John, can you acknowledge how your comments here seem irrational and unreasonable?

No.

John, can you admit that cults like the Jehovah's Witnesses have emerged precisely because of the futurist interpretation of Revelation? Other cults as well have emerged and declared the exact dates of a pre-trib rapture. These false claims, when shown to be false, are merely brushed off as an "oops" but the main tenants keep being held. For nearly 200 years now we have witnessed obsession with futurism and tolerance of bad interpretation as it predicts the return of Christ.

I completely disagree. The JWs did not arise because of the futurist interpretation of Revelation. That's really a very small part of their cult's origins. No scholar of the cults that I know of would agree with you.

George Mather and Larry Nichols tie the JW genesis and similar 19th century heresies to "dissatisfactions with the despondent mainstream Protestantism that had become characteristic of the older established denominations" (Dictionary of Cults, Sects, Religions and the Occult. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 147).

When dispensationalist futurism is critiqued, the followers of that position very often question the critics salvation (hopefully that's not what you are doing with John Gerstner).

I never do this.

Godward Christians have been removed from fellowship and kicked out of churches for not holding a dispensational futurist interpretation of Revelation. The vileness that gets directed at the amillennialist, historicist, or preterist, is as awful as can be. Will you acknowledge this reality in Fundamentalism and Evangelical circles that embrace futurism as their eschatological preference?

And vice versa against Dispensationalism.

John, if I used your logic, I could make the exact statement against futurism and dispensationalism. The lack of love and tolerance in the camp is palpable. Will you acknowledge this reality?

No.

I have not read Gerstner's book. I have read Mounce on Revelation and I have read parts of Riddelbargers commentary on Revelation. If you doubt the claims of mistreatment by futurists to non-futurists, I would ask you to listen to Voddie Baucham's sermon on Revelation 20:1-3. The whole sermon is excellent, but for this point you can start at the 8:45 mark and listen to the 16 minute mark. Especially focus on the 11:20 mark to 16 minute mark.

John, you may think Gerstner was mean in his critique. I cannot speak for his book. I have not read it. But, your thinking in your response is not rational or well thought out. I caution you to let the actual text of scripture guide you. Take your preconceptions and bias and place them in the corner. Acknowledge that Revelation uses apocalyptic language and numbering. View Revelation as a picture book and tapestry, meant to be viewed as a whole rather than as a strict timeline. Then write down what you see.
I recommend Mounce's book to you as a comparison to the futurist books you have studied.

Gerstner is a first rate theologian, but he let his prejudices against Dispensationalism take him where no Christians should go. He calls it heresy, antinomianism, etc. Read this review by a Master's Seminary prof yourself: https://tms.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/tmsj3d.pdf

Finally, know that your eschatology and it's difference from mine does not promote any desire in me to be angry. We disagree and I am at peace with that.

Great. But you were extremely dismissive of me personally--not just my doctrine--in that previous thread.

Blessings to you as you walk with God.

And you.

 

[taisto]

You want me to answer this one, and I will, but I must say that my #1 pet peeve on the BB is such long, long posts as this. I wish you could present your views succinctly.

I said it poorly. With that post I was not advocating my own views in particular, but only trying to present the idea that right doctrine should make us better Christians. Perhaps Titus 2:10 says it better. Both of us should be better Christians because of our theology. Good theology leads to good practice.

No.


I completely disagree. The JWs did not arise because of the futurist interpretation of Revelation. That's really a very small part of their cult's origins. No scholar of the cults that I know of would agree with you.

George Mather and Larry Nichols tie the JW genesis and similar 19th century heresies to "dissatisfactions with the despondent mainstream Protestantism that had become characteristic of the older established denominations" (Dictionary of Cults, Sects, Religions and the Occult. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 147).


I never do this.


And vice versa against Dispensationalism.

No.


Gerstner is a first rate theologian, but he let his prejudices against Dispensationalism take him where no Christians should go. He calls it heresy, antinomianism, etc. Read this review by a Master's Seminary prof yourself: https://tms.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/tmsj3d.pdf

Great. But you were extremely dismissive of me personally--not just my doctrine--in that previous thread.


And you.

John, the JW view of Jesus return is connected to a dispensational approach to eschatology. Not all dispensationalists agree on soteriology (as the review of Gerstner's book presents) but that does not remove JWs from the dispensational camp. (Cults exist in many Christian camps, not just dispensationalism).

John, I read the review of Gerstner's book. My initial thought is that the reviewer needs to grow some thicker skin. It is too bad that Gerstner is not alive to rebutt this review. The critique quotes Gerstner on four occasions and references Gerstner's book in many other occasions, which would cause me to have to read the book in order to see if his connection is accurate. Here are the four quotes I found.

"If Dispensationalism has actually departed from the only way of salvation which the Christian religion teaches, then we must say it has departed from Christianity" (p. 150).
"The root of the problem is the Israel/church distinction which assumes that Israel is an entirely temporal matter and the church an entirely spiritual affair. As a result, dispensationalists retreat into a hyper-spiritual Gnosticism which spurns the structures of the visible church which God has graciously given to His people" (p. 208).
" We have now examined the Dispensationalism of yesterday and today. We have found that Dispensationalism is virtually the same today as yesterday. There have been some variations, of course, but none are essential. There are many varieties (to use an expression from natural science), but no new species" (p. 261).
" My plea to all dispensationalists is this`show me the fundamental error in what I teach or admit your own fundamental error. We cannot both be right. One of us is wrong`seriously wrong. If you are wrong (in your doctrine, as I here charge), you are preaching nothing less than a false gospel. This calls for genuine repentance and fruits worthy of it before the Lord Jesus Christ whom we both profess to love and serve" (p. 263).

I note, from your dismissal of Progressive Dispensationalism that you are locked into an original system and won't move from it. Gerstner has pegged you.

I have listened to Gerstner's Handout Church History and found he tried hard to be unbiased. He is/was an Historical Theologian so he looks at the Bible from a different point of view than other theologians, which I can see would ruffle feathers.

Mostly, I see academic hurt feelings in the review of Gerstner's book. No refutation is actually provided regarding Gerstner's content. Instead, the complaint is all against Gerstner's challenge to refute his assertions against dispensationalism. That complaint, as I see it, is a complaint that Gerstner used too wide of a brush and thus he lumped Masters Seminary into a group that Masters says it should not be lumped. In essence Masters would like to separate soteriology from eschatology and they think Gerstner lumped the two together. Since I haven't read Gerstner's book, I cannot say if their complaint is accurate. In that point, Gerstner may have been too fierce.

What I note is that dispensationalism is a disjointed approach to the Bible and it works to mash God into its inaccurate claim to interpret the Bible "literally." The word "literal" is a very loose word as dispensationalists often declare that they reserve the right to declare when a passage should be literal and when it cannot. I find dispensationalists to be quite rigid on this area. John, you, yourself, have exhibited this rigidity (and I suspect this statement will ruffle you).

It is obvious from your response to me that you are unwilling to question your presuppositions. I can only hope that you allow your students the capacity to question those presuppositions and study scripture apart from your bias to the text.

May God bless you in your walk with our King.

 

[robycop3]

According to 2 Peter 3, the Day of the Lord comes when the last, chosen, believer comes to saving faith. Then, at that moment, Christ Jesus returns in great authority to vanquish his enemies and bring his bride unto himself as they rise to meet him in the air and watch him burn the earth to the ground in his wrath against those who refused to repent.

We are presently in the tribulation. We are also in the millennial as Satan has been bound from utterly attacking the church. However, the release of Satan to fully attack the church is soon to occur and believers in the US need to be ready for the coming persecution.

Even so...come Lord Jesus.

No, the trib hasn't yet begun. Satan certainly isn't bound, as the prevalence of sin and non-belief in Jesus is worldwide. This prevalence of sin is a condition leading to the trib. And the millenium won't begin til Jesus returns.

 

[taisto]

No, the trib hasn't yet begun. Satan certainly isn't bound, as the prevalence of sin and non-belief in Jesus is worldwide. This prevalence of sin is a condition leading to the trib. And the millenium won't begin til Jesus returns.

robycop, the binding of Satan has to do with protecting the Church on earth so it can grow. If Satan were not bound (just as Satan complained about Job being protected) then Satan would attack Christians just like he attacked Job. But, Satan is currently held at bay. This is the binding of Revelation 20.

Robycop, you cannot find your assertions in the text, in Revelation. You have to read your presuppositions into the text and force a pre-trib rapture into Revelation. The text provides zero support for a pre-trib rapture. This means you have to be getting your ideas from outside of the Bible.

 

[37818]

So there are 3 times mentioned by Paul as to when those made alive are presented to God.

Cite them.

It is not the bodily resurrection where, ". . . to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord. . . ."

 

[37818]

. . . the binding of Satan has to do with protecting the Church on earth so it can grow. . . .

Not Biblical.

 

[John of Japan]

John, the JW view of Jesus return is connected to a dispensational approach to eschatology. Not all dispensationalists agree on soteriology (as the review of Gerstner's book presents) but that does not remove JWs from the dispensational camp. (Cults exist in many Christian camps, not just dispensationalism).

Are you kidding me? The JWs as dispensationalists? If you truly think that, you don't know the JWs at all, and maybe don't even know what Dispensationalism is.

One question for you to prove you know Dispensationalism: What is your definition of a dispensation?

One question for you to prove you know JW theology: What are the 144,000 in current JW thinking?

If you refuse to answer these questions (and looking them up is not fair ), I'll know you don't know either theology.

I suspect you are conflating dispensational premillennialism and other forms of that prophetic scheme such as historical premillennialism and the wacky JW version of premillennialism.

I note, from your dismissal of Progressive Dispensationalism that you are locked into an original system and won't move from it. Gerstner has pegged you.

Huh? Sorry, this does not make sense.

What I note is that dispensationalism is a disjointed approach to the Bible and it works to mash God into its inaccurate claim to interpret the Bible "literally." The word "literal" is a very loose word as dispensationalists often declare that they reserve the right to declare when a passage should be literal and when it cannot. I find dispensationalists to be quite rigid on this area. John, you, yourself, have exhibited this rigidity (and I suspect this statement will ruffle you).

I use the term "literal" for those not familiar with dispensational hermeneutics. The better term is grammatical-historical interpretation. And it is a very coherent and logical method, not "disjointed" as you think.

Are you familiar at all with grammatical-historical hermeneutics?

It is obvious from your response to me that you are unwilling to question your presuppositions. I can only hope that you allow your students the capacity to question those presuppositions and study scripture apart from your bias to the text.

May God bless you in your walk with our King.

Again, you are trying to delineate my theological journey without knowing me. I threw aside all of my presuppositions, based on my family's theology, in my journey to dispensationalism. Now I have a theology based not at all on my presuppositions.

 

[robycop3]

robycop, the binding of Satan has to do with protecting the Church on earth so it can grow. If Satan were not bound (just as Satan complained about Job being protected) then Satan would attack Christians just like he attacked Job. But, Satan is currently held at bay. This is the binding of Revelation 20.

Robycop, you cannot find your assertions in the text, in Revelation. You have to read your presuppositions into the text and force a pre-trib rapture into Revelation. The text provides zero support for a pre-trib rapture. This means you have to be getting your ideas from outside of the Bible.

No, it's not. That binding will be complete, with satan unable to do anything on earth, I. E. the bottomless pit. 10 Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.

robycop, the binding of Satan has to do with protecting the Church on earth so it can grow. If Satan were not bound (just as Satan complained about Job being protected) then Satan would attack Christians just like he attacked Job. But, Satan is currently held at bay. This is the binding of Revelation 20.

No, it's not. Satan will be cast into the bottomless pit, unable to do anything on earth during the millenuim.

Robycop, you cannot find your assertions in the text, in Revelation. You have to read your presuppositions into the text and force a pre-trib rapture into Revelation. The text provides zero support for a pre-trib rapture. This means you have to be getting your ideas from outside of the Bible.

Rev. 3:10 Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.

You're making up stuff as you go, much like a preterist.

 

[John of Japan]

Here's Kenneth Gentry, mocking Dispensationalism (not nice), treating them like the lost: HOW TO SAFELY WITNESS TO DISPENSATIONALISTS

Here is a non-dispensational writer talking about how hated we are: Dissing Dispensationalists - Providence

Sorry, folks, I don't believe that amil or postmil or preterist folk get treated worse than dispensationalists. There are many in Christianity who mock and attack us, but I only gave two.

 

[taisto]

No, it's not. That binding will be complete, with satan unable to do anything on earth, I. E. the bottomless pit. 10 Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.

Rev. 3:10 Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.

You're making up stuff as you go, much like a preterist.

Interesting how you ignore the context of the letter to Philadelphia.

(Revelation 3:7-13)
“Write this letter to the angel of the church in Philadelphia. This is the message from the one who is holy and true, the one who has the key of David. What he opens, no one can close; and what he closes, no one can open: “I know all the things you do, and I have opened a door for you that no one can close. You have little strength, yet you obeyed my word and did not deny me. Look, I will force those who belong to Satan’s synagogue—those liars who say they are Jews but are not—to come and bow down at your feet. They will acknowledge that you are the ones I love. “Because you have obeyed my command to persevere, I will protect you from the great time of testing that will come upon the whole world to test those who belong to this world. I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take away your crown. All who are victorious will become pillars in the Temple of my God, and they will never have to leave it. And I will write on them the name of my God, and they will be citizens in the city of my God—the new Jerusalem that comes down from heaven from my God. And I will also write on them my new name. “Anyone with ears to hear must listen to the Spirit and understand what he is saying to the churches.

What is the great time of testing to come upon the world to test those who belong to the world?

(Revelation 19:11-21)
Then I saw heaven opened, and a white horse was standing there. Its rider was named Faithful and True, for he judges fairly and wages a righteous war. His eyes were like flames of fire, and on his head were many crowns. A name was written on him that no one understood except himself. He wore a robe dipped in blood, and his title was the Word of God. The armies of heaven, dressed in the finest of pure white linen, followed him on white horses. From his mouth came a sharp sword to strike down the nations. He will rule them with an iron rod. He will release the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty, like juice flowing from a winepress. On his robe at his thigh was written this title: King of all kings and Lord of all lords. Then I saw an angel standing in the sun, shouting to the vultures flying high in the sky: “Come! Gather together for the great banquet God has prepared. Come and eat the flesh of kings, generals, and strong warriors; of horses and their riders; and of all humanity, both free and slave, small and great.” Then I saw the beast and the kings of the world and their armies gathered together to fight against the one sitting on the horse and his army. And the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who did mighty miracles on behalf of the beast—miracles that deceived all who had accepted the mark of the beast and who worshiped his statue. Both the beast and his false prophet were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. Their entire army was killed by the sharp sword that came from the mouth of the one riding the white horse. And the vultures all gorged themselves on the dead bodies.

@robycop3 the answer is right there. No one of the Church will suffer from God's judgment when Jesus returns.

You are adding your presupposition to Revelation when you cannot find any pre-trib rapture in any of Revelation. It is found nowhere in the text.
If you intend to truly look at the literal text, you will find no pre-trib rapture in Revelation. It is not there. What you read is God's people being spared God's wrath on those in rebellion to God who are marked by Satan and his beast. The comment to Philadelphia is shown in Jesus return in Revelation 19.

Is this me making stuff up, or have you made stuff up that isn't found in Revelation at all? The text tells us that you have made it up. Revelation does not teach what you are teaching.

 

[taisto]

Amillennial view, an interview with Kim Riddelbargers:

 

[taisto]

Dispensational Premillennialism view, an interview with Craig Blaising

 

[taisto]

My purpose, on this topic, is to encourage Christians to hear both the Amillennial and Premillennial arguments. Read Revelation for what it actually says and then see what the text tells us. Put aside your presuppositions and just read the letter.