Another take on the Rapture

[keras]

Thanks Copperhead. You have your beliefs and I have mine.
Your ideas sound feasible but simply do not have Biblical support.
Re the resurrected saints as per Matthew 27:50-53, this does not say what eventually happened to them. You say they went to heaven, I said no-one goes to heaven, John 3:13, then you demand that I prove they didn't go to heaven. ???

Just like most who have been deceived by false teachings, you think you hold the moral high ground and those who refute you, are just poor, ignorant and unschooled in the truths as you see them. Let me inform you, that this situation is just as the Bible says it would be. The majority failing to understand the real truths and only a few will truly understand God's plans for our future. Daniel 12:10

 

[Copperhead]

I said no-one goes to heaven, John 3:13, then you demand that I prove they didn't go to heaven. ???

Oh come now. You cant't play the poor little victim here. You said that there was no biblical support for my assertion that those resurrected saints went to heaven, and likewise, I claimed there was no support for yours that they didn't. The Scripture is totally silent on what happened to those resurrected saints for both of us. The only thing that any of us can base any assertion on regarding what happened to those resurrected saints is what the early church writers who were close to the event had to say about it some inference we might pull out of scripture. And I outlined how those early church writer comments on this are credible and unassailable from a archeological textual criticism standpoint

But the scripture does state categorically that those resurrected are saints. That is not said of any other resurrected person in scripture prior to the end times... OT or NT. That alone implies they are not in the same category as other individual resurrection events up to that point and a special case. And that adds circumstantial support to the removed to heaven assertion. So between the earthly church writers and what scripture calls these resurrected individuals, that is two major pieces of circumstantial evidence, internal and external, that they are unique and quite likely were taken to heaven.

If I am trying to determine between two people who had combat experience, the one who actually had been in the military is probably the best candidate for me to assume which had that experience. It is called deductive reasoning. I applied the same methodology regarding those saints of Matthew 27. It is an accepted technique well within the principles of Scripture Hermeneutics.

 

[Copperhead]

Oops... double post.

 

[Copperhead]

Just like most who have been deceived by false teachings, you think you hold the moral high ground and those who refute you, are just poor, ignorant and unschooled in the truths as you see them

Now that comment is totally out of line and downright slanderous.

I do indeed hold to a high moral standard. I have been respectful of your assertions all along, even while disagreeing with them, and have not denigrated you in any way. I have only countered your assertions. But this statement of yours evidences taking the gutter route. You don't like the message so instead why not attack the messenger. And any one who might disagree with you is being deceived. After all, there is no way you could ever be deceived. Sarcasm intended.

I have never stated or implied anyone who disagrees with me is some poor, ignorant, unschooled individual. It is a sin for you to make such accusations about me in front of others. That is bearing false witness against a brother. I think you might be wise to back up and reconsider the route you are taking.

We might as well discontinue this dialogue. If it is going to cause you to sin, it might not be the wise thing to continue.

 

[Gottservant]

I have to hand it to him, he got the fact that those who were resurrected at the Cross, will be resurrected at the Tribulation right.

What I don't understand is how he divides tribulation over three phases: first fruits, harvest, and gleanings.

The first fruits are resurrected, because having been risen with Christ, they always are resurrected with each fresh spirit of the good news (the main harvest are caught between the good news and the bad news; while the gleanings receive only the bad news).

If the tribulation were distributed over three phases, the phases would change and if the phases changed: the message would change - but the message of the Tribulation does not change....

...so yes, I am confused.

 

[BABerean2]

...so yes, I am confused.

Anyone who attempts to force the Book of Revelation into a perfect chronological sequence will produce confusion.
Because Christ returns in Revelation 16:15-16, and also in chapter 19, we know the book cannot be chronological.
Instead it is a series of overlapping visions.

Christ returns at the end of chapter 6, with the same signs in the sun, and stars found in the Olivet Discourse at His Second Coming.

He returns at the 7th trumpet and "the time of the judgment of the dead", in Revelation 11:15-18.
Most people skip "the time of the judgment of the dead" in Revelation 11:18, because it destroys their doctrine.

He returns in the "harvest" of chapter 14, which is related to the parable of the wheat and tares in Matthew chapter 13.

He returns as a thief at Armageddon in Revelation 16:15-16.

He returns in chapter 19.

He returns at the end of chapter 20.
We know this because He returns in "flaming fire" in 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, and the fire comes at the end of Revelation chapter 20.

.

 

[keras]

He returns at the end of chapter 20.
We know this because He returns in "flaming fire" in 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, and the fire comes at the end of Revelation chapter 20.

This idea is totally wrong. The Lake of Fire is quite a different thing to the fire the Lord will send to destroy His enemies on His Day of wrath, the Sixth seal.
Amos 1 and Psalms 11:4-6, plus over 70 other prophesies prove that there will be a Day when the Lord will use fire to reset civilization, as He did with water in Noah's time.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

This idea is totally wrong. The Lake of Fire is quite a different thing to the fire the Lord will send to destroy His enemies on His Day of wrath, the Sixth seal.
Amos 1 and Psalms 11:4-6, plus over 70 other prophesies prove that there will be a Day when the Lord will use fire to reset civilization, as He did with water in Noah's time.

Will have my water hose ready..........

Luke 12:49
Fire I came to be casting upon the Land and any I am willing if already it was kindled.

Revelation 8:
3 And another Messenger having a Golden Censer came and stood at the Altar, and much incense<2368> was given to Him,
that He will offer it with the prayers of all the Saints upon the Golden Altar before the throne.
5 And the Messenger took the Censer, and filled it from the fire of the Altar, and cast it to the land;
and there were thunders, and rumblings, and flashes of lightning, and an earthquake.

Revelation 18:
11 And the merchants of the earth weep and mourn for Her, because no one buys their cargo any longer—
13 and cinnamon, and spice, and incenses<2368>, and myrrh, and frankincense; and wine, and oil,

 

[Copperhead]

What I don't understand is how he divides tribulation over three phases: first fruits, harvest, and gleanings.

I didn't divide the tribulation over 3 phases, I showed the division of the harvest of the righteous over 3 phases It shouldn't be that hard. Yeshua was always pointing to the harvest in his many dissertations to those around Him. The harvest is part of Leviticus 23 which describes how the feasts are appointed times and rehersals.. moed.

Yeshua is indeed the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep, but He is not part of the harvest. He is our High Priest. And one of the requirements of Leviticus 23 is that the High Priest present the First Fruits of the Harvest before the Father. I believe this is why He told Mary at the tomb on Sunday morning not to touch or handle Him because He had not yet ascended to the Father. As High Priest, He would be required to remain ceremonially pure to present the First Fruits before the Father. And all of this happened on the Feast of First Fruits, which is the first of the week (Sunday) following Passover as prescribed by Leviticus 23. And the first fruits He presented to the Father were those resurrected saints of Matthew 27. Many early church writers concur.

In Leviticus 23 there is a delineation of the harvest. There is first fruits, the main harvest as one event, and the left over and corners of the field which are the gleanings that are picked over time.

I am convinced that the main harvest will occur with the removal of the righteous before the GT period starts and the gleanings of the harvest will occur during the GT period in incremental fashion just like the literal gleanings harvest of a field.

 

[Copperhead]

Anyone who attempts to force the Book of Revelation into a perfect chronological sequence will produce confusion.
Because Christ returns in Revelation 16:15-16, and also in chapter 19, we know the book cannot be chronological.
Instead it is a series of overlapping visions.

I would have to concur with that. It does have a chronological progression, but there are parenthetical moments that elaborate on things. I have generally viewed Revelation as like the old overhead projectors that were used "back in the day". A transparency would be placed on the projector platform and illuminated. Then another, then another. As they were laid down, they clarified what is being presented. I guess it would akin to a Powerpoint presentation.

 

[Choose Wisely]

I would have to concur with that. It does have a chronological progression, but there are parenthetical moments that elaborate on things. I have generally viewed Revelation as like the old overhead projectors that were used "back in the day". A transparency would be placed on the projector platform and illuminated. Then another, then another. As they were laid down, they clarified what is being presented. I guess it would akin to a Powerpoint presentation.

The video you posted is wrong because it does not take into account that there is a barley harvest, a wheat harvest and a fall fruit harvest.

 

[Copperhead]

I posted a video on the topic of the harvest?

Oh duh. My bad. It had been a while and I have taken 2 weeks of vacation, etc that I forgot about the initial post! Getting old, the memory is first to go.

You would be right on different grain harvests, but Leviticus 23 doesn’t delineate those. It lays out the prescription on the harvest. Wheat or barley, both are handled the same..... first fruits, main harvest, gleanings. And the Feast of First Fruits falls on the 1st of the week following the Passover. That is the day the Messiah rose, and shortly after, the saints of Matthew 27.

I didn’t make the video, just posted it. Take up any details you disagree with him.

 

[Choose Wisely]

I posted a video on the topic of the harvest?

Oh duh. My bad. It had been a while and I have taken 2 weeks of vacation, etc that I forgot about the initial post! Getting old, the memory is first to go.

You would be right on different grain harvests, but Leviticus 23 doesn’t delineate those. It lays out the prescription on the harvest. Wheat or barley, both are handled the same..... first fruits, main harvest, gleanings. And the Feast of First Fruits falls on the 1st of the week following the Passover. That is the day the Messiah rose, and shortly after, the saints of Matthew 27.

I didn’t make the video, just posted it. Take up any details you disagree with him.

I realize that you did not make the video. I am merely pointing out why the video is incorrect.

And yes each harvest has a 1st fruits, main harvest and gleanings. However the maker of the video uses these three things to show when the timing of the rapture will occur. His error is not understanding that there will be more than one harvest.

Jesus is the 1st fruits of those that are asleep. This is the barley harvest
The church will be harvested when summer is nigh.....pretrib........the wheat harvest at Pentecost.
The 144000 are the 1st fruits of the harvest of his elect........the twelve tribes. This is the fall fruit harvest, prewrath.......Feast of Trumpets.

 

[BABerean2]

The church will be harvested when summer is nigh.....pretrib........

PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418


Lacunza, Manuel, “Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty“
http://www.regal-network.com/dispensationalism/pdfs.htm


Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Doctrine
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.4windsfellowships.net/articles/rapture_23.pdf


Pretribulationist Revisionism
(Grant Jeffrey’s revision of early Church Posttrib viewpoints)
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.4windsfellowships.net/articles/rapture_22.pdf

.

 

[Choose Wisely]

PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418


Lacunza, Manuel, “Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty“
http://www.regal-network.com/dispensationalism/pdfs.htm


Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Doctrine
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.4windsfellowships.net/articles/rapture_23.pdf


Pretribulationist Revisionism
(Grant Jeffrey’s revision of early Church Posttrib viewpoints)
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.4windsfellowships.net/articles/rapture_22.pdf

.

 

[BABerean2]

I watched that program on my home television.

The charge of "Replacement Theology" is based upon a strawman built by claiming that there are two different Peoples of God, in direct opposition to the words of Jesus Christ in the verse below.

Joh 10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.


Dr. Reagan has replaced the one seed, with the many seeds in Galatians 3:16.

He has replaced the children of the promise, with the children of the flesh in Romans 9:8.

He has replaced the "son" who is the "heir" to the land in Matthew chapter 21, with those who reject Him as the "chief cornerstone".

He has replaced a Church made up of all races of people, with one made up only of Gentiles.

He has ignored the fact that Peter addressed the crowd as "all the house of Israel" on the Day of Pentecost.

He has adopted the Two Peoples of God doctrine that John Nelson Darby brought to America, about the time of the Civil War.

Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which was fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in Hebrews 12:22-24, and 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, the Two Peoples of God doctrine falls apart, and the pretrib removal of the Church falls with it.

Why does Dr. David Reagan fail to inform his audience that his form of Dual Covenant Theology is less than 200 years old?

.

 

[Choose Wisely]

I watched that program on my home television.

The charge of "Replacement Theology" is based upon a strawman built by claiming that there are two different Peoples of God, in direct opposition to the words of Jesus Christ in the verse below.

Joh 10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.


Dr. Reagan has replaced the one seed, with the many seeds in Galatians 3:16.

He has replaced the children of the promise, with the children of the flesh in Romans 9:8.

He has replaced the "son" who is the "heir" to the land in Matthew chapter 21, with those who reject Him as the "chief cornerstone".

He has replaced a Church made up of all races of people, with one made up only of Gentiles.

He has ignored the fact that Peter addressed the crowd as "all the house of Israel" on the Day of Pentecost.

He has adopted the Two Peoples of God doctrine that John Nelson Darby brought to America, about the time of the Civil War.

Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which was fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in Hebrews 12:22-24, and 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, the Two Peoples of God doctrine falls apart, and the pretrib removal of the Church falls with it.

Why does Dr. David Reagan fail to inform his audience that his form of Dual Covenant Theology is less than 200 years old?

.

Just more of your mumbo jumbo.

I don't believe in a dual covenant and yet you used the same false claim with me.

There is only one covenant. The difference is the timing of the acceptance of Jesus as Messiah. After the Church is raptured........pretrib, He will turn His attention to His ELECT.

Replacement theology is a failed theory and according to Dr Reagan has an evil origin.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Not sure what the rapture thing has to do with RT...

https://www.christianforums.com/threads/the-errors-of-replacement-theology.8052677/#post-72399383
The Errors of Replacement Theolog

 

[Choose Wisely]

Not sure what the rapture thing has to do with RT...

https://www.christianforums.com/threads/the-errors-of-replacement-theology.8052677/#post-72399383
The Errors of Replacement Theolog

Look it up in the Greek.

 

[jgr]

It is abundantly evident wherein lie the origins of evil. For any "doctrine" that argues in defiance and denial of God's explicit declarations under His New Testament, the only Testament in force and effect, that He has appointed His Son as the complete and exclusive Fulfillment and Heir of His promises and bequests (Galatians 3:16; 2 Corinthians 1:20; Hebrews 1:1,2; Hebrews 9:15-17); qualifies as a "doctrine" which is sourced in evil.

The root issue is not difficult to recognize. Since its beginnings, dispensationalism has incessantly and loudly proclaimed that it is Israel that is the fulfillment and heir of a vast array of God's promises and bequests. One need only read and hear a small fraction of dispensationalism's prodigious prophetic output to recognize that Israel is the chief cornerstone in the foundation of the dispensational prophetic edifice.

Consequently, not even Christ Himself is permitted to replace Israel as the anointed recipient of that which dispensationalism believes it is entitled to. In any and every instance whenever it appears that Israel's entitlements are being questioned, charges such as “calling God a liar”, “anti-Semitic”, "evil", "heretical", and various other epithets are directed at the perceived offender. It is the equivalent of identity politics within the church of God. Thus Christ is denied His own entire, rightful, and exclusive entitlements as Fulfillment and Heir of all of God's promises and bequests.

The reason is self-evident. Israel's removal as the anointed recipient is the equivalent of the removal of dispensationalism's chief cornerstone, and the consequent and unavoidable collapse of the edifice which it supports. The result is effectively dispensational detonation, and the disappearance of a pervasive, not to mention lucrative, presence and influence within the Church.

But Scripture is unequivocal in its declarations, notwithstanding the denials directed at it.

Revelation 19:10
“...the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy”

Israel does not substitute for Jesus.

Jesus declares Himself to be the Fulfillment of all things.

Luke 24:44
And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

Other Scriptures confirm His declaration, and further declare Him as Heir of all things.

2 Corinthians 1:20
For all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen, unto the glory of God by us.

Hebrews 1:1,2
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

There is no substitute for “all”.

In summation of which, Scripture declares:
Colossians 3:11
“...Christ is all, and in all”

Notice that Israel is conspicuous by its absence in the foregoing declarations.

The reason: It's not about Israel.

It's all about Him.