NEW UPDATED POLL: When is the rapture?

[Diggindeeper]

I just don't get how all of a sudden people are taking all these Old Testament prophecies from way back in the time the Jews were in captivity in Babylon....and trying to make those prophets of old sound like they are talking about a FUTURE time, 2,000 to 3,000 years down the road.

Don't people understand any more that the chosen people were in Babylonian captivity IN BABYLON and after a period of 480 years (if my memory serves me right!) the Jews already returned and, indeed, REBUILT Jerusalem AND the temple there! Nowadays, people try to make the OLD TESTAMENT prove the NEW, but that can't be done and it be correct. We MUST consider what's already happened! The New Testament proves the Old, not the other way around. All those things were written for 'our admonition' and for our examples.

Don't people know that Ezekiel, Zechariah, and so many other Old Testament prophets prophesied to things that are ALREADY DONE! Jerusalem WAS destroyed. Jerusalem was rebuilt. Too many are mixing up the events that are now history with things in John's Revelations.

[divaD]

I just don't get how all of a sudden people are taking all these Old Testament prophecies from way back in the time the Jews were in captivity in Babylon....and trying to make those prophets of old sound like they are talking about a FUTURE time, 2,000 to 3,000 years down the road.

Don't people understand any more that the chosen people were in Babylonian captivity IN BABYLON and after a period of 480 years (if my memory serves me right!) the Jews already returned and, indeed, REBUILT Jerusalem AND the temple there! Nowadays, people try to make the OLD TESTAMENT prove the NEW, but that can't be done and it be correct. We MUST consider what's already happened! The New Testament proves the Old, not the other way around. All those things were written for 'our admonition' and for our examples.

Don't people know that Ezekiel, Zechariah, and so many other Old Testament prophets prophesied to things that are ALREADY DONE! Jerusalem WAS destroyed. Jerusalem was rebuilt. Too many are mixing up the events that are now history with things in John's Revelations.

It's easy to say all of that. It's another thing to prove all of that. Some of it can be proven of course, but not all of what you said can.

Zechariah 14:5...and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.

Zechariah 14:12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.

In no way, shape or form have either of these verses ever happened yet. It doesn't taken a rocket scientist to figure that out.

Seriously...Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet...how can that be understood any other way but literal? If it was meaning spiritually, then where is the 2nd witness to that fact? Spiritually speaking, explain the concept of one's flesh consuming away while they stand upon their feet. But if you can't, then how can you claim that some of us are simply mixed up about things, when you can't even show how?

[thedee]

But that's the thing. Please think about this. He also compared His coming to Noah's day, right? In the flood no one was taken (Greek paralambanō) anywhere. They were killed right where they were.

They were taken away by the flood and killed.
"until the flood came and took them all away" - mat 24:39

No, the ones left behind to be killed are the wicked. The ones taken (paralambanō) are the ones taken (paralambanō) up to meet the Lord in the air

No, it is clear from Luke that the ones taken are the ones who's body is going to be with the birds:
"And they answered and said to Him, Where, Lord? So He said to them, Wherever the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together." - Luke 17:37

They asked the Lord where the ones who were going to be taken going to be taken to.... the answer the Lord gave was in verse 37. The vultures will feed on the bodies of the ones taken and killed. The same is said in Revelation 19:21.

It would make no sense to ask "Where, Lord" of the ones who are left behind.

Both. I don't believe they were just asking where the ones taken would be taken to or just asking where the ones left would be left. I believe they were asking where this event of one being taken and one being left would occur. The birds gathering refers to the wicked but that says nothing about whether or not they are the ones taken or left.

I am not sure why they would be asking where the event is going to occur but it seems more logic to ask where those who are taken going to be taken to.

But your scenario does not fit the definition for the Greek word translated as "taken". In order to be "taken" one has to be taken from one place to another. Were the wicked who were killed in the flood taken from one place to another? No! They were killed right where they are. They were then washed away by the flood but that isn't what the word "paralambanō" would be used to refer to, that is what the word "airō" was used to refer to.

So in Matthew 24:31 it uses the word "gather" and the greek is episynagō but in 1Thes4:17 it uses the word "caught up" and the greek is harpazo. But you insist they are the same thing even tho different greek words are used? This is the argument that you are using for "taken".

[Diggindeeper]

It's easy to say all of that. It's another thing to prove all of that. Some of it can be proven of course, but not all of what you said can.

Zechariah 14:5...and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.

Zechariah 14:12 And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.

In no way, shape or form have either of these verses ever happened yet. It doesn't taken a rocket scientist to figure that out.

Seriously...Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet...how can that be understood any other way but literal? If it was meaning spiritually, then where is the 2nd witness to that fact? Spiritually speaking, explain the concept of one's flesh consuming away while they stand upon their feet. But if you can't, then how can you claim that some of us are simply mixed up about things, when you can't even show how?

DivaD, yes there are a few passages where those saints of old were able to see ahead, like Job, when he said:

Job 19:26
And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:

Job was able to see clear to the end of time! To see past the time that maggets would eat up his old body that would be buried and he no longer was living...he was able to know, somehow, that YET in his flesh he would see God!

I see various times when the saints of old were able to SEE what was to be, at the end. But so many today really do confuse many things that HAVE already happened with what will happen. At the finish line.

Dear Lord, if we could only see that clearly........... And be able to speak with the comprehension and clarity that they spoke! To KNOW what we're talking about...And not confuse things, and put them where those saints of old did not intend.

[John146]

Maybe I need to say in precise terms what I see clearly in scripture. Okay...Christ Jesus said that his return would be in this manner:

There will only be 2 groups. The ones who are alive and remain alive and who are 'in him' who are 'gathered together with him', or there will be the sinners. The first group will not go to be with him until the dead in Christ rise FIRST. They SHALL rise first. Then those who are alive and 'found to be ABIDING IN HIM will rise and join them in the air, where they will all be with him.

The second group on earth are the unrighteous, the sinners, the wicked...the ONLY thing that 'takes' them is DESTRUCTION, as it was in the day of Noah and the flood. The ONLY thing that 'takes' them (or I could say overtakes them) is DESTRUCTION. Just as it was in the days of Noah. The wicked do not survive. They are destroyed by fire this time rather than by water!

Actually, there is no one left on this OLD earth to enter any so called 'millenenium', because that so-called 'one thousand years' is now...the time between the resurrection and his second coming.

So, the ones 'taken' are either 'taken' by destruction (fire) or rise to join the dead in Christ where they shall EVER be with the Lord. No one would be left to 'repopulate' a future '1,000' years on this old earth. If people can ever understand that supposed 'one thousand years' is no more literal than 'God own the cattle on 'a thousand' hills, or that 'God's mercy shall endure to 'a thousand' generations.

The term 'millennium' kingdom is a man-made term that people offer as proof of a coming '1,000' year reign of Christ.

So, since I see NO coming 'millennium kingdom', its reasonable to me that at the end, EVERYONE is either taken to be with him for eternity or taken by destruction by fire. That so-called '1,000 years' is simply a time 'of unknown, long' duration. Not a precise '1,000 years' as it seems.

I hope this makes it clear as to my belief.

Your contention is the same as mine even though I have "taken" a firm stance on who exactly is taken and who is left. Either way, we both believe that all people are in only 2 groups and one of those groups will be caught up to Christ in the air at His coming and the other group will all be destroyed, which is exactly what Christ taught in Matt 24:37-39. There were only 2 groups back then in Noah's day. One group survived and the other group was destroyed. Jesus said it will be just like that when He returns. Everyone will be either saved or lost with the lost all being destroyed. Since all believers will be changed from mortal to immortal at that point that doesn't leave any mortals to populate a supposed earthly millennial kingdom. But some try to create a 3rd group that is neither wicked nor righteous who somehow survive His coming. Jesus never mentioned such a group so that can't be true. Anyway, we're in agreement on this, overall, even if our understanding of what one being taken and one being left is not exactly the same.

[John146]

They were taken away by the flood and killed.
"until the flood came and took them all away" - mat 24:39

LOL. I have to assume that you are just refusing to take into consideration the fact that the Greek word translated as "took" there is not the same Greek word translated as "taken" in Matt 24:40-41. Two different words with two different definitions and yet you somehow think they are synonyms. So be it.

No, it is clear from Luke that the ones taken are the ones who's body is going to be with the birds:
"And they answered and said to Him, Where, Lord? So He said to them, Wherever the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together." - Luke 17:37

They asked the Lord where the ones who were going to be taken going to be taken to.... the answer the Lord gave was in verse 37. The vultures will feed on the bodies of the ones taken and killed. The same is said in Revelation 19:21.

It would make no sense to ask "Where, Lord" of the ones who are left behind.

How does this make any sense? Where exactly would the vultures be and why would the wicked need to be taken to them in order to be killed and for the birds to feast on them? This is what neither you nor Jerry have explained up to this point. In the case of the flood were the wicked taken from one place to another to be killed? No. They were each killed right where they were, wherever that might have been at the time.

I am not sure why they would be asking where the event is going to occur

Jesus didn't say where it would occur so it makes sense to me that the disciples would wonder about that.

but it seems more logic to ask where those who are taken going to be taken to.

Why would the wicked need to be taken anywhere in order to be killed? Please answer that question. The wicked don't need to be taken anywhere to be killed and have the birds feast on them. They would be killed right where they were without any need of being taken anywhere. I wish you would address that.

So in Matthew 24:31 it uses the word "gather" and the greek is episynagō but in 1Thes4:17 it uses the word "caught up" and the greek is harpazo. But you insist they are the same thing even tho different greek words are used?

In that case those are two words that clearly can mean similar things since when we are caught up to Him we will all be gathered together when we meet Him together in the air. In 2 Thess 2:1 Paul refers to the rapture as "our gathering together unto Him". But can you show that the Greek words airō and paralambanō can have similar meanings? I don't believe you can. Those are two different words with two entirely different meanings and yet you are trying to say they both mean the same thing.

[thedee]

Why would the wicked need to be taken anywhere in order to be killed? Please answer that question. The wicked don't need to be taken anywhere to be killed and have the birds feast on them. They would be killed right where they were without any need of being taken anywhere. I wish you would address that.

To answer that question then I have to ask a question. When the scripture state that the flood came and took them all away where did the flood take them?

[divaD]

But so many today really do confuse many things that HAVE already happened with what will happen. At the finish line.

I agree to a certain extent. But I wouldn't go as far as to say that that is always the case. That's where logic has to play a roll in things. One has to ask themselves, according to what this text or that text says, is it more logical that this has already been fulfilled, or is it more logical that it is yet to be fulfilled? I just don't know what all of the fuss is about. It's quite clear, as pertaining to Jesus, there are two comings. So why can't some of the prophesies be dealing with His first coming, and other prophesies be dealing with His 2nd coming? Why must all of the prophesies only be dealing with His first coming?

[John146]

To answer that question then I have to ask a question. When the scripture state that the flood came and took them all away where did the flood take them?

In the sense of the Greek word airo it took them to their death. But my question has nothing to do with being taken in that sense it has to do with being taken in the sense of the Greek word paralambano (the word translated as "taken" in Matt 24:40-41). And in that sense the flood didn't take them anywhere specifically. It certainly didn't take them to some specific place where vultures gather since there is no such place. Do you understand that there is no actual specific place where vultures gather and that they just gather wherever there happens to be a dead body? The way you speak about this it seems like you think there's actually some specific place where vultures go to gather.

[thedee]

In the sense of the Greek word airo it took them to their death. But my question has nothing to do with being taken in that sense it has to do with being taken in the sense of the Greek word paralambano (the word translated as "taken" in Matt 24:40-41). And in that sense the flood didn't take them anywhere specifically. It certainly didn't take them to some specific place where vultures gather since there is no such place. Do you understand that there is no actual specific place where vultures gather and that they just gather wherever there happens to be a dead body? The way you speak about this it seems like you think there's actually some specific place where vultures go to gather.

In the same way as the flood came and took the wicked away, it will be the same way when Christ returns with all His saints. The end of Revelation 19 explains this in more detail. I am thinking also that Ez 39:17-20 is speaking of the same thing. Yet I am not 100 percent sure on that one.

Wherever they are killed, the vultures will be there feasting on their dead bodies. So in the same sense as the flood came and took them all away (wicked) as told in Matthew 24 and Luke 17, so it will be in like manner at the Second Coming.

I believe the Second Coming is about executing judgement and not about catching away His bride. Also read (Matthew 13:41-43).

[divaD]

In the same way as the flood came and took the wicked away, it will be the same way when Christ returns with all His saints. The end of Revelation 19 explains this in more detail. I am thinking also that Ez 39:17-20 is speaking of the same thing. Yet I am not 100 percent sure on that one.

Wherever they are killed, the vultures will be there feasting on their dead bodies. So in the same sense as the flood came and took them all away (wicked) as told in Matthew 24 and Luke 17, so it will be in like manner at the Second Coming.

Notice how you're contradicting yourself tho. If all the saints are with Christ, per Rev 19, then that means the ones that become bird food, they got left, and not taken. The context in Luke 17 is dealing with where the body is, there the vultures are gathered. The fact that the saints would be with Christ, they could not be left or remaining, in order to become bird food like those that are left behind.

[John146]

In the same way as the flood came and took the wicked away, it will be the same way when Christ returns with all His saints. The end of Revelation 19 explains this in more detail. I am thinking also that Ez 39:17-20 is speaking of the same thing. Yet I am not 100 percent sure on that one.

Wherever they are killed, the vultures will be there feasting on their dead bodies.

Right. So, would they need to be taken to where the vultures are for that to occur or would the vultures go to where they are? Do you see what I'm saying? Once again, let me point out that the wicked will not be taken (paralambano) anywhere at Christ's return! Yet, you try to say they will be. You are not accepting the meaning of the Greek word from which the English word "taken" in Matt 24:40-41 was translated, IMO. Instead, you are trying to insist that the Greek word airo mean exactly the same thing as the Greek word paralambano. But they don't mean the same thing. I'm not sure why you can't understand that.

So in the same sense as the flood came and took them all away (wicked) as told in Matthew 24 and Luke 17, so it will be in like manner at the Second Coming.

That is true in the sense of how the word airo is used in Matt 24:39 but not in the sense of how the word paralambano is used in Matt 24:40-41.

I believe the Second Coming is about executing judgement and not about catching away His bride. Also read (Matthew 13:41-43).

It is about both.

[John146]

Notice how you're contradicting yourself tho. If all the saints are with Christ, per Rev 19, then that means the ones that become bird food, they got left, and not taken. The context in Luke 17 is dealing with where the body is, there the vultures are gathered. The fact that the saints would be with Christ, they could not be left or remaining, in order to become bird food like those that are left behind.

She didn't mention them but pre-tribs believe that tribulation saints (those who became believers during the tribulation) will be the ones who populate the supposed earthly millennial kingdom. So, apparently, tribulation saints would not be Christ's saints (according to pre-trib), which would not make any sense.

[thedee]

Notice how you're contradicting yourself tho. If all the saints are with Christ, per Rev 19, then that means the ones that become bird food, they got left, and not taken. The context in Luke 17 is dealing with where the body is, there the vultures are gathered. The fact that the saints would be with Christ, they could not be left or remaining, in order to become bird food like those that are left behind.

No. You have those who made it though the tribulation period. You can see some of these in Revelation 7. For example there will be a remnant of the Jews who will make it though this tribulation period.

[thedee]

Right. So, would they need to be taken to where the vultures are for that to occur or would the vultures go to where they are? Do you see what I'm saying? Once again, let me point out that the wicked will not be taken (paralambano) anywhere at Christ's return! Yet, you try to say they will be. You are not accepting the meaning of the Greek word from which the English word "taken" in Matt 24:40-41 was translated, IMO. Instead, you are trying to insist that the Greek word airo mean exactly the same thing as the Greek word paralambano. But they don't mean the same thing. I'm not sure why you can't understand that.

No. This is not the way I see it. The saved at this time will not be caught up in the air being they are going to be the ones who are to populate in the millennium. I believe this is speaking of the same as Matthew 13:41-43.

It is about both.

I don't believe it is about both. This is not the time of the catching up in the air to be with the Lord. If that was the case then there would be nobody to populate the millennium. But then again if you don't believe in the literal 1000 years then that is a whole different story.