Pre-Trib Raptured Where???

[Walls]

Ok. But everyone outside the ark at the wicked. Which include those of the church who did not overcome. Now who does Noah represent, the overcomers of the church or the 144,000. I would say the latter but requardless Noah did end up dying.

I answered concerning Luke 17. Who mentioned the 144,000? Let us settle who is threatened in Luke 17 and then we can move anywhere you choose.

I refer you to my posting #5 which carries more arguments, since my opposers could not prove their point except they brought Matthew 24 into the discussion. But this is to pit one verses against another - a sure sign they call the Bible into question. The brother who wrote the OP used Luke 17. Let us stay there and see what the words are, what the grammar is, and what the context is. The CONTEXT of the "days of Noah" and the "days of Lot" POINT at "ALL who were destroyed".

Then the CONTEXT changes in verse 33. It addresses those who must be prepared to lose their "soul-lives". And if you want to be one of those who does not interpret the Bible "privately", and who interprets scripture with scripture, and who wants to find out WHO the Lord wanted that they lose their "soul-life", why, just read Matthew 10:39, 16:25, Mark 8:35-37, Luke 9:24-25 and John 12:25.

THEY ARE, IN EVERY CASE, DISCIPLES!

The threat of JUDGMENT is leveled at the people of the world. The threat of being LEFT where the carcass is, is leveled at DISCIPLES.

[DavePeace]

Yes. But who does this prophecy aim at? The Church? No! The people of the world!

Your point is moot, simply because Jesus is warning His Church of how the end will be.

[DavePeace]

Nothing hurts. We discuss the meaning of language within its context and within the laws of grammar.

You, like the others, have not answered my objections. I know a lot was written, but you can say I am incorrect a thousand times, but if you bring no counter, we will just have to agree to disagree. Your argument in the OP was based on three things:

1. The meaning of "losing one's soul-life"
2. The meaning of "airo" ("taken" in judgement) verses "paralambano" ("taken" as an intimate companion)
3. Who was "Taken" and Who was "Left" and the PLACE

1. I showed that losing one's soul-life is not the same as losing one's physical life.
2. I showed that those "taken" in Luke 17:33-37 were "TAKEN as intimate companions"
3. I showed that those "Taken as intimate companions" were Believers, and those "Left" were "LEFT" in the same place as the slaughter of men and animals

This ... is what you have to answer. Your OPINION is valuable. Your textual and contextual argument however is what wins and convinces.

I was discussing context with you; the 'taken' idea in Luke 17 is answered by Jesus when His disciples asked Him, "Where, Lord?" regarding where those first ones would be 'taken' to. His answer is what you must turn to in order to define His meaning of being 'taken' there.

There's no special grammatical case with that, except the one you're likely attempting to create.

[DavePeace]

....

Just so you know, language is to transmit ideas. God gave it, and these rules endure that the correct idea is given. If those "taken" in Judgement is the word "airo" - snatched away in severe judgement" like our sins in John 1:29, then we must honor it. If the word "taken" like a wife on a journey is "paralambano", we must honor it. When men write a contract, they hire the best lawyers they can afford to see that the LANGUAGE contains no loop holes. How much more has the Great God of the universe written His Oracles so as to transmit the correct idea.

And just so you... know, when our Lord Jesus gives an answer to a question His disciples ask Him, we are to understand it. Often He gives it in a parable or metaphor though, and Luke 17:37 is one such example. Language also deals with idioms and expressions too, so it is not always about the definition of a single word. Most often word definitions won't explain the meaning behind the metaphor. It's about understanding how He applied that metaphor of being taken like a dead 'carcase' to wheresoever the eagles are gathered. That should be your goal, i.e., to understand how He meant being taken like a dead 'carcase' to where the eagles are gathered.

And if you still cannot understand, then it has to be that it is not given for you to know it, otherwise you would easily get His metaphor there within His answer.

[randyk]

I subscribe to the *historical approach* to the Olivet Discourse, but we agree that Pretrib Rapture belief is *not* in the discussion! So let's consider how I view the Postrib perspective in this Discourse.

1) The day of Christ's Coming is used as a model for how the generation of Jesus was supposed to operate, if indeed they were disciples of him. It is to be a day of judgment, like Noah, like Lot. So men in Jesus' generation had to anticipate judgment, which could only be prepared for by responding to Jesus. In fact, judgment did come upon that very generation, and only those who responded to Jesus were able to escape that judgment. The judgment was not coming for them!

2) The one taken and the one left are representative of an invasion and deportation. Israel had been through the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities. And this language suggests the "taken" are being either deported or killed. When Jesus is asked where it would be that the Jews would be captured and taken away, he indicates that they are captured in a place where eagles gather. This means that the deportation will begin at a place where the Jews are initially invaded, where the hostile forces gather.

Those left represent those who survive, to remain as a remnant, signifying that Israel continues to have a future hope. The comparison of the taken and left to the previous example of the Flood taking away the wicked sets the precedent. The wicked are taken away and judged, whereas those who remain alive are spared. It doesn't matter what Greek words are used. The context determines the meaning. The wicked are "taken," and the righteous are "spared."

I would just add that the "gathering of eagles" had a special meaning in the context of Jesus' generation. When Jesus anticipated the approaching destruction of the temple he was indicating that false prophets would mislead the Jews, and that the city of Jerusalem will actually be destroyed--the temple would fall. The "eagles" that were gathered were Roman troops who carried an eagle standard--the eagle was worshiped. They gathered not to spare Israel, nor to be defeated by the Jews. Rather, they came to destroy Israel, and then to deport others.

This related to the 2nd Coming because Jesus had already established that the coming of the Kingdom would bring judgment. Jesus was saying that in the same way his own generation would experience judgment, and not deliverance. Only those who respond to him would be safe in the eyes of God.

[Walls]

Your point is moot, simply because Jesus is warning His Church of how the end will be.

Correct. Now all we have to do is discover who the TWO are, why only ONE is taken, and why the OTHER is left, where the One is taken to, and where the OTHER is left.? THREE People are in view in Luke 17:20-37.

1. Those who will be destroyed like the masses where at Noah and Lot's time
2. Those who are "taken as intimate companions"
3. Those who are "LEFT"

So now I ask you to give exposition, in context, and being accurate with the words and their meaning, to show

1. WHO are those, who like the people at Noah's and Lot's time, "were ALL destroyed"?
2. WHO are commanded to lose their soul life BUT are LEFT behind - and where?
3. WHO are those commanded to lose their soul life and who are "taken as intimate companions" - and where?

Thanks brother.

The Type of Lot and his wife are shown to build a picture. That I explained. Now I give you another one. In Matthew 17 our Lord scaled the Mount of Transfiguration. The setting is as follows.

• A HIGH place "apart" where the Lord Jesus is in glory
• A HIGH place where a raptured saint is with Jesus - Elijah
• A HIGH place where a resurrected saint is with Jesus - Moses (seeing as his body was fought for - Jude 1:9)
• A HIGH place where THREE of TWELVE were "taken" (paralambano) as companions of Jesus - Peter, James and John
• A LOW place where there were Jews, Samaritans and Gentiles
• A LOW place where demons could not be overcome
• A LOW place were NINE disciples are "LEFT"
• A LOW place where Jesus called the NINE disciples, because of their impotence to cast out the demon, "... O faithless and perverse generation, ... ."

The picture clear. Our Lord Jesus, ON HIGH and IN GLORY, "TAKES" as companions, ON HIGH, ONE of every FOUR, and LEAVES the other THREE in low place where (i) demons overcome Christians because they have no faith, (ii) they do not pray enough and (iii) they do not fast enough. Also present, and ALSO "LEFT" were the "Multitude". So, again, we have the THREE Peoples.

1. The Multitude who would, in a few short days, murder our Lord Jesus - a multitude who had demons
2. The DISCIPLES, the bulk of them (75%), who were LEFT at the low place and overcome by the demon
3. The DISCIPLES, the minority of them (25%), who were TAKEN as companions to a HIGH PLACE to meet our Lord in glory with Elijah, a living raptured believer, and Moses, a once dead believer who is now resurrected.

This picture, just like that of Lot, shows a Rapture of SOME Christians to a HIGH PLACE where our Lord is in glory with raptured and resurrected SERVANTS, and with SOME DISCIPLES "TAKEN" as companions, while the rest of the DISCIPLES are left below with those who are about to be judged.

Luke 17:33-37 shows a SELECT Rapture of SOME to avoid the Great Tribulation and slaughter.

[Walls]

And just so you... know, when our Lord Jesus gives an answer to a question His disciples ask Him, we are to understand it. Often He gives it in a parable or metaphor though, and Luke 17:37 is one such example. Language also deals with idioms and expressions too, so it is not always about the definition of a single word. Most often word definitions won't explain the meaning behind the metaphor. It's about understanding how He applied that metaphor of being taken like a dead 'carcase' to wheresoever the eagles are gathered. That should be your goal, i.e., to understand how He meant being taken like a dead 'carcase' to where the eagles are gathered.

And if you still cannot understand, then it has to be that it is not given for you to know it, otherwise you would easily get His metaphor there within His answer.

Metaphors are part of our language, and metaphors are used in the Bible. But where is the metaphor here? A Metaphor is defined as;

1. a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable.
2. a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else.

The only metaphor I can see is the "body" in verse 37. The Lord was real, His disciples were real, the multitudes under threat of judgement are real. The TWO in the field and at the mill are real, the ONE taken is real. The one left is real. The vultures are real. There is no metaphor except maybe the "body" (or carcass as it is in Matthew 24:28). So, for all intents and purposes, the whole text is LITERAL. How shall we understand this then. By being true to the GRAMMAR!

The sentences present us with ONE TAKEN somewhere, and ONE LEFT somewhere. Here is the text of Luke 17:35-37 (KJV);

35 "Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
36 Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
37 And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord? And he said unto them, Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together."

The word "LEFT" is the last mentioned event in BOTH sentences. Thus, the "Where Lord?" in verse 37 pertains to where they were LEFT. Those who are LEFT are LEFT in the district of the slaughter and of the attendant vultures. Try this. Ephesians 2:8 says;

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:"

According to the GRAMMAR, is "saved" an GIFT of God, or is "FAITH" a gift of God? According to the grammar the "Gift of God" pertains to the last mentioned subject - FAITH. Again, let us see:

"The drowning man was saved by a floating ring, which was thrown to him by a young boy." Here, it is clear that the young boy did not save the man. The floating ring saved the man. And the actions of the young boy pertain to the floating ring not to the "salvation".

Thus, IT IS THOSE "LEFT" WHO MUST ABIDE BY THE "BODY" - THE CARCASS - THE RESULTS OF A GREAT SLAUGHTER. Abraham was missing when the inhabitants of Sodom were incinerated. But Lot's wife WAS LEFT In the place of a great slaughter.

[ForHisglory]

The brother addressed the contents and context of Luke 17. So my answer was about Luke 17. That there are parallels and even identical themes to Matthew 24 and 25 is given, but do I need to divert the OP away from Luke 17 to answer it? Am I called to task because I answered his objection solely from the text he chose? The "abuse" objected to in the OP revolved around three points in Luke 17:

1. The preparedness of Christians to die physically
2. The meaning of word "taken"
3. The meaning of the Type in Lot and his wife.

These I answered, and came to a conclusion. These arguments you have avoided. You have not addressed one of my points. Your objection is to assume that I cannot connect Luke 17 with Matthew 24 - something that I did not need to do. But now I will address your statement;

Actually if you do NOT deal with the CONTEXT of what is stated then you can come to all sorts of conclusions based on the usage of a word in a different CONTEXT.
You highlighted the usage of the word implying an intimacy, and thus translated that into something positive. I showed that it may be intimate, but that is not necessarily positive. Rape is intimate, as is the one who leads you by the hand to your execution.

The meaning of the word "taken" then IS not what you claimed. I dealt with that.
The issue is NOT about the preparedness of Christians to die physically, because the challenge is to flee. This IS about your physical life, and not simply your soul. In fact throughout the Bible the word soul often simply means your being, yourself as a person and is not limited to what is inside you.

Lot's wife is an example because she turned back. Yet what Jesus says repeatedly is do NOT turn back. This is a physical returning for your cloak or for your goods. You may argue you want the things that life had provided you with, which probably has truth in it, but the basic CONTEXT is that of physical action.

The questions posed in Matthew 24:3 are;

1. Tell us, when shall these things be?
2. and what shall be the sign of thy coming?
3. and (what shall be the sign) of the end of the age?

The Jews 24:1-31
At the time of our Lord's Second Coming there will be THREE peoples on earth. (i) The Nations, (ii) The Nation of Israel, and (iii) the Believers (or, the Church). Unlike Mark and Luke, Matthew answers these questions in regard to ALL THREE peoples. From Matthew 24:1 to 31, all things are Jewish. From the Temple to false Christ's, to being hated worldwide, to Jerusalem, to Judea, to Daniel a Jewish prophet prophesying to "Daniel's People" - the Jews, and the Abomination of Desolation, even to Christ's landing on earth which is predicted to be on Mount of Olives, everything is about the Jews. Since there is no Rapture for the Jews, they are advised by the Lord Jesus that when they see what Daniel prophesied happen in Jerusalem of Judea, they must flee to the mountains in great haste.

I see little point in dealing with this at the moment as it expands the OP.
I referred to Matt 24 as it related to the OP, but now you are making additional claims.
Many of which I disagree with, such as Matt 24:1 - 31 is ALL about the Jews. Just for example verses 9 - 14 is NOT about the Jews, but about the Church. It is about the proclamation of the gospel to the whole world.

[Walls]

Actually if you do NOT deal with the CONTEXT of what is stated then you can come to all sorts of conclusions based on the usage of a word in a different CONTEXT.
You highlighted the usage of the word implying an intimacy, and thus translated that into something positive. I showed that it may be intimate, but that is not necessarily positive. Rape is intimate, as is the one who leads you by the hand to your execution.

The meaning of the word "taken" then IS not what you claimed. I dealt with that.
The issue is NOT about the preparedness of Christians to die physically, because the challenge is to flee. This IS about your physical life, and not simply your soul. In fact throughout the Bible the word soul often simply means your being, yourself as a person and is not limited to what is inside you.

We discuss the word "taken" in Luke 17:35 and 36. I showed the context to be those in verse 33 who are required to lose their soul-life as explained in postings #2, #5 and #16. Even if you think that being raped is "taken as an intimate companion", (which many would dispute), it does not come near meaning that here WITHIN the CONTEXT of those who must lose their soul-life. It is CONTRASTED with those who are "Left" in a district of slaughter and vultures. Your objection in posting #4 was out of Zechariah 14:2 where a city was "taken". You pointedly avoided my examples of Joseph "taking" a wife on a journey to show how the Holy Spirit uses this word, and introduced an Hebrew word which means; "to catch (in a net, trap or pit); generally to capture or occupy;" (Strong's Greek & Hebrew Dictionary). And then intimated that "intimate" in "paralambano" could mean "rape". But it is how SCRIPTURE uses the word that counts.

If you make the soul-life and physical life equivalent, by all means go ahead. But scripture makes a vast difference. I showed this difference in Matthew 10:28 - to which you did not object. May the reader judge if the soul and the body are the same. And let them start with the SOUL our Lord Jesus, Who, when sundered form the BODY in death, went to Hades in the heart of the earth (Matt.12:40; Act.2:31), while His BODY languished less than a kilometer away ON THE SURFACE of the earth. Your lumping them together is the kind of accuracy is not conducive to getting to the bottom of a matter. How can we ever get to the bottom of this grand and complicated Book if we are so loose?

And the issue we discuss is NOT whether to FLEE or not. It is WHO is "TAKEN" and who is "LEFT", and WHERE? The past participle "taken" implies a force from a second party. And if that force is the "Son of man" TAKING ("paralambano") those He is intimate with on a journey, THEN a RAPTURE in its truest sense occurs ("Harpadzo" - "caught away").

Lot's wife is an example because she turned back. Yet what Jesus says repeatedly is do NOT turn back. This is a physical returning for your cloak or for your goods. You may argue you want the things that life had provided you with, which probably has truth in it, but the basic CONTEXT is that of physical action.

My friend, how is it that you can warn other brothers of CONTEXT and in the same breath say that Lot's wife TURNED BACK. She DID NOT TURN BACK. She "LOOKED BACK" (Gen.19:26). Your whole argument is void because of this inaccuracy.

I see little point in dealing with this at the moment as it expands the OP.
I referred to Matt 24 as it related to the OP, but now you are making additional claims.
Many of which I disagree with, such as Matt 24:1 - 31 is ALL about the Jews. Just for example verses 9 - 14 is NOT about the Jews, but about the Church. It is about the proclamation of the gospel to the whole world.

It was you who introduced Matthew 24 into the debate. Are you maintaining that this is your sole right? Or do we others have the right to address what you introduced once you have done it? And Matthew 24:9-14 is not about the Church. Matthew 24:9-20 is the full context of the ONE verse you wish to use to turn the meaning.

• Verse 9 is the Lord's answer to; "When shall these things be". You will be hated! When?? In the time from the destruction of the Temple till the Son of man comes!
• Verse 10 are sentiments and emotions found richly among the dispersed Jews
• Verse 11. False prophets are a Jewish problem. False TEACHERS are the Church's problem (2nd Pet.2:1)
• Verse 12. These emotions were rife in the Warsaw ghetto and in many other places of Jewish persecution
• Verse 13. The Jew is saved by "enduring to the end". The Christian is saved by FAITH
• Verse 14 shows the TIME period of Jewish travail. The TIME that it takes to preach the gospel, not of grace, but of the Kingdom, is the time that Israel will be chastised.
• Verse 15. The "Abomination of Desolation" is a prophesy to "Daniel's People" from a Jewish prophet in Hebrew, and which has its fulfillment in the Holy Place of a Jewish Temple in Jerusalem - chief city of the Jews.
• Verse 16. And were shall they FLEE - Judean MOUNTAINS. The Church must flee to a WILDERNESS (Rev.12)
• Verses 16-20 are problems of fleeing in Judea where the Abomination of Desolation has unleashed horror upon horror. The Sabbath is exclusive to the Jews

My friend, the Church is not alluded to here. But maybe I missed something. I am open to learn. Please show me the Church in these verses.

This Thread is about to descend into accusatory one-liners. You can avoid this now by a solid word-for-word and verse-for-verse exposition of Luke 17:33-37. Then we will all benefit from your knowledge and insight.

Thanks and God bless (genuinely).

[DPMartin]

One of the ideas brethren on the Pre-trib Rapture theory are taught from Luke 17 is about being the first one 'taken'. They are told the first 'taken' will be Jesus pulling them out of this world, escaping just before the time of "great tribulation" begins. In reality, Luke 17 does not teach any such idea as that, as shown in the following Scripture:

Luke 17:26-37
26 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.

This first example our Lord Jesus gave is about being protected inside the ark while those outside were busy with the ways of this life when the flood came upon them and destroyed them. Noah's ark rode on top of those waters of the flood for 150 days. He and his didn't escape the flood, they went through it.


Luke 17:28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;
29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

Now Lot and his were led out by the two angels, and then God destroyed those cities with the wicked, the idea being their sudden destruction while God protected His (they didn't have to leave the earth).


Luke 17:31 In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back.
32 Remember Lot's wife.

This Scripture is also used to preach the "be ye also ready" idea Jesus said (Matt.24:44). His meaning was that He wants to find us busy doing His work when He comes, and not busy with the ways of the world so that we forget about the end of all things.


Luke 17:33 Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.

This is a special Message for those who understand. In that time of the end, those who seek to save their lives shall lose them. How's that? In that our Lord means if you're busy in the ways of this world and are not prepared with the Gospel Armour on, ready even to the death if needs be, then you could lose your soul. Those who will be seeking to 'save' their life at the end of this world will be in agreement with the coming Antichrist and his ways. It will mean taking the mark and bowing to his image.

But whosoever shall lose their life, meaning for Christ in making a stand for Him, will have preserved their soul unto Him unto everlasting life. His Message in just this one verse is for us to be prepared to make a stand for Him, even to the death, and do not fear death, like Matt.10:28. That's a lot different than what those on the Pre-trib Rapture theory are preaching, isn't it?



Luke 17:34 I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.
35 Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
36 Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
37 And they answered and said unto him, "Where, Lord?" And He said unto them, "Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together."
KJV

Here again is a Scripture that the Pre-trib Rapture preachers abuse, because it is not about the Church escaping at all.

Jesus says two men in one bed, one taken the other left, two women grinding at the mill, one taken, the other left, two men in one field, the one taken, the other left. So naturally, His disciples then turn to Him and ask Him, "Where, Lord?" They want to know where those 1st ones 'taken' will be taken to!

Here's another version of our Lord Jesus' answer to them:

Matt 24:28
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
KJV

That word "carcase" in the Greek means literally a dead body. Our Lord used that to compare those first ones 'taken' being like dead bodies gathered to where the eagles will be gathered. The idea is for a meal (spiritually) those birds will have on their dead bodies (also spiritual sense).

The idea is about deception. That was our Lord Jesus' very first warning sign for the end of this world. He gave several examples in His Gospel about peoples alive walking on the earth but inside, their spiritual status was like a tomb full of dead men's bones. So He taught the idea of being spiritually dead inside regarding one's soul who rejects Him, even while their flesh body is still alive walking upon the earth.

When the coming Antichrist arrives and demands all to bow to him in place of God, what will that do to one's soul who agrees? It will make them spiritually like a dead "carcase", and they will be gathered to be supped on by... the followers of the Antichrist, as they will disguise themselves as "eagles". That is where the first one 'taken' will be taken to. It is not to our Lord Jesus, it will be to the coming pseudo-Messiah in Jerusalem, for that is the coming Antichrist.

What about the "eagles" symbol, how does that apply here, because it's actually vultures that go after a carcase that is already dead? Fly like eagles is more in the sense of what the Pre-trib Rapture idea teaches. But remember in 2 Corinthians 11 Apostle Paul said no marvel, for the Satan disguises himself as an angel of light, and his ministers as the ministers of righteousness? In 2 Thessalonians 2:4, Paul showed the coming Antichrist will exalt himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped.

So 'where', like Christ's disciples asked, is that place where those fake "eagles" will be? and where will those taken be taken to?

to understand first one should look into the day of Lord which is when the Lord returns to the Mt of Olives that the two that were with Him when He ascended told the disciples that Jesus would return to that place. the OT prophets speak of that particular day as when the Mt of Olives explodes and creates a valley where its at and the day is darkened and the night is the same as the day that is darkened, w/some discerptions that would match an all out nuke response.

then one can see that what Jesus warns of is to that day.

your thinking on eagles doesn't seem to make sense. any living things would be found where their feed is. but one should take into consideration that there are some prophecies that refer to birds feasting on the dead in the day of the Lord.

[Revelation Man]

I strongly... suggest you study the end of the Luke 17 Scripture again, and compare Jesus' answer in the last verse with the version in Matt.24:28. His answer about those 'taken' is NOT... about being taken to Him! I'm sorry if that upsets you, because the Pre-trib Rapture preachers have mistaught the 'taken' idea from Luke 17.

Luke 17:36-37
36 Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
37 And they answered and said unto Him, "Where, Lord?" And He said unto them, "Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together."
KJV

The Matthew 24 version:

Matt 24:28
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
KJV


If you are 'taken' as a dead "carcase" to where the "eagles" are gathered, that is the opposite of being gathered to Jesus! It's very simple. Those who stand in Christ Jesus are NEVER a symbolic dead "carcase", and God's eagles do NOT go after carrion (the dead). If you don't like what our Lord Jesus showed with that, which is a warning for His Church to beware, then you can take it up with Him when He appears. I won't argue with you, His answer to His disciples in that Luke 17:37 Scripture is very clear, especially with the Matthew 24:28 version.

When our Lord Jesus taught that He wants to find us working, giving meat in due season, that means NOT being the first one 'taken', but instead keeping our nose to the grind stone, being a good steward doing the work He gave us, all the way up to His return. This is what He showed us concerning the goodman of the house who will know in what 'watch' the thief would break in.



Sorry if this hurts, but it's time to study the Scripture for yourself instead of listening to men who like your money, and wrongly preach that our Lord Jesus promised us a rose garden by taking us out of the coming tribulation.

Jesus isn't speaking about a dead body, he is using a euphemism about a dead body being whee the vultures/eagles will be gathered at. Like a bear is drawn to honey and a bee to nectar. So they ask him, where Lord as in where will the people be taken to, and Jesus as he was want to do told them in riddles, because the coming Rapture was for Paul, the disciple unto the Gentiles, not for them else Jesus would have explained it in detail.

Notice the passages in Luke and Matthew 23 don't quite harmonize ? They really didn't understand what Jesus was telling them, it was the Rapture, in Matt. it should have been placed between verse 14 and 15 to be technically correct, but alas, it was meant for Paul to understand, not Matthew or Luke, they just repeated what the heard Jesus speak of, and of course they assumed this was speaking of the very end.

I will put this together for you as Jesus intended it to be understood (eventually).

The Luke passage can be seen for what it means by looking at Matt. 24 and Rev. 19.

Matt. 24:23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. 24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. 25 Behold, I have told you before.

26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not. 27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.

If you will notice, Luke places this with those TAKEN and LEFT, and Matthew does not. These men wrote these passages long after Jesus made reference unto them, plus neither actually understood the Rapture at all, so we must take that into account, then figure out what Jesus is actually saying because he spoke these things in riddles.

Since Matthew places this with the Second Coming Event and Luke places it wth the Rapture Event, somebody has it placed in the WRONG PLACE, no doubt.

I will use Matthew, who I think placed it correctly and Rev. 19 to show what it means.

Rev. 19:17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God; 18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great. 19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

The lesson as per Matthew is about the Second Coming of Jesus, and Jesus is WARNING the Jews of that time not to do what ? Not to go unto the fake chirst, he says they will say I am the messiah in the desert, do not believe it or DON'T GO UNTO THEM [they will kill you], they will say I am Jesus/messiah in the Secret Chambers/Storeroom don't go unto them there either [the Little Horn is not the messiah, but they do want to KILL YOU].

Then Jesus EXPLAINS where he will be at, so the Jews will not fall for the Anti-Christ's lies, thus verse 25 now makes sense, BEHOLD I HAVE TOLD YOU BEFOREHAND. Here comes the EXPLANATION: For as the lighting comes out of the East and goes unto the West, so shall the coming of the Son of Man (Jesus) be......Meaning Jesus WILL NOT be in the desert or in the secret chambers or anywhere on earth, but he will Return from the Eastern Skies and come towards the West !! Then he throws in the euphemism, for wherever the dead body (carcass) is at so will the eagles/vultures be at.

We then see in Rev. 19:17-18 that Jesus shows us where the Marriage Supper is going to be at. Jesus says it will be ON EARTH, where the flesh of the Kings, and men of earth will be destroyed by the FOWLS of Heaven (Church) at or Armageddon.

I am a preacher of 30 years, and I never listen to men, I listen to the Holy Spirit brother. Every time you use that line, do you see what you are doing ? You use it has a sorta hammer t say I am right and you are wrong. I just use the scriptures and teach what God has taught me over the years brother. When I see passages in conflict I hash them out via reason. For example Rev. 19 says the Anti-Christ is thrown into hell ALIVE.....Daniel 7:11 says his BODY is DESTROYED and he is KILLED then thrown into hell, so what is the truth ? Is there a conflict ? No, Of Daniel says he is killed then he is killed, so why does Rev. 19 say he is thrown into hell ALIVE ?

We NEVER DIE, our soul only rests/sleeps, thus Jesus will call us from the grave (see 1 Cor. 15), BUT the Anti-Christ is never allowed to go unto the grave, as soon as he is KILLED he is taken to the pits of hell and cast in, immediately. Thus Daniel 7:12 now also makes sense, the other Beasts (Babylon, Persia, Greece and Rome) lived on after they lost Dominion for a time and season.

I can see how Luke having the passage where the Rapture is being spoken of would throw one off, but as per Matt. 24, I think it should be placed with the Second Coming passages, thus its speaking about where the eagles (church) will be gathered at.

God Bless brother.

[ForHisglory]

We discuss the word "taken" in Luke 17:35 and 36. I showed the context to be those in verse 33 who are required to lose their soul-life as explained in postings #2, #5 and #16. Even if you think that being raped is "taken as an intimate companion", (which many would dispute), it does not come near meaning that here WITHIN the CONTEXT of those who must lose their soul-life. It is CONTRASTED with those who are "Left" in a district of slaughter and vultures. Your objection in posting #4 was out of Zechariah 14:2 where a city was "taken". You pointedly avoided my examples of Joseph "taking" a wife on a journey to show how the Holy Spirit uses this word, and introduced an Hebrew word which means; "to catch (in a net, trap or pit); generally to capture or occupy;" (Strong's Greek & Hebrew Dictionary). And then intimated that "intimate" in "paralambano" could mean "rape". But it is how SCRIPTURE uses the word that counts.

I read your postings and disagreed with your conclusions as your CONTEXT was incorrect.
Those who are taken in CONTEXT are those who are slaughtered.
Joseph taking a wife is no more intimate than having another person alongside you.
If you choose to use Hebrew words to explain Greek words...
It is indeed how scripture uses the words which is important, and on that we agree.

If you make the soul-life and physical life equivalent, by all means go ahead. But scripture makes a vast difference. I showed this difference in Matthew 10:28 - to which you did not object. May the reader judge if the soul and the body are the same. And let them start with the SOUL our Lord Jesus, Who, when sundered form the BODY in death, went to Hades in the heart of the earth (Matt.12:40; Act.2:31), while His BODY languished less than a kilometer away ON THE SURFACE of the earth. Your lumping them together is the kind of accuracy is not conducive to getting to the bottom of a matter. How can we ever get to the bottom of this grand and complicated Book if we are so loose?

Actually when you physical die your soul goes to hades, even as your body returns to the earth.
I agree with your example of Matt 10:28 and that of Jesus. However scripture is NOT as clinically exact as you are claiming.
At times it does differentiate and at others it doesn't.
So we need to use the words as used within the CONTEXT and not as if it is a medical textbook.
Language is unfortunately more loose than we sometimes want.
In Luke 17 we have verse 37 which speaks of a body, which then speaks of the soul having left the body, which means that there was a PHYSICAL death.
In Matt 24:28 the word used is that of a corpse, which clarifies things further.

And the issue we discuss is NOT whether to FLEE or not. It is WHO is "TAKEN" and who is "LEFT", and WHERE? The past participle "taken" implies a force from a second party. And if that force is the "Son of man" TAKING ("paralambano") those He is intimate with on a journey, THEN a RAPTURE in its truest sense occurs ("Harpadzo" - "caught away").

Actually the issue under discussion IS related to whether to flee or not.
The one who is taken is the one who has NOT fled.
Where is the one taken? To be a body, a corpse, food for the birds.
There is indeed force taken, but it isn't God's.
It is that of man.

My friend, how is it that you can warn other brothers of CONTEXT and in the same breath say that Lot's wife TURNED BACK. She DID NOT TURN BACK. She "LOOKED BACK" (Gen.19:26). Your whole argument is void because of this inaccuracy.

Gen 19:26* But Lot's wife, behind him, looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.
I agree the actual words do not say she turned back.
What it says is she was behind him and looks back.
Now what does that tell you?
She is behind him and looking to what she has left behind.
Her physical action of lagging behind and of looking back shows what is in her mind.
Why else do you think she was turned into a pillar of salt?

It was you who introduced Matthew 24 into the debate. Are you maintaining that this is your sole right? Or do we others have the right to address what you introduced once you have done it? And Matthew 24:9-14 is not about the Church. Matthew 24:9-20 is the full context of the ONE verse you wish to use to turn the meaning.

• Verse 9 is the Lord's answer to; "When shall these things be". You will be hated! When?? In the time from the destruction of the Temple till the Son of man comes!
• Verse 10 are sentiments and emotions found richly among the dispersed Jews
• Verse 11. False prophets are a Jewish problem. False TEACHERS are the Church's problem (2nd Pet.2:1)
• Verse 12. These emotions were rife in the Warsaw ghetto and in many other places of Jewish persecution
• Verse 13. The Jew is saved by "enduring to the end". The Christian is saved by FAITH
• Verse 14 shows the TIME period of Jewish travail. The TIME that it takes to preach the gospel, not of grace, but of the Kingdom, is the time that Israel will be chastised.
• Verse 15. The "Abomination of Desolation" is a prophesy to "Daniel's People" from a Jewish prophet in Hebrew, and which has its fulfillment in the Holy Place of a Jewish Temple in Jerusalem - chief city of the Jews.
• Verse 16. And were shall they FLEE - Judean MOUNTAINS. The Church must flee to a WILDERNESS (Rev.12)
• Verses 16-20 are problems of fleeing in Judea where the Abomination of Desolation has unleashed horror upon horror. The Sabbath is exclusive to the Jews

My friend, the Church is not alluded to here. But maybe I missed something. I am open to learn. Please show me the Church in these verses.

I ONLY introduced Matt 24 where it connects with Luke 17. You are trying to broaden it into other things outside the scope.
However verse 9 - 14 are 100% about the Church.
This is VERY EASY to see.
Mat 24:9* Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

Who are they? The Jews and anyone else who persecutes you.
Who is you? The disciples, the followers of Jesus.
Why? Because of His name.
Therefore in this verse alone it is abundantly clear this is about the church and spans the age from His departure to His return. Therefore this is NOT about the Jews.
Verse 10 is not about Jews, but about the Church.
Verse 11 is about the church - do you not realise there are false prophets in the Church?
Verse 12 speaks of the love of Christians growing cold:
We read this in the following verse:
Rev 2:4* But I have this against you, that you have abandoned the love you had at first.

Verse 13 is about Christians enduring NOT Jews. It is a strange claim that it is not Christians. Have you not heard the parable of the Sower? Perhaps you peddle OSAS?
Verse 14 is not the time of travail for the Jew, but the time UNTIL Jesus returns. It is for the Christian to shorten this time by preaching the gospel.

Now verse 15 then is where the events of the Jews and those of Christians come together.
The GT starts in Jerusalem and is the Day of Jacob's Trouble, but from there it expands into the world and is the GT for Christians. Jews are either taken or flee into the wilderness and safety.

I am not interested in exhaustively creating a commentary on Luke 17.
It is very simple, the CONTEXT of Luke 17 is the SAME event as that in Matt 24 which is an event in Jerusalem. This is NOT a rapture event, as you should be agreeing as you have Matt 24 until verse 31 as about the Jews, which therefore includes the SAME verses in Matthew as we read in Luke 17.

What you don't seem to follow is that Luke is relating this part of the Olivet Discourse out of chronology because Luke writes according to topic (as it chronologically occurs).

[ross3421]

However verse 9 - 14 are 100% about the Church.
This is VERY EASY to see.
Mat 24:9* Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

Agree. But do any survive?

Those which endure unto the end will be saved. End of what? Not the GT rather endure unto death.

The GT starts in Jerusalem and is the Day of Jacob's Trouble, but from there it expands into the world and is the GT for Christians.

Christians are killed off as above.

So no post rapture!

Jews are either taken or flee into the wilderness and safety.

He does not tell them to flee for safety rather a warning. Is he telling them not to come down from the roof top for safety as well?

If anyone survives it would be the Jews 144,000.

[ForHisglory]

Agree. But do any survive?
Those which endure unto the end will be saved. End of what? Not the GT rather endure unto death.

Yes some live to the end of the GT. We don't know how many. Depends in parton how people treat us.

Christians are killed off as above.
So no post rapture!

Not all are killed, and the rapture starts with the DEAD rising.

He does not tell them to flee for safety rather a warning. Is he telling them not to come down from the roof top for safety as well?
If anyone survives it would be the Jews 144,000.

It will be more than 144K, it will include those who give God glory and who respond to the testimony of the 2W.

[ross3421]

Yes some live to the end of the GT. We don't know how many. Depends in parton how people treat us.

Not all are killed, and the rapture starts with the DEAD rising.

No one survives not taking the mark of the beast....(perhaps only the 144,000). Are they cowards and hiding out?

Does anyone survive not taking God's mark?