“About The Great Tribulation”

[ross3421]

The dead in Christ rise first, followed by the rapture of the living (1 Thess 4:16-17).

Yes, this I was pointing out to Walls that the "taken" in Matt 24 cannot be believers due to the above.

[Walls]

Others have already put up an alternative. I don't need to give one to be able to see where yours is in error.
It is very simple though in Rev 16:15 we have the saints still needing patient endurance after the 6th vial is poured out.
So there are saints on the earth at that time and have not been raptured.


Sorry, but this is meant to dismantle my theory?
The statement is a sign is seen in heaven - you can use the word wonder if you prefer.
Any sign, or symbol used in prophecy speaks of something real.
The woman is the sign and signifies (why it is called a sign) something real. We agree that Israel is real.
So the woman is a symbol of Israel.
There is NO woman ACTUALLY or in REALITY in heaven - it is a SIGN.
So from that point on the rest of your refutation is baseless.
Mary is of Israel and is the one who gave birth to Jesus.
Notice verse 5 has her give birth to a child and the child is caught up to God. This speaks of Jesus, so clearly we have Israel being the one who gives birth to Jesus through the individual of Mary.
Now if you read Gen 37 you will know that Israel is expressed as sun and moon and stars.
However if you read Matthew you will find Magi who saw a sign in the stars which led them to the REALITY.

Israel is NEVER called a man UNLESS it is speaking of the individual who was known as Jacob. Every prophecy regarding Israel has her as a female.

So to reiterate, you have dismantled nothing because you have built a strawman of nothing.
The SIGN is in heaven and speaks of a REALITY on the earth.

OK. Go well brother.

[Walls]

Luke 21:36 Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

The fact is that to escape in the text does not explicitly denote a physical removal. This is, unfortunately, a convenient interpretation embraced by those seeking support for a pre-trib rapture. Backtrack to v-34, Jesus warned his adherents not to imbibe in drunkenness and the cares of this 'life' so that the coming events will not take them unawares. The fact is there's no amount of preparedness that will save anyone from the GT unless it is of God. So if God intended to remove the church from the coming events, He would have warned them about these things.

Furthermore, the reference to the cares of this life suggests that whether one dies in the GT or lives through it, the ultimate is the redemption of the soul. Whereas the case for an early rapture places emphasis on the saving of the flesh from suffering and death.

The same is true for 1 Thess 1:9 & Rev 3:10: Jesus promised to "keep" the faithfull from the hour of temptation that will come upon the world. Again, to keep should not be limited to a physical removal of the church. The 144,000 of Rev 14:1-7 are the same in Rev 7:4 and they are so not the raptured church that I see no point in addressing it further.

Now with regards to the trumpets, the idea of a "last trump" call outside the listed 7 trump calls in Revelation has been punted about. But without scriptural proof, I regard it as no more than conjecture. The problem with your case is that you (a) believe the church will rapture BEFORE the GT begins. (b) but the trump calls 1-7 (Rev 8:7 to Rev 11:15) shows the degrees of catastrophe that will be poured out on the earth at that time, otherwise called the wrath of the Lamb. At this time, the GT is in earnest.

Now, following your argument, let's say the last trump which precedes the rapture comes after the listed 1-7, do you not see the problem with your case? Because trumps 1-7 actually unleash the GT on earth!

I don't see any disagreement that a trumpet call often sounds to gather God's people. But with regards to the rapture, the question is, when? My argument stands that God's people are gathered after the GT, not before.



You cited Matt 24:40-41 where one is taken and the other left behind to support your view that some church are taken and some are left. I agreed with this but clarified that it will NOT HAPPEN before the GT. Yesterday, I used the figurative exchange between the rich man in hell and Lazarus in Abraham's bossom (Luke 16) to point out that there's no second chance for those who miss the rapture.

I used what Abraham told the rich man (when he pleaded that a messenger be sent to his brothers on earth to warn them so they don't end up in hell like him) that they [people of the earth] have Moses and the prophets and should listen to them (Luke 16:29) to show that once God's judgment comes, those who are against him will not be saved.

Your position predicates that some of those who are left behind will come to faith, isn't it? This is what I meant by 'second chance' having missed the opportunity to rapture with the church.

I'm not sure why didn't understand what I meant...nevertheless, my position is that the doctrine of people coming to faith after the rapture will contradict what Abraham told the rich man. Because to seek Christ after the rapture would suggest that the rapture represents a 'messenger' from heaven sent to convince the ungodly that God is real.



I am agreeable with all the passages you provided to show the church on earth during the GT. Our disagreement is where you divide the church and place ONE group in heaven as the raptured while the latter go through the Tribulation. My position is that the Church in full will go through the GT. Some will die but the majority will remain until the tail end of the GT when they are raptured.

Thank you for your answer. It is read and noted. Go well brother.

[Keraz]

It is Trivalee's opinion that:

1 Thess 4:15-17 is actually is NOT Jesus Christ' physical return to earth. That is a private meeting where the Lord comes to receive his faithful in the clouds [John 14:3] and takes them to heaven prior to his Glorious Return. We are told in Rev 1:7 that when he returns in the clouds every eye shall see him. However, it is clear that the wicked who are left behind after the rapture will not see this meeting in the clouds.

I know that FHG supports the idea that the cloud meeting is Christ' return to earth, but this is erroneous. As you pointed out, John saw the Church in heaven (Rev 19:7-9) after Jesus received them in the cloud for the marriage of the Lamb. Notice in v-8 that the church is now referred to as "wife" in contrast to its previous status of virgin betrothed to Christ (2 Cor 11:2).

In v-8 they were arrayed in white linen. In v-9 John was told that "these are those called unto the marriage supper [the millennium]. From v-11 we have the actual Return of the Lord and his retinue which include the church and his angels. Remember that in the resurrection, we will be like the angels (Matt 22:30). This is when every eye on earth sees the Lord return in Glory.

I wonder how you can cite Rev 19:7-9 which John clearly placed in heaven and yet say "there is no going to heaven?

1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 IS about the glorious Return of Jesus to earth. Verse 15 says: those of us who are still alive when He comes..... And verse 16...the Lord Himself will descend from heaven.... No mention of Him going back to heaven there, certainly not taking the Church there, as we are designated to be His priests and co-rulers on earth for the Millennium. Revelation 5:9-10.

All of Paul's prophecy from 1 Thess. 4:13-17, is about how Jesus will bring the souls of the martyrs with Him when He Returns.
Thinking that this passage is not the Return of Jesus for His Millennium reign, is flat out error and only made to suit a false doctrine.

Revelation 19:1-8, is in heaven, it is the souls of the martyrs who shout out their praises to God , as they are enabled to do by God and they receive the white robes, as per: Revelation 6:9-11
Proved by their thanks to God for taking vengeance on their murderers. Rev 19:2b

[randyk]

emecrus; I totally disagree with the scripturally unsupported fiction above.
There will be a Great Tribulation, all as described in Revelation; the 7 Trumpets and the 7 Bowls, culminating with Armageddon and Jesus' Return. It will occur in the last 3 1/2 years of this Church age, as stated in Daniel 9:27.....what has been decreed concerning the desolation, will be poured out. I do agree that the AC will rule the world then and it surely has not all happened yet.

There is no scripture that says the Jewish people will be restored as a nation. Other than what we see at present; in apostasy and facing Judgement.
Please do not say again they will be, unless you prove it with scripture.

To call it fiction, you need to expose the Scriptures I used as a fraud. You will not be able to do that. Luke 21 identifies the Great Tribulation as a period of great distress for the Jewish People, Christian and nonChristian, who lose their homeland to the Romans in 70 AD and have to wander through the NT age, with unfulfilled promises. The promises are in evidence in the promises God made to Abraham in Gen 12-17. And the promise of Israel's restoration is not only understood by the Jews and represented by Jesus, but Jesus' own disciples understood that this is how Jesus saw it, as implied in their question: "Is it at this time you will restore Israel?" (Acts 1.6).

Here is the fiction in your work, Keraz. You claim that Israel is now Christians, generally, no matter what nation they belong to. There is nothing in Scripture that indicates that, unless you read it into a verse here or there. Israel is Israel, and not Christians from other nations.

The error is in thinking Israel has been abandoned simply because the majority of them are not Christians now. But Paul puts that argument to rest by claiming that God *always* has a remnant of Jews who convert to Christianity, as a reminder of His eternal promise to Israel. In the end, the ungodly Jews will be destroyed, while those who convert, in the future, to Christianity will be saved. They may convert now, or they may convert in the future. But the promise of "national salvation" has more to do with the whole nation adopting a Christian constitution than with every citizen becoming a born again Christian.

The promise to Israel is their preservation, for all time. And they had lost their nationhood for a very long time, until the modern State of Israel was born. This is evidence of God's eternal patience and love, and evidence of His eternal faithfulness to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. There will always be faithful believers among the people of Israel. And the promise is that God will, once again, rebuild the State around those who are faithful, while judging the rest. The nation will, once again, become a nation built on godly principles. The State will adopt a Christian Constitution after Jesus returns.

[randyk]

Brother Randy,

From your exegesis its obvious you're a preterist. But my question the people who believes the great tribulation already took place in the 70AD is this...

What about the immediate following events the Lord promised will follow. Have they also been fulfilled?

No, brother, I'm not a preterist. I'm often thought that I am one, though, because I associate the Abomination of Desolation with the 70 AD destruction of Jerusalem.

However, the Early Church Fathers also identified the AoD as the destruction of Jerusalem (some of the Church Fathers--not all). It is therefore *not* preterism to believe this, since the ECF predated preterism.

The distinctives of preterism are not based exclusively on the view of the AoD. Rather, their eschatology is almost exclusively based on the historical interpretation of prophecy, nearly excluding all future prophecy. Partial Preterism, however, accepts the future coming of Christ.

By contrast, I believe the Olivet Discourse speaks of an age-long Great Tribulation of the Jewish People. Clearly, that is only partly fulfilled in history, and continues on into the future. I of course believe in Christ's 2nd Coming in the future. I also believe in a future application of the book of Revelation, a future reign of Antichrist, along with a future restoration of the nation Israel.

I am not a Dispensationalist, however. Like GE Ladd I am a postribulational Premillennialist. But I go to the Church Fathers for my view on the Olivet Discourse, along with some of my own exegesis. I only accept interpretations, however, that square with historical interpretations.

[Keraz]

Here is the fiction in your work, Keraz. You claim that Israel is now Christians, generally, no matter what nation they belong to. There is nothing in Scripture that indicates that, unless you read it into a verse here or there. Israel is Israel, and not Christians from other nations.

The error is in thinking Israel has been abandoned simply because the majority of them are not Christians now. But Paul puts that argument to rest by claiming that God *always* has a remnant of Jews who convert to Christianity, as a reminder of His eternal promise to Israel. In the end, the ungodly Jews will be destroyed, while those who convert, in the future, to Christianity will be saved. They may convert now, or they may convert in the future. But the promise of "national salvation" has more to do with the whole nation adopting a Christian constitution than with every citizen becoming a born again Christian.

Here we go again, making the Jewish State of Israel, to be as though they are the one and only Israel.
That this idea is quite wrong is proved by: …not all of Israel are truly Israel. Romans 8:6 and how we Gentiles are grafted into Israel, becoming Israelites of God.

Those believers who love the Lord and keep His commandments, that is: every faithful Christian person are designated by God to be Israelites. Galatians 6:16
The New Testament writings are clear: there is only one Israel, who are the only one Church, only one elect, be they Jew or Gentile by birth.

1/ Israel, the chosen people of God: Exodus 15:13, Deuteronomy 33:3, Ezra 3:11
Christians, chosen of God: Romans 9:25, Ephesians 5:1, Col. 3:12, 1 John 3:1, Rev. 7:9
2/ Israel, the children of God: Deut. 14:1, Isaiah 1:2-4, Isaiah 63:8, Hosea 11:1
Christians, the children of God: John 1:12, Romans 8:14-16, Galatians 4:5-7, 1 John 3:1
3/ Israel, the scattered sheep of God: Psalms 78:52, Isaiah 40:11, Jer. 23:1-4, Ezekiel 34:12
Christians, His sheep: among the nations: John 10:14-16, Hebrews 13:20, 1 Peter 2:25
4/ Israel, God’s household: Hebrews 3:5, 1 Chronicles 29:14-18
Christians are God’s household: Hebrews 3:6, Hebrews 10:20-21, I Timothy 3:15, 1 Cor.3:9
5/ Israel are the priests of God: Exodus 19:6, Deuteronomy 27:9
Christians are the priests of God: Isaiah 66:21, 1 Peter 2:5-9, Rev. 1:6, Revelation 5:10
6/ Israel is the bride of God: Isaiah 54:5-6, Jeremiah 2:2, Ezekiel 16:32, Hosea 1:2
Christians are the bride of Christ: Isaiah 62:4-5, 2 Corinthians 11:2, Ephesians 5:29-32
7/ Israel is the vine and the olive tree: Isaiah 5:7, Hosea 9:10, Hosea 14:6-7
Christians are the vine and the olive: Luke 20:16, Romans 11:24
8/ Israelites are the circumcised: Genesis 17:9-14, Judges 15:18
Christians are the ‘circumcised’: Romans 2:25-29, Philippians 3:3, Col. 2:11
9/ Israelites are the children of Abraham: 2 Chronicles 20:7, Psalms 105:5-6, Isaiah 41:8
Christians are the spiritual children of Abraham: Romans 4:13-18, Gal. 3:7& 29, John 4:23
10/ The Covenant is with Israel: Deut. 4:31, 2 Kings 17:34-36, Psalms 105:7-10
The New Covenant is with Christians: 1 Corinthians 11:25, Hebrews 8:6-10, Ezekiel 34:25

The above 10 proofs totally negate any argument that the Church and Israel are 2 separate entities.

[DurbanDude]

To call it fiction, you need to expose the Scriptures I used as a fraud. You will not be able to do that. Luke 21 identifies the Great Tribulation as a period of great distress for the Jewish People, Christian and nonChristian, who lose their homeland to the Romans in 70 AD and have to wander through the NT age, with unfulfilled promises. The promises are in evidence in the promises God made to Abraham in Gen 12-17. And the promise of Israel's restoration is not only understood by the Jews and represented by Jesus, but Jesus' own disciples understood that this is how Jesus saw it, as implied in their question: "Is it at this time you will restore Israel?" (Acts 1.6).

Here is the fiction in your work, Keraz. You claim that Israel is now Christians, generally, no matter what nation they belong to. There is nothing in Scripture that indicates that, unless you read it into a verse here or there. Israel is Israel, and not Christians from other nations.

The error is in thinking Israel has been abandoned simply because the majority of them are not Christians now. But Paul puts that argument to rest by claiming that God *always* has a remnant of Jews who convert to Christianity, as a reminder of His eternal promise to Israel. In the end, the ungodly Jews will be destroyed, while those who convert, in the future, to Christianity will be saved. They may convert now, or they may convert in the future. But the promise of "national salvation" has more to do with the whole nation adopting a Christian constitution than with every citizen becoming a born again Christian.

The promise to Israel is their preservation, for all time. And they had lost their nationhood for a very long time, until the modern State of Israel was born. This is evidence of God's eternal patience and love, and evidence of His eternal faithfulness to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. There will always be faithful believers among the people of Israel. And the promise is that God will, once again, rebuild the State around those who are faithful, while judging the rest. The nation will, once again, become a nation built on godly principles. The State will adopt a Christian Constitution after Jesus returns.

I agree that there is a period of great tribulation/distress for Israel since the Romans surrounded Jerusalem. Luke 21 is clear on that. But the greatest distress occurs later when we see the abomination according to Matthew 24.

In the Abomination=Army thread I gave multiple reasons why Rev 13 is a better match to the abomination and greatest tribulation than the Roman army was. It also makes sense that the final 3.5 year period of Satan's wrath in Rev 12 matches the greatest tribulation the world will know.

[DurbanDude]

However, the Early Church Fathers also identified the AoD as the destruction of Jerusalem (some of the Church Fathers--not all).
.

https://bibleforums.org/showthread.p...omination-Army

I said the following in that thread, clearly showing that the beast's 42 month reign of Rev 13 fits in better with the abomination than the Roman army:

To compare historical fulfilment of Matthew 24 to a future fulfilment:

HISTORIC FULFILMENT: A) abomination of a Roman army, not clearly matching Antiochus' examples of a statue of Zeus or a pig desecration
3.5 years, not clearly matching any period surrounding 70 AD
No significant deceiving Messianic signs and wonders in the first century
Gospel to all nations, not yet achieved in 70 AD
A second coming, not clearly seen in 70 AD

FUTURE FULFILMENT: B) Rev 13 image of the beast, matching well with Antiochus' Zeus image in the temple
3.5 years clearly stated as 42 months in Rev 13
Deceiving signs and wonders clearly described in Rev 13
A great victory of the gospel in Rev 12, the victory of our testimony, that is so great it causes Satan to fall from heaven for 3.5 years of final wrath
The beast comes to his end at the second coming, as described in 2 thess 2 and Rev 19, putting an end to the 42 month reign of the beast.

Of the two, in every area Rev 13 is a better fit to the fulfilment of Matthew 24 than 70 AD is. The length of period is firmer, the starting point is firmer, the persecution/greatest ever tribulation is a firmer fulfilment, the abomination of an image is clearer and better fits the Antiochus example. The victory of the gospel is clear in Rev 12 which occurs at the same timing at the beginning of the GT. The second coming is a better fit to the dramatic description of Matthew 24. And of course this all fits in with the post-trib timing of the rapture, described so well in... Matthew 24.

[ForHisglory]

1 Thess 4:15-17 is actually is NOT Jesus Christ' physical return to earth. That is a private meeting where the Lord comes to receive his faithful in the clouds [John 14:3] and takes them to heaven prior to his Glorious Return. We are told in Rev 1:7 that when he returns in the clouds every eye shall see him. However, it is clear that the wicked who are left behind after the rapture will not see this meeting in the clouds.

Actually 1 Thess 4:15 - 17 is indeed Jesus PHYSICAL return to the earth.
He ONLY makes one Second Coming.
When He leaves Heaven His destination is earth.
As for the wicked, they too will see Him.

I know that FHG supports the idea that the cloud meeting is Christ' return to earth, but this is erroneous. As you pointed out, John saw the Church in heaven (Rev 19:7-9) after Jesus received them in the cloud for the marriage of the Lamb. Notice in v-8 that the church is now referred to as "wife" in contrast to its previous status of virgin betrothed to Christ (2 Cor 11:2).

Actually Rev 19:7 - 9 there is NO church in heaven at this time.
Did you NOT notice it still speaks of the Bride making herself ready. A Bride does NOT make herself ready AFTER she is married but BEFORE.

In v-8 they were arrayed in white linen. In v-9 John was told that "these are those called unto the marriage supper [the millennium]. From v-11 we have the actual Return of the Lord and his retinue which include the church and his angels. Remember that in the resurrection, we will be like the angels (Matt 22:30). This is when every eye on earth sees the Lord return in Glory.

She is given righteous acts - where do you do such acts? On earth. This is NOT speaking about AFTER a resurrection, but about BEFORE.

I wonder how you can cite Rev 19:7-9 which John clearly placed in heaven and yet say "there is no going to heaven?

There is NO going to (the 3rd) heaven in Revelation. I don't say it will be impossible, but this creation God has made is our home.

[ForHisglory]

My understanding of the Beast's attack on Jerusalem is that it will occur AFTER those of Israel who have accepted Christ have fled into the desert. In reference to Daniel's people, this is what Dan 12:12 means - a window of escape which if ignored, those who chose to remain in the city (Jerusalem) will be slaughtered. This is confirmed when Zech 14:2 described the fall of Jerusalem to the Beast, the majority are killed, their wifes raped, etc.

Notice that it is the same rage driving the Beast as he realizes that Israel has fled for succour, that makes him turn on the Church (Rev 12:17) as well as Jerusalem itself. So they won't flee if they survive Jacob's trouble, rather those that have come to faith would have fled BEFORE Jacob's trouble is unleashed.

A few reasons why I disagree.
1) Daniel 12:11 & 12 has already occurred. Happened at the time when the Jews triumphed over the Seleucid army, gaining independence from A4E, and then the subsequent death of A4E.
2) Zech 14:2 - 5a doesn't speak of a majority, but 50% - around half.
3) This is the SAME amount Jesus speaks about in Luke 17:26 - 37 and Matthew 24:15 - 21, 36 - 41.

IOW the attack starts with the Beast killing the 2W in Jerusalem - I understand this will be in the Temple, and so with this "victory" the Beast will declare himself god in the temple - just as stated in 2 Thess 2:4. This is also seen in Revelation 11:
Rev 11:7* And when they have finished their testimony, the beast that rises from the bottomless pit will make war on them and conquer them and kill them,*
Rev 11:8* and their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city that symbolically is called Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord was crucified.*
Rev 11:9* For three and a half days some from the peoples and tribes and languages and nations will gaze at their dead bodies and refuse to let them be placed in a tomb,*
Rev 11:10* and those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them and make merry and exchange presents, because these two prophets had been a torment to those who dwell on the earth.*
Rev 11:11* But after the three and a half days a breath of life from God entered them, and they stood up on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them.*
Rev 11:12* Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, “Come up here!” And they went up to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies watched them.*
Rev 11:13* And at that hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell. Seven thousand people were killed in the earthquake, and the rest were terrified and gave glory to the God of heaven.

Now notice that there is a 3.5 day window while the world rejoices to celebrate, to get away. However I believe many will be unable to do so. The streets will be jammed etc.
However verse 13 speaks of a great earthquake, which matches that in Zech 14:5, and which is when those who give glory will then be able to flee.
Those who remain will face the wrath of Satan.

[Trivalee]

It is Trivalee's opinion that:


1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 IS about the glorious Return of Jesus to earth. Verse 15 says: those of us who are still alive when He comes..... And verse 16...the Lord Himself will descend from heaven.... No mention of Him going back to heaven there, certainly not taking the Church there, as we are designated to be His priests and co-rulers on earth for the Millennium. Revelation 5:9-10.

All of Paul's prophecy from 1 Thess. 4:13-17, is about how Jesus will bring the souls of the martyrs with Him when He Returns.
Thinking that this passage is not the Return of Jesus for His Millennium reign, is flat out error and only made to suit a false doctrine.

Revelation 19:1-8, is in heaven, it is the souls of the martyrs who shout out their praises to God , as they are enabled to do by God and they receive the white robes, as per: Revelation 6:9-11
Proved by their thanks to God for taking vengeance on their murderers. Rev 19:2b

OK, Keraz, I'm not surprised by your rebuttal.
So it is your opinion that while part of the church is on earth or meeting Jesus in the clouds, another group are made perfect with white linen in heaven (Rev 19:7-8)? By this assertion, you promote a schism in the body of Christ?

[Trivalee]

I agree that there is a period of great tribulation/distress for Israel since the Romans surrounded Jerusalem. Luke 21 is clear on that. But the greatest distress occurs later when we see the abomination according to Matthew 24.

In the Abomination=Army thread I gave multiple reasons why Rev 13 is a better match to the abomination and greatest tribulation than the Roman army was. It also makes sense that the final 3.5 year period of Satan's wrath in Rev 12 matches the greatest tribulation the world will know.

Agreed. The Great Tribulation is yet to come.

[Trivalee]

https://bibleforums.org/showthread.p...omination-Army

I said the following in that thread, clearly showing that the beast's 42 month reign of Rev 13 fits in better with the abomination than the Roman army:

To compare historical fulfilment of Matthew 24 to a future fulfilment:

HISTORIC FULFILMENT: A) abomination of a Roman army, not clearly matching Antiochus' examples of a statue of Zeus or a pig desecration
3.5 years, not clearly matching any period surrounding 70 AD
No significant deceiving Messianic signs and wonders in the first century
Gospel to all nations, not yet achieved in 70 AD
A second coming, not clearly seen in 70 AD

FUTURE FULFILMENT: B) Rev 13 image of the beast, matching well with Antiochus' Zeus image in the temple
3.5 years clearly stated as 42 months in Rev 13
Deceiving signs and wonders clearly described in Rev 13
A great victory of the gospel in Rev 12, the victory of our testimony, that is so great it causes Satan to fall from heaven for 3.5 years of final wrath
The beast comes to his end at the second coming, as described in 2 thess 2 and Rev 19, putting an end to the 42 month reign of the beast.

Of the two, in every area Rev 13 is a better fit to the fulfilment of Matthew 24 than 70 AD is. The length of period is firmer, the starting point is firmer, the persecution/greatest ever tribulation is a firmer fulfilment, the abomination of an image is clearer and better fits the Antiochus example. The victory of the gospel is clear in Rev 12 which occurs at the same timing at the beginning of the GT. The second coming is a better fit to the dramatic description of Matthew 24. And of course this all fits in with the post-trib timing of the rapture, described so well in... Matthew 24.

You nailed it. The Olivet Discourse is easy to understand once the reader realises that the primary focus was to prepare the faithful for His Glorious Return. But on the road towards his return, Jesus cited a number of events that will happen:

* wars and rumours of wars.
* false prophets out in force to deceive and mislead.
* Christians hated because of their faith.
* the Great Tribulation
* AoD
* False Christ's with their minions claiming he's in the desert or the secret room.

But Jesus warned the faithful not to be deceived by any of these because he will not return UNTIL the Gospel has been preached to all the world for a witness. And what does this mean, one might ask? So that on the judgment day, no one will claim not to have heard the Gospel.

And then from Matt 24:29 he began to explain the signs that will herald his coming. To ignore all these and make the theme of the discourse all about 70 AD is really unfortunate. Matter of fact (historically confirmed) 70 AD happens to be just one of the events on the road to his end times return.

[Trivalee]

Actually 1 Thess 4:15 - 17 is indeed Jesus PHYSICAL return to the earth.
He ONLY makes one Second Coming.
When He leaves Heaven His destination is earth.
As for the wicked, they too will see Him.

Really?
How do you fit in Rev 19:7-11 into your case? John clearly placed the church in heaven v-7-8 (marriage of the Lamb) and they were given white linen.
From v-11 John shows his Glorious return and who are the armies with him v-14? At least we agree that 1 Thess 4:15-17 occurs in the clouds and not the 3rd heaven, where God's Throne is. If Jesus was already coming with the church whom v7-8 says has wed the Lamb and now called "wife" and v9 says they are those called to the marriage supper ie the MK, is the church divided into two groups?

For your position to be tenable, you must prove that 1 Thess 4:15-17 occurs BEFORE Rev 19:7-11.

Actually Rev 19:7 - 9 there is NO church in heaven at this time.
Did you NOT notice it still speaks of the Bride making herself ready. A Bride does NOT make herself ready AFTER she is married but BEFORE.

The bride has made herself ready in heaven by means of the resurrection/rapture. Now, using your argument a bride is never called a wife UNTIL the marriage has taken place. And yet v7 says "his wife has made herself ready".

Rev 19:7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.
Rev 19:8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.

Rev 19:14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

I don't know how you read the above and conclude in good conscience that the church is not present? We find further confirmation in v-14. Notice the "armies" in plural, (meaning the angels and the saints) clothed in white linen?

She is given righteous acts - where do you do such acts? On earth. This is NOT speaking about AFTER a resurrection, but about BEFORE.

Elaborate what some of these 'righteous acts' are?

There is NO going to (the 3rd) heaven in Revelation. I don't say it will be impossible, but this creation God has made is our home.

I agree that earth is our ultimate home. However, Jesus takes the church to heaven after welcoming them in the clouds before returning with us and his angels to earth. Ever wondered why the Saints have to rise to the sky since Jesus is on his way down? Wouldn't it have been easier that he meet us on earth -- I mean the dead could have risen from the grave but remain on earth and the living change into their spiritual body and also remain on earth.