Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9159 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: K.Rose
Happy Birthday: CosmicChimp
Post Volume: Total: 914,660 Year: 1,917/9,624 Month: 1,350/567 Week: 296/601 Day: 39/32 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Biblical Support for the Pre-Tribulation Rapture
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 330 (626724)
07-31-2011 1:46 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by jaywill
07-30-2011 11:20 PM


Re: Selective Rapture
Revelation 3:10 is a promise attached to a condition. Since the condition has been satisfied the reward of the promise is to be dispensed.
"Because you have kept the word of My endurance, I also will keep you out of the hour of trial, which is about to come on the whole inhabited earth, to try them who dwell on the earth."
1.) The promise is to keep these Christians "out of the hour of trial". It is not merely to keep them through the trial or to keep them from the trial. Rather it is a promise to keep them out of the very hour of the trial. This must mean to be taken out of the world.
But it really just says they will be kept 'out of the hour of trial'. You change the meaning when you rephrase it to 'hour of the trial'. And, unlike you claim, there are many ways to keep someone from an 'hour of trial' without taking them out of the world. I am glad you brought this passage to my attention, but I am not quite convinced that it represents scriptural support of a pre-tribulation rapture.
2.) The promise is not automatic to the church universal. It is a promise for to those who have "kept the word of My endurance". It is therefore conditional. That implies that a selection is involved. So since a selection is involved according to who the Lord deems as having kept the word of His endurance, it must be a partial rapture, involving a remnant rather than the entire church.
Okay; so it only applies to the church members in Philadelphia (v 7)?
To be kept out of the the very hour of this world wide trial is to be taken out of the earth before the hour begins. The passage is about a pre-great tribulation rapture.
Again, you've inserted material that isn't in the passage. I am not convinced that keeping folk from the 'hour of trial' requires sweeping them off the Earth.
But it should be noted that the manchild who is raptured is a collective unit, a collective rather than an individual person. This is proved by the plural pronouns "they", "their", "them" plus the word "brothers" in verses 10 and 11.
Briefly then, after the corporate man-child is caught up to God and to His throne (12:5), these words are uttered in verse 10,11:
"And I heard a loud voice in heaven saying, Now has come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of His Christ, for the accuser of our brothers has been cast down, who accuses them before our God day and night.
And THEY overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of THEIR testimony, and THEY loved not THEIR soul-life even unto death." (12:10,11)
The words "brothers", "them", "they", "their", "they" point back to the man-child who was "caught up to God and to His throne".
There is absolutely no evidence in the text to support interpreting 'brethren' as referring back to the 'male child' of v 5. If there is, you will have to help me out with a little more explanation as to why you think 'brethren' should be read as referring to the child.
The third evidence is in Revelation 14. Here again I do not launch a full exposition. But it should be noted that the terms firstfruits (Rev. 14:4) ) and "harvest" (14:15) strongly imply TIMING. Firstfruits are taken up to God first as a remant or minority. Latter a general harvest is taken up in rapture.
The place of their taking differs and the time of their taking differs. First firstfruits ripen early and are raptured. Following this the general majority or harvest is ripened and raptured (14:14-16).
In chapter 14 in between the appearance of the firstfruits in heaven and the taking up of the harvest to the cloud are a general summary of the events of the great tribulation. This indicates that the firstfruits are taken prior to the start of the great tribulation and the harvest majority is taken towards the end.
There is nothing here about a rapture, though. The 'first fruits' are just standing on a hill.
However, I think it is better to consider 13 as connected to 12 and 14 as a corner vision communicating these matters:
1.) Pretribulation rapture of Firstfruits (14:1-5)
2.) Angelic announcement of the eternal gospel to fear the Creator (vv.6-7)
3.) The fall of religious Babylon (v.8)
4.) Warning against worship of Antichrist during great tribulation (vv.9-12)
5.) Blessing on martyrs during great tribulation (v. 13)
6.) Harvest of believers near the end of the great tribulation (vv.14-16)
7.) Gathering of grapes (evildoers) at end of great tribulation (vv.17-20)
What evidence in the text suggests that chapter 14 should be read as a 'corner vision'? You say that:
Chapter 14 is therefore a concise summary of the end times bounded on one end by a pretribulation rapture and on the other end with a end tribulation rapture...
... yet there is no mention in 14 of a tribulation between the description of the folk on Mount Zion (your 'first fruits') and the ripeness of the Earth's harvest, even if we are to view both of these as describing raptures.
Jon

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by jaywill, posted 07-30-2011 11:20 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by jaywill, posted 07-31-2011 9:03 AM Jon has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1907 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


(1)
Message 17 of 330 (626760)
07-31-2011 9:03 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Jon
07-31-2011 1:46 AM


Re: Selective Rapture
If you recall an earlier post, I said that rapture schools usually line up either on the pre-tribulation side or post tribulation side, AND tend to suppress passages not supportive of their leaning. And this they do because of the a prior assumption that any rapture must involve the entire body of the church.
Maybe you'll surprise me. But I am anticipating that you are well seasoned to lean towards a post tribulation view and have many reasons to discount legitimate pre-tribulation rapture passages. That seems to be how our discussion is shaping up. Ironically, you'll find me equally polemic when it comes to a post tribulation view because I really believe that selective rapture is what is seen in the Bible.
So, to your problems:
But it really just says they will be kept 'out of the hour of trial'. You change the meaning when you rephrase it to 'hour of the trial'.
Hold on. What it says is not simply "out of the hour of trial ...", as any general trial (of which there have been many and sore). Rather it is a specific trial -
It says " ... out of the hour of trial, which is about to come on the whole inhabited earth, to try them who dwell on the earth." (Rev. 3:10b)
This then is a world wide trial. And those caught up in it are "them who dwell on the earth". If you are on the earth then, you cannot avoid undergoing this trial. So I provided Matt. 24:21 to indicate the evidence of said "great tribulation" as what Christ is speaking of specifically:
"For at that time there will be great tribulation, SUCH as has not occured from the beginning of the world until now, nor shall by any means ever occur."
And, unlike you claim, there are many ways to keep someone from an 'hour of trial' without taking them out of the world. I am glad you brought this passage to my attention, but I am not quite convinced that it represents scriptural support of a pre-tribulation rapture.
You are predictably lining up with the typical post tribulation entire church rapture.
The passage is not really in isolation at all. I believe it refers to the great tribulation because of accompanying verses like Luke 21:34-36 which includes these words:
"For it will come in upon all those dwelling on the face of all the earth. But be watchful at every time, beseeching that you would prevail to escape all these things which are about to happen and stand before the Son of Man."
For some years I regarded this as a promise to be kept THROUGH the great tribulation and to stand before the Son of Man at its end. Eventually, I changed my view. This probably means to be raptured and stand before the Son of Man in heaven before He descends upon the earth.
We can examine how the word "escape" is used. Below is copied from another discussion I had.
Now the issue I would explore here is this word translated "escape". Do you think it mean merely to be kept through all these negative things or kept from them ?
We see the word used in the sense of getting clear of the place of peril. Getting clear of the whole dangerous place, I think, is the meaning of "escape". Here it is more than a safety of abiding or enduring. It is to be raptured clear from the scene to stand before the Son of Man in Heaven.
Compare with the word's usage in these passages:
1.) Acts 16:27 - And the jailer, waking up out of his sleep and seeing the doors of the prison opened, drew his sword and was about to do away with himself, supposing that the prisoners had escaped.
He supposed that they physically got clear through the doors of the jail.
2.) Acts 19:16 - And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped upon them, subdued both of them and overpowered them, so that they escaped out of that house naked and wounded.
They fled and got clear of the place by the skin of their teeth.
3.) Romans 2:3 - And do you consider this, O man, who judge those who practice such things and do the same [yourself] that you will escape the judgment of God ?
Surely, this does not mean to endure through the judgment of God. Rather it is to be clear of that judgment altogether.
4.) Second Cor. 11:33 - And in a basket I was lowered through a window, through the wall, and escaped his hands.
That is removed clear out of the danger. It is not to be kept safely through said danger.
5.) First Thess. 5:3 - When they say, Peace and security, then sudden destruction comes upon them, just as birth pangs to a woman with child; and they shall by no means escape.
That is by no means removed clear of the danger.
6.) Hebrews 2:3 - How shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which, having had its beginning in being spoken by the Lord, has been confirmed to us by those who heard ..."
The Lord's exhortation to His disciples is to beseech God that we would escape the things which are about to happen and stand before the Son of Man. I interpret that not to be kept through the dangers but removed clear from them. And in being removed to stand before the Son of Man in Heaven.
This passage must refer to watching for pre-tribulation catching away. But it is not automatic that such removal will take place. Otherwise there is no need to beseech and petition God for what is inevitable.
Do we beseech God that He be the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit ? That is something that does not require our requesting of God. But to be counted worthy to escape the things to happen in the great tribulation ? That, the Lord Jesus exhorts us -
" ... be watchful at every time, beseeching that you would prevail to escape all these things which are about to happen and stand before the Son of Man."
Luke 21:36 and Revelation 3:10 both refer to escape out of the world and out of the hour of world wide great tribulation. But if some object that Luke 21:36 should not mean rapture, I would respond -
Would you hold it against some Christians if God did answer their beseeching to escape through rapture ? Love believes all things and hopes all things. If you WISH to pass through the great tribulation, that is your perogative. But we should love those who may not wish that experience, and are "watchful at every time, beseeching that [they] would prevail to escape ..."
I hope you would not chide them if God answered their prayer. He does have the right to do with His own as He wishes. In other words, the passage should not mean "cannot ever be a pre-tribulation rapture".
jaywill:
2.) The promise is not automatic to the church universal. It is a promise for to those who have "kept the word of My endurance". It is therefore conditional. That implies that a selection is involved. So since a selection is involved according to who the Lord deems as having kept the word of His endurance, it must be a partial rapture, involving a remnant rather than the entire church.
jon:
Okay; so it only applies to the church members in Philadelphia (v 7)?
I do not believe that it only applies to the church in Philadelphia because of the repeated phrase at the end of each of the seven letters:
"He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches." (Rev. 2:7a,11,17,29,3:6, 13,22)
Though each letter is addressed to a specific local church, there is a call for all the other churches to take heed to what is being said to each church. Christ wants the hearer to heed the speaking Holy Spirit. And I count the letters as having a prophetic nature in addition to them being addressed to actual local assemblies in John's day.
In fact this promise is also reflected in the word of warning to the church in Sardis, yet in more of a negative tone:
"Become watchful and establish the things which remian, which were about to die ... Remember therefore how you have received and heard, and keep it and repent. If therefore you will not watch, I will come as a thief, and you shall by no means know at what hour I will come upon you. (3:2a,3) ... "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches." (v.6)
I am not in the church in Sardis and I am not in the church in Philedelphia in those olden days. However, I believe that I need to hear what the Spirit is speaking.
We know both the positive and the negative consequences for watching or failing to watch in connection with the parousia of the Lord Jesus.
jaywill:
To be kept out of the the very hour of this world wide trial is to be taken out of the earth before the hour begins. The passage is about a pre-great tribulation rapture.
jon:
Again, you've inserted material that isn't in the passage. I am not convinced that keeping folk from the 'hour of trial' requires sweeping them off the Earth.
You are welcome to have another view about Jon. I am convinced if you are not.
We also have the example of Enoch who was not found. We are told in Hebrews this:
"By faith Enoch was translated sothat he should not see death; and he was not found, because God had translated him. For before his translation he obtained the testimony that he had been well pleasing to God." (Heb. 11:5)
1.) Enoched walked with God. His being translated was the result of his daily walk with God. God took him out of the earth before the flood.
2.) Enoch's walk with God must have been enfluenced by his intimate expectation of what was coming on the world. He had named his son Methuselah. The names means something like "When he dies, it will come". The "it" is the flood. The flood came the year Methuselah died.
Enoch knew of coming world judgment. And he walked with God most likely as a response. His walk was a testimony unto God. And God rewarded that walk with a rapture of sorts. Anyway, God took Enoch out of the world, where is not important to me.
3.) I don't think the story of Enoch is included in Genesis as just one of the miscellaneous nice things that God did. I regard it as a vital lesson to the saints about the proper reaction to the awareness of coming divine judgment. Enoch should be an example to us.
It is not merely a matter of what we need. It is a matter also of what God needs in such a testimony - "For before his translation he obtained the testimony that he had been well pleasing to God"
At this point I need to remind you that I see selective rapture in the New Testament. The pre- great tribulation rapture will be of a minority of saints. Watchfulness is a key. Beseeching the Lord to be found worthy to be taken is a key. Walking with God is a key. And obtaining a godly testimony before the world beforehand is a key.
Please remember as you launch your standard objections to pre-tribulation rapture against this poster. I do not believe the entire body of Christians on the earth will be ready for a pre-tribulation rapture. We know how we ought to live. Whether we live that way or not determines early rapture.
jaywill:
But it should be noted that the manchild who is raptured is a collective unit, a collective rather than an individual person. This is proved by the plural pronouns "they", "their", "them" plus the word "brothers" in verses 10 and 11.
Briefly then, after the corporate man-child is caught up to God and to His throne (12:5), these words are uttered in verse 10,11:
"And I heard a loud voice in heaven saying, Now has come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of His Christ, for the accuser of our brothers has been cast down, who accuses them before our God day and night.
And THEY overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of THEIR testimony, and THEY loved not THEIR soul-life even unto death." (12:10,11)
The words "brothers", "them", "they", "their", "they" point back to the man-child who was "caught up to God and to His throne".
There is absolutely no evidence in the text to support interpreting 'brethren' as referring back to the 'male child' of v 5. If there is, you will have to help me out with a little more explanation as to why you think 'brethren' should be read as referring to the child.
Who else would you think the plural pronouns refer to ?
They should not refer to the good angels. Though good angels do overcome Satan in that battle, they do not do so by the blood of the Lamb. They are not recipents of Christ's redemption as sinful humans are.
Do you agree ?
The plural pronouns should not refer to those left on earth as members of the woman. The proclamation to rejoice is to those in heaven in contrast to have WOE to those who remain on the earth:
"Therefore be glad, O heavens and those who dwell in them. Woe to the earth and the sea because the devil has ome down to you and has great rage, knowing that he has only a short time." (12:12)
The "they" who overcame Satan cannot refer to the corporate group of those left upon the earth. At least at that time it cannot refer to them. In fact the next chapter says that the Antichrist is given to overcome them:
"And [permission] was given to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them; and authority was given to him to act forty-two months." (13:5)
So the "they" and "their" and "them" is not the angels and it is not those persecuted on earth as the children of the woman who brought forth the manchild.
It is impossible that the "they" and "their" and "them" refer to the bad angels who follow Satan. So who else in the chapter could these plural pronouns refer to ?
Verse 10 refers to the man-child. And that man-child is collective unit of overcomers who are resurrected and raptured pre-tribulation. A fuller exposition of chapter 12 would reinforce this interpretation. I have not yet done that.
jaywill:
The third evidence is in Revelation 14. Here again I do not launch a full exposition. But it should be noted that the terms firstfruits (Rev. 14:4) ) and "harvest" (14:15) strongly imply TIMING. Firstfruits are taken up to God first as a remant or minority. Latter a general harvest is taken up in rapture.
The place of their taking differs and the time of their taking differs. First firstfruits ripen early and are raptured. Following this the general majority or harvest is ripened and raptured (14:14-16).
In chapter 14 in between the appearance of the firstfruits in heaven and the taking up of the harvest to the cloud are a general summary of the events of the great tribulation. This indicates that the firstfruits are taken prior to the start of the great tribulation and the harvest majority is taken towards the end.
jon:
There is nothing here about a rapture, though. The 'first fruits' are just standing on a hill.
I am glad you brought that up. You are correct that the vision does not show them GOING UP. It merely shows them STANDING there in heaven.
Well this is very meaningful. That is because rapture is a matter of simply being physically taken where one's heart and spirit are already. Most more superfiscial treatments of rapture only deal with the physical transport. But the Bible puts more emphasis on the inward condition of the heart.
For example, Jesus tells us to remember Lot's wife. She escaped the place of judgment physically. She was removed from Sodom as far as her body was concerned. But her backward glance revealed that her heart was still back there. And as a result of a longing backward glance she became a pillar of salt. She became a kind of monument of shame.
Why should we remember Lot's wife for the end times? Christ is teaching that physical removal is secondary to spiritual and moral removal.
Now these firstfruits live in a heavenly atmostphere with their hearts ever before God and the Lamb. They follow Him always with their spirit. Therefore they are living on that heavenly mount Zion already while on earth. Their rapture is merely a matter of them being taken physcially where their inward being was already.
So I quite agree. We see them standing there. No word is said about them going up. The sign of the Holy Spirit should be instructive. To be raptured before the great tribulation we must be living in heaven (so to speak) in our hearts and in our innermost being. Then rapture will not be a surprise or shock. We simply arrive at physcially where our heart has been daily while on the earth.
We should de-emphasize pop culture's view of rapture and really pay attention to the teaching and signs given to us in the word of God.
jaywill:
1.) Pretribulation rapture of Firstfruits (14:1-5)
2.) Angelic announcement of the eternal gospel to fear the Creator (vv.6-7)
3.) The fall of religious Babylon (v.8)
4.) Warning against worship of Antichrist during great tribulation (vv.9-12)
5.) Blessing on martyrs during great tribulation (v. 13)
6.) Harvest of believers near the end of the great tribulation (vv.14-16)
7.) Gathering of grapes (evildoers) at end of great tribulation (vv.17-20)
What evidence in the text suggests that chapter 14 should be read as a 'corner vision'? You say that:
I'll come back to this. But what is important in this list is that the major events of the great tribulation are found between the vision of the firstfruits and the harvest.
If you read the chapter carefully you may notice that verses 6 through 13 are really a concise overview of major details we are told about the great tribulation throughout the rest of the book.
The typology of the crop of God means that the church is like a farm of God growing Christ within people. The Apostle Paul said of the apostles and the church in Corinth -
"For we are God's fellow workers, you are God's cultivated land [or farm], God's building." (1 Cor. 3:9)
Many other portions of the NT also show that Christ imparted into people is a matter of God growing this divine Person within them. God is actually growing a crop of Christ within His redeeemed people on earth.
The ripening process is gradual. And at the end of the age it culminates in some ripening early just before the start of the great tribulation. This is a minority. This is a remnant. And this remnant is consistant with the promises with a condition to those who would escape the great tribulation.
In essense the lessons that the tribulation has to teach them, they have already learned in their daily lives. I think it is preferable that we learn to keep the word of His endurance little by little through daily sovereign trials rather than in a crash course at the end of the age.
The heat of persecution will also be used by God to ripen that portion of the church which was left behind from the early rapture. Under the heat of the Antichrist and the times the larger majority of the church will "ripen". That is they will give up the love of the world because there is nothing there for them any longer.
The maturity sought by God for rapture comes at different times because the saints have different responses of obedience to His will. And some are early, a minority of first ripe ones - firstfruits. And the majority mature with the help of the heat of the great tribulation.
So pre-tribulation rapture school and post tribulation rapture school are each partially corrent. There will be selection in rapture.
jaywill:
Chapter 14 is therefore a concise summary of the end times bounded on one end by a pretribulation rapture and on the other end with a end tribulation rapture...
jon:
... yet there is no mention in 14 of a tribulation between the description of the folk on Mount Zion (your 'first fruits') and the ripeness of the Earth's harvest, even if we are to view both of these as describing raptures.
The great tribulation in its essence is covered in 14:6 through 14:13. Read it carefully.
And there should be no dispute that after the Harvest what is scene in chapter 14 is a indication of the battle of Armegeddon which is more detailed in Revelation 19. How can you say that the winepress of God's wrath of 14:17-20 is not an indication that 14 is about the great tribulation ?
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Jon, posted 07-31-2011 1:46 AM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Jon, posted 07-31-2011 2:30 PM jaywill has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 330 (626823)
07-31-2011 2:30 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by jaywill
07-31-2011 9:03 AM


Re: Selective Rapture
jaywill:
But it should be noted that the manchild who is raptured is a collective unit, a collective rather than an individual person. This is proved by the plural pronouns "they", "their", "them" plus the word "brothers" in verses 10 and 11.
Briefly then, after the corporate man-child is caught up to God and to His throne (12:5), these words are uttered in verse 10,11:
"And I heard a loud voice in heaven saying, Now has come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of His Christ, for the accuser of our brothers has been cast down, who accuses them before our God day and night.
And THEY overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of THEIR testimony, and THEY loved not THEIR soul-life even unto death." (12:10,11)
The words "brothers", "them", "they", "their", "they" point back to the man-child who was "caught up to God and to His throne".
There is absolutely no evidence in the text to support interpreting 'brethren' as referring back to the 'male child' of v 5. If there is, you will have to help me out with a little more explanation as to why you think 'brethren' should be read as referring to the child.
Who else would you think the plural pronouns refer to ?
They refer to 'our brethren' (= fellow Christians) of the same sentence. It is illogical to read them as having any other reference. The fact that 'child' is singular and these pronouns plural should be all the evidence needed to conclude that they are not referencing the same thing.
jaywill:
The third evidence is in Revelation 14. Here again I do not launch a full exposition. But it should be noted that the terms firstfruits (Rev. 14:4) ) and "harvest" (14:15) strongly imply TIMING. Firstfruits are taken up to God first as a remant or minority. Latter a general harvest is taken up in rapture.
The place of their taking differs and the time of their taking differs. First firstfruits ripen early and are raptured. Following this the general majority or harvest is ripened and raptured (14:14-16).
In chapter 14 in between the appearance of the firstfruits in heaven and the taking up of the harvest to the cloud are a general summary of the events of the great tribulation. This indicates that the firstfruits are taken prior to the start of the great tribulation and the harvest majority is taken towards the end.
jon:
There is nothing here about a rapture, though. The 'first fruits' are just standing on a hill.
I am glad you brought that up. You are correct that the vision does not show them GOING UP. It merely shows them STANDING there in heaven.
No; not 'in heaven', on a hill:
quote:
Revelation 14:1 (NRSV):
Then I looked, and there was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion! And with him were one hundred and forty-four thousand who had his name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads.
That is because rapture is a matter of simply being physically taken where one's heart and spirit are already. Most more superfiscial treatments of rapture only deal with the physical transport. But the Bible puts more emphasis on the inward condition of the heart.
Not really; the rapture has a pretty specific meaning, particularly as the concept derived from the reading of 1 Thessalonians 4:17:
quote:
1 Thessalonians 4:17 (NRSV):
Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air; and so we will be with the Lord for ever.
This is a physical movement to a specific place. It is not being taken to 'where one's heart and spirit are already'; this passage does not put 'more emphasis on the inward condition of the heart'.
But it really just says they will be kept 'out of the hour of trial'. You change the meaning when you rephrase it to 'hour of the trial'.
Hold on. What it says is not simply "out of the hour of trial ...", as any general trial (of which there have been many and sore). Rather it is a specific trial -
It says " ... out of the hour of trial, which is about to come on the whole inhabited earth, to try them who dwell on the earth." (Rev. 3:10b)
This then is a world wide trial. And those caught up in it are "them who dwell on the earth". If you are on the earth then, you cannot avoid undergoing this trial.
Sure you can, by being one of the loved ones who 'kept my word of patient endurance' (3:10). In fact, just one passage later (v 11), they are told to wait for the arrival of the 'one like a son of man' (1:13). It's hard to wait for someone coming to Earth when you've already been taken off the Earth.
I do not believe that it only applies to the church in Philadelphia because of the repeated phrase at the end of each of the seven letters:
"He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches." (Rev. 2:7a,11,17,29,3:6, 13,22)
So it applies to all of the churches?
How can you say that the winepress of God's wrath of 14:17-20 is not an indication that 14 is about the great tribulation ?
Like I said:
quote:
Jon in Message 16:
... there is no mention in 14 of a tribulation between the description of the folk on Mount Zion (your 'first fruits') and the ripeness of the Earth's harvest, ...
I'm not convinced that the passages between the mention of the 144k and the reaping of the Earth describe any tribulation. And even if they do, it is not at all clear that the 144k are described as raptured.
Jon

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by jaywill, posted 07-31-2011 9:03 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by jaywill, posted 07-31-2011 11:13 PM Jon has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1907 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 19 of 330 (626930)
07-31-2011 11:13 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Jon
07-31-2011 2:30 PM


Re: Selective Rapture
They refer to 'our brethren' (= fellow Christians) of the same sentence. It is illogical to read them as having any other reference. The fact that 'child' is singular and these pronouns plural should be all the evidence needed to conclude that they are not referencing the same thing.
There is not argument that Christians, or "fellow Christians" must be the referant to of the phrase "our brothers" I am not sure who the speaker is.
The singular "child" is part of the SIGN - "And a great SIGN was seen in heaven: a woman ... And she was with child, and she cried out, travailing in birth and being in pain to bring forth." (12:1,2)
The man-child, like the woman, is a SIGN to symbolize something. The plural pronouns refer to the child as a collective entity.
It is not illogical that the man-child refers to corporate group of overcomers. We are told that the man-child performs the same shepherding over the nations that Christ does:
Jesus Christ - "And out of His mouth proceeds a sharp sword, that with it He might smite the nations; and He will shepherd them with an iron rod ..." (Rev. 19:15)
Jesus Christ again - "Ask of Me, and I will give the nations as Your inheritance ... You will break them with an iron rod; You will shatter them like a potter's vessel" (Psa. 2:8,9)
The man-child - "And she brought forth a son, a man-child, who is to shepherd all the nations with an iron rod; and her child was caught up tp Gpd and to His throne." (Rev. 12:3)
The overcomers of Thyatira - "And he who overcomes and he who keeps My works until the end, to him I will give authority over the nations; And he will shepherd them with an iron rod, as vessels of pottery are broken in pieces, as I also have received from My Father." (Rev. 2:26,27)
Christ secures co-kings to reign with Himself in the millennium. They are overcomers according to Rev. 2:26,27. What He does they also do. And the man-child consists of some who overcame who will fulfill that desire of God.
What is spoken to any one church is to be heeded by all who have an ear to hear what the Spirit says to the churches. And we are told by the Apostle Paul that certain saints who overcome will reign with Christ:
"If we endure, we will also reign with Him ..." (2 Tim. 2:12)
A fuller discussion of chapter 12 would be in order. First my replies.
Concerning the 144,000 firstfruits standing on a Mt. Zion in Revelation 14:
jon:
There is nothing here about a rapture, though. The 'first fruits' are just standing on a hill.
No; not 'in heaven', on a hill:
They are in heaven for the sound of their worship is heard coming from heaven:
"And I heard a voice out of heaven like the sound of many waters and like the sound of loud thunder; and the voice which I heard was like the sound of harpsingers playing on their harps. And they sing a new song before the four living creatures and the elders; and no one could learn the song except the hundred and forty-four thousand, who were purchased from the earth." (14:2,3)
1.) There sound comes to John "out of heaven."
2.) They stand before the four living creatures, which sign was seen in heaven in chapter 5.
3.) They were purchased "from the earth" . This probably also indicates a rapture from the earth up to heaven.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revelation 14:1 (NRSV):
Then I looked, and there was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion! And with him were one hundred and forty-four thousand who had his name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads.
"And I heard a voice OUT OF HEAVEN like the sound of many waters ..."
jaywill:
That is because rapture is a matter of simply being physically taken where one's heart and spirit are already. Most more superfiscial treatments of rapture only deal with the physical transport. But the Bible puts more emphasis on the inward condition of the heart.
Not really; the rapture has a pretty specific meaning, particularly as the concept derived from the reading of 1 Thessalonians 4:17:
The word "rapture" means an estatic attitude. It means an ecstasy of exuberant enjoyment. So "rapture" certainly in its meaning is more a word on a moral and spiritual state. It was used to be applied to a catching away by the Lord.
I don't think the actual word "rapture" appears in the Bible. But the etymology of the word certainly is more psychological, spiritual, and moral than it is physical.
Strictly speaking, if the Lord comes at any time, and one is a backslidden Christian with problems with the world, the flesh, and the self love, it is highly doubtful that he would be in "rapture" at knowing the Lord Jesus has come for him in that state.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Thessalonians 4:17 (NRSV):
Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air; and so we will be with the Lord for ever.
This passage refers to the rapture at the end of the great tribulation. It corresponds to the Harvest of Revelation 14:14-16.
And if you look at the passage carefully it says that "Then we who are living, WHO ARE LEFT REMAINING, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord ..."
If the Apostle Paul meant only those who were living, it would have been sufficient for him to merely say "Then we who are living" and leave it at that. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit another phrase is added " ... we who are living, WHO ARE LEFT REMAINING ...".
1.) If the living firstfruits were raptured before the great tribulation, then those taken at the end would not only be those who are living but also "who are left remaining".
2.) If some were raptured in order to be kept out of the hour of trial which comes upon the whole earth (Rev. 3:10), then those raptured at the end would be those "who are living, who are left remaining" .
3.) If some were watchful and besought the Lord that they would be counted worthy to escape the great tribulation according to Luke 21:36), then those left to pass through the great tribulation would to be raptured aftwards would be those "who are living, who are left remaining" .
4.) If some like Enoch were raptured before the great tribulation, then those raptured at its end would be discribed as "we who are living, who are left remaining".
It could be that the Holy Spirit is indicating by the words "who are left remaining", that some were living and were raptured beforehand.
This is a physical movement to a specific place. It is not being taken to 'where one's heart and spirit are already'; this passage does not put 'more emphasis on the inward condition of the heart'.
You yourself previously objected that it only records that they are seen STANDING on a Mt. Zion. Now you want to point out that a physical movement to a specific place is indicated.
Of course their standing there is the result of a physical movement - rapture. And the place is in heaven (14:2). I only point out that we only view them AFTER they have arrived there, being "purchased from the earth" (v.3)
Since we are told that "These are those who follow the Lamb wherever He may go" (v.4) we can conclude that their following Christ at all costs has resulted in their ending up in heaven on some heavenly Mt. Zion. This unique experience of living and never undergoing physical death, but being transfigured and raptured to heaven before death, is what comprises their unique experience. They have an experience which the majority of God's saints do not have. So they sing a new song which no one could learn except they.
Their early rapture is more unique then the harvest rapture at the end of the great tribulation. But both raptures are wonderful.
But it really just says they will be kept 'out of the hour of trial'. You change the meaning when you rephrase it to 'hour of the trial'.
But "the trial" are not words I would intentionally insert into my quotation of the text.
To put this matter to rest hopefully for good, the quotation which I am using reads exactly:
" Because you have kept the word of My endurance, I also will keep you out of the hour of trial, which is about to come on the whole inhabited earth, to try them who dwell on the earth." (Rev. 3:10)
Any variation of this quotation you saw me write would be a typo.
Having said that, in discussion, to refer to THE trial is legitimate because the great tribulation is unique as the "trial which is about to come on the whole inhabited earth, to tru them who dwell on the earth."
It is a specific hour of trial that is meant.
Hold on. What it says is not simply "out of the hour of trial ...", as any general trial (of which there have been many and sore). Rather it is a specific trial -
It says " ... out of the hour of trial, which is about to come on the whole inhabited earth, to try them who dwell on the earth." (Rev. 3:10b)
This then is a world wide trial. And those caught up in it are "them who dwell on the earth". If you are on the earth then, you cannot avoid undergoing this trial.
jon:
Sure you can, by being one of the loved ones who 'kept my word of patient endurance' (3:10). In fact, just one passage later (v 11), they are told to wait for the arrival of the 'one like a son of man' (1:13). It's hard to wait for someone coming to Earth when you've already been taken off the Earth.
The trial comes upon all those dwelling upon the earth. That is why it is a great tribulation. Of course rapture before it begins excludes one from the hour of that trial.
I do not follow your objection well here. Verse 11 says "I come quickly, hold fast what you have that no one take your crown"
I see no problem whatsoever. First He tells them that because they have kept His word of endurance He will kept them from the hour of trial. Then He cautions them that He comes soon and that they should not lose what has been wrought in them.
I see no contradiction in this at all. In fact as pleased as the Lord is with the church in Philadelphia there is STILL the standard promise to those who overcome. And there is still the exhortation for us to hear what the Spirit says to the churches.
They have the crown already. They have achieved a rising up to the normal standard of overcoming. But they still must be vigilant that no one would take their crown.
The word to the Colossians is similar - "Let no one defraud you ..." (Col 2:18). The exhortation is not to lose the enjoyment that they have arrived at. If anyone thinks he stands let him beware lest he fall (1 Cor. 10:12) \[/b\]
We never graduate from the need for vigilance while on this earth. And I see no cause to think verse 11 nullifies the promise of pre-tribulation rapture in verse 10. There is nothing inconsistant about a promise to be rewarded followed by an exhortation not to let the reward slip away.
Much of the New Testament is precious promises accompanied with sober exhortations.
jw:
I do not believe that it only applies to the church in Philadelphia because of the repeated phrase at the end of each of the seven letters:
"He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches." (Rev. 2:7a,11,17,29,3:6, 13,22)
So it applies to all of the churches?
All the churches are to heed. The Holy Spirit can work out the prophetic specificity according to His own sovereignty.
If it did not apply to Ephesus it certainly is still profitable for Ephesus to heed the word spoken. Why look for reason to not want to keep the word of the Lord's endurance ?
jw:
How can you say that the winepress of God's wrath of 14:17-20 is not an indication that 14 is about the great tribulation ?
Like I said:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon in Message 16:
... there is no mention in 14 of a tribulation between the description of the folk on Mount Zion (your 'first fruits') and the ripeness of the Earth's harvest, ...
So you do not feel the passages after verse 5 pertain to the great tribulation ? That is indeed strange.
You have the worship of the beast and his image in verse 9.
You have the mark of the beast in verse 10.
You have the terrible warnings not to worship the Antichrist in verse 11.
You have the prediction of the judgment to come upon those who do, v.12.
You have the indication of "the endurance of the saints" through all of this terrible trial in verse 12.
You have the promise of reward to those who will be martyred in their resistance to that mark of the beast in verse 12.
And strangely in all this and more you see no mention of the great tribulation ? It is harder for me NOT to notice the great tribulation in all of this than to notice.
I'm not convinced that the passages between the mention of the 144k and the reaping of the Earth describe any tribulation. And even if they do, it is not at all clear that the 144k are described as raptured.
You are missing the obvious. And the followers of Christ the Lamb are heard singing in heaven (14:2) because they were raptured there.
And the preaching of the eternal gospel in verse 6 is done by an angel rather than by the church:
"And I saw another angel flying in mid-heaven, having an eternal gospel to announce to those dwelling on theearth, even to every nation and tribe and tongue and people." (v.6)
This is an eternal gospel of God the Creator of all things. The preacher is not mankind but the angel in midheaven. And the contents of this eternal gospel are meant to neutralize the threats of Antichrist that the world should worship him as god.
Rather the eternal gospel preached from the air by the angel points the earth dwellers to God the Creator:
"Saying with a loud voice, fear God and give Him glory because the hour of His judgment has come; and worship Him who has made heaven and earth and the sea and the springs of waters." (v.7)
This is not the gospel of the grace preached by the church in the church age. This is a announcement supernaturally preached from the skies by the angel. And it contents say nothing about Christ's redemption. The contents speak of God the Creator. For it is the Creator who will be shaking the cosmos by that time as a counter reaction to Antichrist's false claim that he is god.
You also have the announcement of the judgement of religious Babylon in verse 8. So if you are familiar with the rest of the book of Revelation, you should realize that 14:6 - 13, and the final winepress of God's wrath in versees 17-20 all pertain to major events of the great tribulation.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Jon, posted 07-31-2011 2:30 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Jon, posted 08-01-2011 10:31 AM jaywill has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1907 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 20 of 330 (626989)
08-01-2011 8:47 AM


The following is submitted to help explain the vision of Revelation 12 - mainly the woman of universal light bringing forth a man-child.
I am quoting from "The Glorious Church" by Watchman Nee.
(1) The woman was clothed with the sun. The sun refers to the Lord Jesus. Her being clothed with the sun means that when the sun shines the brightest, it is shining upon her. In this present age, God is revealing Himself through her. This shows her relationship with Christ in the age of grace.
(2) The woman had the moon underneath her feet. This phrase "underneath her feet" does not mean that she is treading upon it. According to the Greek, it means that the moon is subject at her feet. The light of the moon is a reflecting light; it has no light of its own. All the things in the age of the law were merely reflected things in the age of grace The law was but a type. The temple and the ark were types. The incense, the showbread in the Holy Place, and the sacrifices offered by the priests were all types, as well as the blood of the sheep and oxen. The moon underneath the feet of the woman means that all things pertaining to the law are subordinate to her. This speaks of her relationship to the age of the law.
(3) The woman had a crown of twelve stars upon her head. The chief figures in the age of the patriarchs were from the time of Abraham to the twelve tribes. The crown of twelve stars upon her head speaks of her relationship to the age of the patriarchs.
In this way, we see that the woman is not only related to the age of grace, but also to the age of the law and the age of the patriarchs. However, she is more closely related to the age of grace. She includes all the saints in the age of grace, as well as all the saints from the ages of the law and the patriarchs.
THE BIRTH OF THE MANCHILD
Revelation 12:2 says, "And she was with child, and she cried out, travailing in birth and being in pain to bring forth." Being with child is figurative and not real. What does it mean to be with child? It means that a child is in the mother's womb, and the child and the mother are united in one body. When the mother eats, the child is nourished. When the mother is ill, the child is also affected. The condition of the mother is the condition of the child. The mother and the child are one.
However, this child is also different from the mother; he is another being. If you say that they are one, they are really one, for the child receives life from the mother. However, as far as his future is concerned, he is different. His future is entirely distinct from that of his mother. Immediately after he is delivered, he is caught up to the throne of God, while his mother flees into the wilderness.
In addition, while the woman is with child, all that can be seen is the mother; the child is hidden. Outwardly, it appears as if there is only the mother. The child assuredly exists, but he is hidden within the mother; he is included in the mother.
... Verse 4 continues, "And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to bring forth, so that when she brings forth he might devour her child." Here is the woman whom God has purposed in His will and a man-child whom He desires to obtain. But the dragon is hindering what God is after in the woman. The dragon knows that this woman is about to bear a man-child; therefore, it stands before the woman and waits to devour her child as soon as she delivers.
Verse 5 says, "And she brought forth a son, a man-child." In order to see the relationship between the woman and the man-child, let us look at Galatians 4:26: "But the Jerusalem above is free, which is our mother." The last part of Galatians 4:27 says, "Because many are the children of her who is desolate rather than of her who has her husband." The Jerusalem that is above is the New Jerusalem, and the New Jerusalem is the woman, the goal which God desires to obtain in eternity. The woman in creation is Eve, the woman in the age of grace is the Body of Christ, the woman at the end of the age of grace is described in Revelation 12, and the woman in eternity future will be the New Jerusalem. When the Word says that the Jerusalem which is above has many children , it does not mean that the woman and the children are separate. It means that one has become many, and many are composed into one. The many children added together equal the mother. It is not as if the mother delivers five children, and then there are six individuals, but that the five children added together compose the mother. Each child is a portion of the mother - one portion of the mother is taken out for this child, another portion is taken out for another child, and so for each one. It seems as if they are all born of her, but in fact they are herself. The mother is not another being in addition to the children; she is the summation of all the children. When we look at the whole, we see the mother; when we look at them one by one, we see the children. When we look at the totality of the people in God's purpose, we see the woman; if we look at them separately, we see many sons. This is a special principle.
...
... All God's people have a part in His eternal purpose, but not all assume their rightful responsibility. Therefore, God chooses a group of people from among them. This is a portion of the whole, a part of the many chosen by God. This is the man-child brought forth by the woman. As a whole it is the mother; as a minority it is the man-child. The man-child is the "brothers" in verse 10 and "they" in verse 11. This means that the man-child is not a single individual, but a composition of many persons. All of these persons added together become the man-child. In comparison with the woman, the man-child appears to be small. When the group is compared with the whole, their number is in the minority. But God's plan is fulfilled in them and His purpose rests upon them.
[The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, Vol. 34, The Glorious Church, Living Stream Ministry, pgs.70-76]

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 330 (627197)
08-01-2011 10:31 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by jaywill
07-31-2011 11:13 PM


Re: Selective Rapture
The plural pronouns refer to the child as a collective entity.
No; they don't. And all your misinterpretation of the word 'sign' doesn't make is so.
The word "rapture" means an estatic attitude. It means an ecstasy of exuberant enjoyment.
If this is the type of rapture you're trying to defend in your posts, then I see little reason for continuing this discussion. I had thought it was clear from my posts that the rapture in question was a reference to the transportation of Christians from Earth to heaven.
quote:
Wikipedia on the Rapture:
In Christian eschatology, the Rapture is a reference to "being caught up" referred to in 1 Thess 4:17, when, in the End Times, the Christians of the world will be gathered together in the air to meet Jesus Christ.
...
"Rapture" is an English noun derived from the Latin verb rapiō, with a literal meaning of "I catch up" "or "I snatch" (from the infinitive form of the verb rapere, "to catch up"; "rapture" is also cognate to the English words "rapids", "raptor", "ravish", and "rape").
quote:
Online Etymology Dictionary on rapture:
c.1600, "act of carrying off," from M.Fr. rapture, from M.L. raptura "seizure, rape, kidnapping," from L. raptus "a carrying off" (see rapt). Originally of women and cognate with rape (v.). Sense of "spiritual ecstasy" first recorded 1620s.
I'm not sure a discussion of spiritual ecstasy is in line with my intentions in starting this topic.
This passage [1 Thess 4:17] refers to the rapture at the end of the great tribulation. It corresponds to the Harvest of Revelation 14:14-16.
And if you look at the passage carefully it says that "Then we who are living, WHO ARE LEFT REMAINING, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord ..."
If the Apostle Paul meant only those who were living, it would have been sufficient for him to merely say "Then we who are living" and leave it at that. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit another phrase is added " ... we who are living, WHO ARE LEFT REMAINING ...".
I don't see why viewing the aside as a clarification is at all impractical. This seems to make the most sense given the preceding mention of the dead rising first, followed by the living that were left behind when the dead were raised. Besides, if Paul is talking about a second rapture happening after the tribulation, where is his mention of the first one?
The mid-/post-tribulation rapture is so well attested. Why is it that the pre-tribulation rapture cannot be found except in special readings of vastly disconnected passages?
If both of these are just as valid, it seems odd that one gets specific mention while support for the other must be finagled out of the text.
Jon

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by jaywill, posted 07-31-2011 11:13 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by jaywill, posted 08-01-2011 1:09 PM Jon has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1907 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 22 of 330 (627220)
08-01-2011 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Jon
08-01-2011 10:31 AM


Re: Selective Rapture
No; they don't. And all your misinterpretation of the word 'sign' doesn't make is so.
I didn't say that was the sole rational. However it is an important one. We are told in Revelation 1:1 - "The Revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave to Him to show to His slaves the things that must quickly take place; and He made it known by signs, ..."
From verse 1 of this book we are given heads up that SIGNS are going to be used to communicate truths surrounding things of God's economy which are to take place.
Could the man-child be a "sign" of an individual person like Jesus ? Yes it could. But is that the best interpretation ? Many of us think not.
Now the THEME of overcoming is presented early in the book of Revelation. It is not enough simply to "be a Christian". What is on the Lord's heart is to be an overcoming Christian as opposed to a defeated Christian.
For this reason each of the seven letters includes a promise to Christians who overcome (2:7,11,17,26,3:5,12,21) - "He who overcomes ..." or "To him who overcomes ...".
I want to write something about this matter of "overcomers". The term "overcomers" I may not be able to find in the New Testament. The closest I have come is the phrase " we than more than conqueror" (Rom. 8:37).
My experience over the years has been that the thought of overcomers as a man-child in Revelation seems to generate intense resentment in some Christians. It sounds to them like the mention of some elite group who has risen above the standard of the common believers.
To the contrary, as best we can see, to "overcome" is not to rise above the standard of God. It is simply to rise TO the standard of God. His grace is sufficient that each believer has what is needed to overcome. Therefore to be an overcomer is not to be super but to be normal.
The fact of life and of the history in the Bible is that what is AVERAGE among the believers is not normal. What is typical is below the standard of a victorious life through Gods' grace. Then to be an overcomer is simply to rise AT the standard expected by the Lord and NOT to be an elite or super or some special priviledged group.
I could take several pages to demonstrate this through the stories of the Bible. Perhaps the little army of 300 under Gideon in Judges 6:1 - 8:32 is one place to see this oft repeated truth demonstrated. A remnant, a minority RISE to the occasion through God's grace, to secure a victory in spiritual warfare FOR THE SAKE of the entire body of God's people.
Secondly, I want to point out that Jesus Christ is the prototype OVERCOMER. No one overcomes except they follow the perfect example of Jesus the Son of God. And we can overcome only because of Christ.
In this regard to say that the man-child of Revelation 12 is Jesus Christ is certainly not altogether wrong. But a deeper view is that it is the Jesus Christ who has been imparted into a group of people. It is the Jesus Christ, the true victorious One, who has been dispensed into the personalities of a group of obedient saints.
There should be no serious objection that the plural pronouns could not possibly refer to the man-child. The Woman clothed with the sun, with the moon beneath her feet, and a crown of twelve stars on her head signifies a corporate body. Why cannot her child represent the same ?
"And THEY overcame him because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of THEIR testimony, and THEY loved not THEIR soul-life even unto death." (v.11)
The Bride and Wife of the Lamb in Revelation 21 and 22 also signify a collective body. Each of the lampstands of chapter 2 and 3 signify a collective body of a local church. The wife in Ephesians five is a corporate body. So I see no serious obstacle to interpreting the man-child as a collective.
The word "rapture" means an estatic attitude. It means an ecstasy of exuberant enjoyment.
If this is the type of rapture you're trying to defend in your posts, then I see little reason for continuing this discussion.
All I said was that the word rapture actually had more of a psychological and spiritual meaning in its root then a physical one. Is it honest of you to now suggest that I am defending a PURELY non-physical rapture ?
I think you know that from the start, I have NOT been expounding on a non-physical rapture.
I had thought it was clear from my posts that the rapture in question was a reference to the transportation of Christians from Earth to heaven.
And it should be clear from my posts that I intended to discuss a pre-tribulation taking out of the world of some saints. I only said that the meaning of the word used for this - "rapture" actually has a more psychological and spiritual root meaning.
In Revelation 14 we do not see the firstfruits moving up. It is assumed that they moved up by God's power. That is by God's power in conjunction with their walk with God and following the Lamb where ever He may go.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wikipedia on the Rapture:
In Christian eschatology, the Rapture is a reference to "being caught up" referred to in 1 Thess 4:17, when, in the End Times, the Christians of the world will be gathered together in the air to meet Jesus Christ.
...
"Rapture" is an English noun derived from the Latin verb rapi, with a literal meaning of "I catch up" "or "I snatch" (from the infinitive form of the verb rapere, "to catch up"; "rapture" is also cognate to the English words "rapids", "raptor", "ravish", and "rape").
That is helpful. But since for you to argue that I am defending a non-physical removal is a misrepresentation of my explanations, I don't take this information as a rebuttal to that. But I see your point.
I think Wikopedia there is emphasizing the word "rapture" primarily according to popularized Christian eschatological sermons. And that view usually is that no matter what your spiritual or moral condition, if you are a Christian you will be physically caught up.
Books like the Left Behind series and "The Late Great Planet Earth" of the 70s or Harold Campings lattest enfluence, and other Christian movies and books USUALLY presented only the physical side of being snatched away.
This is not the emphasis that the New Testament carries. It is hard to think of any passage on what we call rapture, does not involve some moral exhortation to watchfulness or inward moral readiness.
I am NOT saying there is no physical snatching away in the rapture. But selective rapture is most biblical. So watching and readiness is constantly emphasized in the NT that conditions for being caught up will occur.
Who wants to be taken where they really have no desire to go?
Will it be a rapture to go somewhere the world loving Christians considers rather tasteless anyway ?
Millions of Christians will suddenly learn this lesson when SOME Christians are raptured and most are not able to rise up.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Online Etymology Dictionary on rapture:
c.1600, "act of carrying off," from M.Fr. rapture, from M.L. raptura "seizure, rape, kidnapping," from L. raptus "a carrying off" (see rapt). Originally of women and cognate with rape (v.). Sense of "spiritual ecstasy" first recorded 1620s.
Okay. Very old meanings of the word in English included kidnapping and rape of women.
Check out also Marriam Webster's Dictionary:
1rapture noun \ˈrap-chər\
Definition of RAPTURE
1: an expression or manifestation of ecstasy or passion
2a : a state or experience of being carried away by overwhelming emotion b : a mystical experience in which the spirit is exalted to a knowledge of divine things
3often capitalized : the final assumption of Christians into heaven during the end-time according to Christian theology
rapturous \ˈrap-chə-rəs, ˈrap-shrəs\ adjective
rapturously adverb
rapturousness noun
See rapture defined for English-language learners
See rapture defined for kids
Examples of RAPTURE
We listened with rapture as the orchestra played.
He listened to the wind in the trees, his eyes closed in rapture.
Origin of RAPTURE
Latin raptus
First Known Use: 1594
Related to RAPTURE
Synonyms: cloud nine, elatedness, elation, euphoria, exhilaration, heaven, high, intoxication, paradise, ecstasy, rhapsody, seventh heaven, swoon, transport
Antonyms: depression
Notice that the opposite or antonym is DEPRESSION.
Rapture Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
Anyway, that we do not see a physical MOVEMENT of the firstfruits UP to Mount Zion is a weak rational to reason that Rapture has not been indicated in that chapter.
I'm not sure a discussion of spiritual ecstasy is in line with my intentions in starting this topic.
It is important to the understanding of Selective Rapture.
Are you happy to go along with the Lord where He desires to take you?
Or would you rather have more fun here as Demas in Second Timothy who forsook co-working with Paul because of being distracted with his love for the world ?
"For Demas has abandoned me, having loved the present age, and has gone to Thessalonica ..." (2 Tim. 4:10)
Demas surely was a Christian disciple. He was made lukewarm in his love for Christ because he found the present age of the world more attractive.
The coming pre-tribulation rapture will be a wake up call to millions of genuine Christians who will discover that they should have watched and been ready.
There is no rapture in being forced to go where you would rather not go. The great tribulation will be needed to demonstrate that the believers really have nothing here on the earth worth missing Christ's kingdom for.
jaywill:
This passage [1 Thess 4:17] refers to the rapture at the end of the great tribulation. It corresponds to the Harvest of Revelation 14:14-16.
And if you look at the passage carefully it says that "Then we who are living, WHO ARE LEFT REMAINING, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord ..."
If the Apostle Paul meant only those who were living, it would have been sufficient for him to merely say "Then we who are living" and leave it at that. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit another phrase is added " ... we who are living, WHO ARE LEFT REMAINING ...".
jon:
I don't see why viewing the aside as a clarification is at all impractical. This seems to make the most sense given the preceding mention of the dead rising first, followed by the living that were left behind when the dead were raised. Besides, if Paul is talking about a second rapture happening after the tribulation, where is his mention of the first one?
The mid-/post-tribulation rapture is so well attested.
Pre-tribulation rapture is well attested to also. That is the paradox.
And that is why J. N. Darby and Benjamen Newton fell out with each other and divided the Brethren in factions over it. Both were godly men and astute teachers of the Bible.
Darby saw only the well attested pre-tribulation rapture passages and suppressed the post tribulation rapture passages. And Newton saw only the post tribulation passages and suppressed the pre-tribulation passages.
Neither should have completely ignored the other. Thankfully expositors like Robert Govette, D M Panton, G.H. Pember and Watchman Nee saw through the dust in the air to reconcile the paradox.
If you just THINK about it a little bit it should make perfect sense. If the Lord said watch and be ready, then those who fulfilll that exhortation will be ready to be raptured pre-tribulation. And if they are caught off guard, the situation testifies that they can no longer afford not to be ready for the Lord's manifestation at the close of the great tribulation.
Let me put it to you this way. The FIRST coming of the Lord had some surprises associated with it. Many of the religious establishment were stumbled that things did not happen exactly as they had expected.
Today we have an even stronger religious tradition. Do you honestly think there will be no surprises with His SECOND coming ?
Selective rapture accounts for the extremely probable likelihood that those failing to heed all of Christ's exhortation around His coming, will learn something and consider their ways.
These passages do not at all have the flavor of an automatic blessing with no regard to inward readiness, even if one has been justfied by faith:
" ... If you therefore will not watch, I will come as a thief, and you shall by no means know at what hour I will come upon you." (Rev. 3:3)
Selective Rapture is implied.
" At that time two men will be in the field; one is taken and one is left. Two women will be grinding at the mill; one is taken and one is left.
Watch therefore, for you do not know on what day your Lord comes." (Matt. 24:40-42)
Here again, selective rapture is strongly implied. Some may have some unwarranted presumption that the TWO in the field or the TWO at the mill are a Christian and an unbeliever. I do not have that foolish confidence. It simply says "TWO" ... PERIOD. (excuse me raising my voice)
It could be "TWO" Christian brothers, one is taken and one is left.
It could be "TWO" Christian sisters, one is taken and one is left.
" I tell you, In that night there will be two on one bed; the one will be taken and the other will be left." (Luke 17:34)
Selective rapture is implied. I have no such confindence that TWO on one bed HAS to mean a Christian and a nonbeliever. I know it should not mean TWO non-Christians. But it probably means either two Christians or a Christian and a non-believer. At any rate the Christian brother or sister is exhorted to watch and be ready. And that EVEN during sleeping hours.
The one walking in the Spirit even has to be careful what passes through his or her mind during resting on the bed of sleep. This kind of watchfulness has to be built up over the course of one's Christian walk.
Selective rapture may teach all will be raptured. It does not insist that all will be raptured at the same time. And I have not seen a persuasive argument from you that the firstfruits or the manchild or those kept out of the hour of world wide trial cannot refer to pre-tribulation rapture.
This verse also speaks of selection in rapture:
"For this reason you also be ready, because at an hour when you do not expect it, the Son of Man is coming." (Matt. 24:44)
Because we DON'T know when He will first come to rapture some, we have to supplement our ignorance with watchfulness and readiness. This is the Lord's way. For He wants to take to heaven that which had its source from heaven.
Why is it that the pre-tribulation rapture cannot be found except in special readings of vastly disconnected passages?
If both of these are just as valid, it seems odd that one gets specific mention while support for the other must be finagled out of the text.
The post tribulation school got hold of you and made sure that passages non supportive of the entire body of Christians being raptured post tribulation would be suspicioned by you.
They effectually "inoculated" you against considering many valid passages. My reaction was different. I see that it is better to embrace ALL that God has told us in His word.
Difficulties often arise because some want to uphold one aspect of the truth and suppress another or paradoxical aspect. I predicted early in this discussion that that is probably what I was going to deal with in your inquisitions.
But proof is different from persuasion. I have presented a number of good evidences of a selective pre-tribulation rapture of at least some of the church. I can't gaurantee you that you'll be persuaded.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Jon, posted 08-01-2011 10:31 AM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Jon, posted 08-01-2011 3:23 PM jaywill has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 330 (627243)
08-01-2011 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by jaywill
08-01-2011 1:09 PM


Re: Selective Rapture
Why is it that the pre-tribulation rapture cannot be found except in special readings of vastly disconnected passages?
If both of these are just as valid, it seems odd that one gets specific mention while support for the other must be finagled out of the text.
The post tribulation school got hold of you and made sure that passages non supportive of the entire body of Christians being raptured post tribulation would be suspicioned by you.
They effectually "inoculated" you against considering many valid passages. My reaction was different. I see that it is better to embrace ALL that God has told us in His word.
No one's inoculated anyone. Until I read the quoted material in the OP, I had little to no concept of what the biblical texts said regarding the relative timing of the rapture and tribulation.
My eyes on this subject are as fresh as could be, and I assure you that I am examining every bit of evidence in the best of faith.
Could the man-child be a "sign" of an individual person like Jesus ? Yes it could. But is that the best interpretation ? Many of us think not.
Unless some new evidence comes to light, I can think of no way to convince me that the plural pronouns in question refer to anything other than 'our brethren'.
The argument you're making, that they refer to the child, is just absurd.
I think you know that from the start, I have NOT been expounding on a non-physical rapture.
Yes; I do know this. I had even considered pointing it out in my last reply. Given your focus elsewhere on a physical rapture, it seemed odd to me that you would switch to a spiritual understanding for interpreting just one passage, going so far as to say it is the understanding on which 'the Bible puts more emphasis', despite your lack of mention of this understanding in reading any other passage.
I only said that the meaning of the word used for this - "rapture" actually has a more psychological and spiritual root meaning.
But it doesn't; the essence of it is physical.
It is hard to think of any passage on what we call rapture, does not involve some moral exhortation to watchfulness or inward moral readiness.
Yes, being watchful and ready for the time when your body is suddenly flung into the heavens. There is a lot of spirituality revolving around the rapture theology, but the rapture itself is essentially a physical event. You can't have a rapture without a physical movement of the body.
Anyway, that we do not see a physical MOVEMENT of the firstfruits UP to Mount Zion is a weak rational to reason that Rapture has not been indicated in that chapter.
The fact that rapture has not been indicated in that chapter is fine rationale to reason that rapture has not been indicated in that chapter. Your interpretation of people singing on a hill as a reference to rapture just seems entirely unfounded.
Pre-tribulation rapture is well attested to also. That is the paradox.
I don't see a paradox because I don't yet see the attestations.
You may be perfectly capable of reconciling the notion of a pre-tribulation rapture with the biblical texts, but the question in this thread is whether the biblical texts actually speak of the pre-tribulation rapture, not just whether or not they are consistent with it.
I have presented a number of good evidences of a selective pre-tribulation rapture of at least some of the church.
Things like 1 Thessalonians make specific reference to a 'catching up', which they embed in a clear timeline toward the end of the tribulation. No such specific reference exists embedded in a timeline that would place it before the tribulation.
If such references exist, why have you built your argument on round-about and indirect textual interpretation?
Jon

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by jaywill, posted 08-01-2011 1:09 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by GDR, posted 08-01-2011 4:33 PM Jon has not replied
 Message 25 by jaywill, posted 08-01-2011 5:19 PM Jon has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6189
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005


Message 24 of 330 (627246)
08-01-2011 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Jon
08-01-2011 3:23 PM


Re: Selective Rapture
Just to bring in a different point of view I contend that the whole concept of rapture comes from a complete misreading of the scriptures. It is trying to provide answers to questions that Jesus wasn’t asked and didn’t answer.
I’m not saying that Jesus didn’t have an eschatological message. He does in Matthew 25 for example. To a large degree the salvation message was secondary to the message of how He wanted His people to respond to each other and the rest of the world. I certainly get the sense that Jesus felt that if we concern ourselves with His message of truth, love, justice, forgiveness etc. that the from our point of view the issue of salvation would take care of itself.
In reading the gospels it is important to remember that Jesus was a first century Jew with an intimate knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures, speaking to first century Jews in language that they understood, which was nearly always referential to their scriptures.
The messiah was supposed to be a nationalist and a revolutionary who would see that Israel’s enemies would be defeated and that the Jewish people would become the dominant power. Jesus’ message was actually very political. To a large degree He was speaking against the revolutionary view. Most of the gospel quotes that are used as evidence of a so-called rapture are in fact Jesus speaking against the revolutionaries and about the destruction that would ensue if they didn’t abandon that approach with the Romans.

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Jon, posted 08-01-2011 3:23 PM Jon has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1907 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 25 of 330 (627249)
08-01-2011 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Jon
08-01-2011 3:23 PM


Re: Selective Rapture
Could the man-child be a "sign" of an individual person like Jesus ? Yes it could. But is that the best interpretation ? Many of us think not.
Unless some new evidence comes to light, I can think of no way to convince me that the plural pronouns in question refer to anything other than 'our brethren'.
I didn't say that "our brethren" is not the referant of the plural pronouns.
I feel no need to defend a position I did not state.
The argument you're making, that they refer to the child, is just absurd.
Tell us why it is an absurd argument.
Is it "absurd" that the overcomers also shepherd the nations with an iron rod as their Lord does ?
Compare Revelation 2:26,27 and Revelation 19:15
That Christ has some co-kings to reign with Him, is that "absurd" ?
Or is it absurd that a remnant of saints from the whole body of believers might be raptured while many of their brethren are left on earth to be persecuted ? Do you find that absurd ?
I expect you to specifically point out your absudity in the man-child representing a corporate group of God's saints.
Yes; I do know this. I had even considered pointing it out in my last reply. Given your focus elsewhere on a physical rapture, it seemed odd to me that you would switch to a spiritual understanding for interpreting just one passage, going so far as to say it is the understanding on which 'the Bible puts more emphasis', despite your lack of mention of this understanding in reading any other passage.
It was not a switch overall. Let's let you do some of the work.
List for us the passages which you regard as having to do with rapture and I'll examine them.
I expect in your next post:
1.) The specific absurdities of seeing the man-child as a collective.
2.) A list of all the passages which you consider to be about rapture, so I can examine their contexts and "emphasis".
Standing along the sidelines saying "I am not persuaded" is cool for awhile. You've enjoyed that posture for quite a few posts. Now YOU take some initiative.
Give me a less "absurd" analysis of Revelation 12. Who or what then is signified in the Woman and the man-child which she brings forth ?
Yes, being watchful and ready for the time when your body is suddenly flung into the heavens. There is a lot of spirituality revolving around the rapture theology, but the rapture itself is essentially a physical event. You can't have a rapture without a physical movement of the body.
The watchfulness is more a watchfulness to be walking in Spirit as a Christian is exhorted to do throughout the New Testament.
I do not count this watchfulness to be a matter of gazing in to the sky. It is a beholding of the indwelling Christ. It is a living in His presence. It is a living by spiritually observing the index of His eyes in the heart of the regenerated Christian.
It is a watchfulness of beholding and reflecting the Lord in order to be transformed into His image:
"And the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is there is freedom.
But we all with unveiled face, beholding and reflecting like a mirror the glory of the Lord are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory even as from the Lord Spirit." (2 Cor. 3:17,18)
This is a spiritual watching which causes the observer to become like the dear One she or he is "beholding".
This is the "watching" to live as if the Lord Jesus may come at any moment. This is the watching unto being exercised in prayer:
"And receive the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which Spirit is the word of God, by means of all prayer and petition, praying at every time in spirit and WATCHING unto this in all perserverance ..." (Eph. 6:17,18a)
I have been assuming that you have some spiritual experience with walking with Christ the indwelling Holy Spirit. I tend to forget the names of some people on this forum.
Now come to think of it, I don't know if you can even understand anything involving the daily spiritual walk in the Holy Spirit.
I think I have been assuming that you are able to follow along with some principles of spiritual warfare. Maybe I am speaking with someone who has not even been regenerated to become a Christian yet.
I think I will just let you talk for a while. Tell me what is "absurd" about the man-child being a collective.
List for me also the passages you regard as speaking to the matter of a rapture. You've stated your skepticism about my faith plenty. Now tell me what you believe about these things.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Jon, posted 08-01-2011 3:23 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Jon, posted 08-01-2011 8:11 PM jaywill has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 330 (627275)
08-01-2011 8:11 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by jaywill
08-01-2011 5:19 PM


Re: Selective Rapture
I expect you to specifically point out your absudity in the man-child representing a corporate group of God's saints.
I may not be understanding you fully, but from where I am sitting, such an interpretation is absurd on its faceno explanation needed.
It seems clear to me that 'brethren' refers to fellow Christians, as it customarily does throughout the NT, and that the child is a completely unrelated entity.
Put a different way, to suppose the child and 'brethren' reference the same thing requires a reasoning that could just as well conclude that 'brethren' references the dragon, the woman, the angels, or any other entity mentioned in that chapter and others. In other words, I don't see the logic forcing me to conclude that 'child' and 'brethren' reference the same thing.
List for us the passages which you regard as having to do with rapture and I'll examine them.
I've already given some, for example, 1 Thessalonians. I'm not sure what good it would do for me to list passage after passage only to have you turn each one down as not being the proof you're talking about. The challenge I posed in the OP was for anyone who thought there was biblical mention of a pre-tribulation rapture to point to the places where it is so mentioned.
Like I already said, I'm coming at this with a pretty fresh pair of eyes. I don't know squat about which scriptures support which interpretations. That is why I've asked the questionand continue asking questionsabout where to find support for a pre-tribulation rapture.
The watchfulness is more a watchfulness to be walking in Spirit as a Christian is exhorted to do throughout the New Testament.
I do not count this watchfulness to be a matter of gazing in to the sky. It is a beholding of the indwelling Christ. It is a living in His presence. It is a living by spiritually observing the index of His eyes in the heart of the regenerated Christian.
I have no reason to disagree with you on this. It seems acceptable to read the watchfulness as being a matter of spiritual preparation. But that is just the watchfulness, then, that is spiritual; this doesn't address the rapture itself, an essentially physical event.
I have been assuming that you have some spiritual experience with walking with Christ the indwelling Holy Spirit.
I would have thought from our previous interactions that it would have been evident that I do not walk 'with Christ the indwelling Holy Spirit', let alone do I know what that even means.
Now come to think of it, I don't know if you can even understand anything involving the daily spiritual walk in the Holy Spirit.
I probably can't.
Maybe I am speaking with someone who has not even been regenerated to become a Christian yet.
I am not a Christian; but my ability to read a text and draw conclusions from it should not be dependent on my religious affiliation.
Now tell me what you believe about these things.
I don't believe anything about these things. To me they are just stories. Highly revered and hotly debated; but stories nonetheless.
Jon
Edited by Jon, : clarity
Edited by Jon, : quote fix

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by jaywill, posted 08-01-2011 5:19 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by jaywill, posted 08-01-2011 8:21 PM Jon has replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1907 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 27 of 330 (627279)
08-01-2011 8:21 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by Jon
08-01-2011 8:11 PM


Re: Selective Rapture
Put a different way, to suppose the child and 'brethren' reference the same thing requires a reasoning that could just as well conclude that 'brethren' references the dragon, the woman, the angels, or any other entity mentioned in that chapter and others.
Like I already said, I'm coming at this with a pretty fresh pair of eyes.
The "brethren" could just as well be the dragon ???
The dragon overcomes by the blood of the Lamb ?
The dragon who seeks to devour the man-child could conceivably also be the brethren who overcome Satan by the redemptive blood of the Lamb, Jesus Christ ?
You call that coming to the NT with a pair of "fresh eyes" ??
What was the word you used ? - ABSURD?
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Jon, posted 08-01-2011 8:11 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Jon, posted 08-01-2011 9:32 PM jaywill has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 330 (627286)
08-01-2011 9:32 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by jaywill
08-01-2011 8:21 PM


Re: Selective Rapture
Put a different way, to suppose the child and 'brethren' reference the same thing requires a reasoning that could just as well conclude that 'brethren' references the dragon, the woman, the angels, or any other entity mentioned in that chapter and others.
Like I already said, I'm coming at this with a pretty fresh pair of eyes.
The "brethren" could just as well be the dragon ???
The dragon overcomes by the blood of the Lamb ?
The dragon who seeks to devour the man-child could conceivably also be the brethren who overcome Satan by the redemptive blood of the Lamb, Jesus Christ ?
You call that coming to the NT with a pair of "fresh eyes" ??
What was the word you used ? - ABSURD?
This was my point. From my perspective, interpreting 'brethren' as a reference to the child can only be done on such loose terms as to also allow almost any other ridiculous link imaginable.
I see no reason for interpreting 'brethren' as a reference to the child. Your arguments have a long way to go for convincing me otherwise on the matter.
Jon

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by jaywill, posted 08-01-2011 8:21 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by jaywill, posted 08-02-2011 9:07 AM Jon has seen this message but not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1907 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 29 of 330 (627374)
08-02-2011 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Jon
08-01-2011 9:32 PM


Re: Selective Rapture
I see no reason for interpreting 'brethren' as a reference to the child. Your arguments have a long way to go for convincing me otherwise on the matter.
I think you are right. You have no faith that Jesus is Lord. You certainly don't know of the importance of Christ's redemption. You have no idea of the importance of the blood of the Lamb. You have no concept of overcoming by the word of the Christian testimony. And you've no clue what not loving the soul-life is all about.
Yet you come on like "curious George" to discuss the second coming of Christ, which you probably think is a bunch of huey, since you do not think Christ is the King, or Son of God, or the Messiah, or the Lord, or God incarnate as a man.
The principles of spiritual warfare mean ziltch to you. Regeneration, redemption, transformation, conformation, the Body of Christ are all things you probably regard as so much nonsense.
But curious George wants to come here and entertain his other skeptical buddies by starting a conversation on the Rapture.
You are right. I have a long, long way to go. Especially if when Revelation 12:9 EXPLICITLY tells us what the dragon represents, no need for guesswork -
"And the great dragon was cast down, the ancient serpent, he who is called the Devil and Satan, he who deceives the whole inhabited earth ..." (12:9)
If you confuse the Dragon with the "brethren" who overcame the accusing Satan by the blood of the Lamb, YEA you're right ! I got a LONG, LONG way to go.
I don't mind someone saying "Well, it really doesn't say that the brethren is the man-child." I can work with that. But for curious George to say, "Well the brethren in verse 10 could just as well be the Dragon who stands to devour the man-child" does not at all come across to me as one coming to the Bible with a pair of fresh eyes.
This sounds to me like a seasoned career skeptical unbeliever with a vested interest in demonstrating that there is no reason to take the Bible with any kind of spiritually serious attitude.
I think your true colors just came out and I remember who "Jon" is on this Forum. I don't think you've changed. Maybe you've gotten a little more skilled at playing with Christians.
You irk me a little. And I also feel kind of sorry for curious and unbelieving people like you.
I'll only say this. Concerning who the man-child is, most Bible students say that the mother in the symbolism is Israel and the child is Jesus. I usually go about to examine other evidence in the chapter to show these folks that that is not the best interpretation. It doesn't match up with the history suggested.
Take it as you wish. Good luck.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Jon, posted 08-01-2011 9:32 PM Jon has seen this message but not replied

  
xtseo 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4532 days)
Posts: 3
Joined: 09-24-2011


(1)
Message 30 of 330 (634943)
09-25-2011 12:23 AM


I like spam
Thanks a lot for providing individuals with remarkably memorable chance to read critical reviews from this site. It's usually so enjoyable and also packed within a good time for me personally and my office fellow workers to search your website at least 3 times a week to read the new guidance you will have. And definitely, we are usually impressed as considering the superb pointers you give. Selected 2 areas in this posting are unquestionably the finest we have all had
Edited by xtseo, : No reason given.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Reset signature to spam treated version and tweak subtitle.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024