RAPTURED TO WHERE?

[claninja]

Perhaps you just did not understand what Jesus said.

First off, it is silly to form doctrine from one isolated verse on a subject when there are many others. We should form doctrine on ALL end times scriptures - considering every one.

Luke is not the only scripture involving Jesus words on the end in what is today called "the Olivet Discourse." And where Jesus has a few verses on the 70th week, Revelation has many chapters on the same period of time. Wisdom then decrees that we should form doctrines from the most complete passage on a subject, not from a shorter one.

I am sure you understand that Jesus was the real Author of Revelation: He just used John to write.

Luke 21:22 tells us that the destruction of 1st century Jerusalem fulfills the days of vengeance in regards to ALL THAT WAS WRITTEN.
Le't see:

22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.

First off, this is only Luke's version of what Jesus said. What about what Matthew and Mark wrote? What are these "days of vengeance?" Can we find another scripture using this word?

2 Thes. 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

WHEN will He be revealed? WHEN will "every eye see Him? My friend, this is FUTURE. Every eye did not see God or Jesus in 70 AD. That kind of thinking is myth. This verse fits perfectly with Christ's coming as shown in Rev. 19. Is there another word for "vengeance?" Or another word that goes with vengeance? Yes, it is WRATH. Revelation shows us that the entire future 70th week comes with wrath. That will be God showing vengeance on a world that refuses to repent, but starting in Israel.

In verse 23 in Luke, it speaks of the trouble of those with child. In Mathew that ties in with the days of great tribulation. You can try your best to make those days fit 70 AD, but you will fail just like the many before you that have tried. If we look in Revelation, the days of GT will be in chapter 15 and 16. What comes before those days in Revelation? The revealing of the man of sin must come first. And before that the 7 trumpet judgments.

No one has every been able to pinpoint a time in the past where or when these trumpet judgments took place. And why is that? It is very difficult to find a future event in history.

Your error is in thinking is that verse 22 is speaking to first century Jerusalem. Sorry, but I don't buy that theory. Yes, that is when the temple was destroyed, but that was CERTAINLY NOT the "end of the age."

Your second error then is not understanding "the end of the age." It will end with the future 70th week of Daniel. Don't even think of saying that the first half of the week was Jesus' ministry. That theory too is myth. Revelation shows us that the entire week is future.

Matthew 23:35-36 tells us that the all the righteous blood shed would be would come upon 1st century Jerusalem.
This is another error on your part. It really does NOT say that. You THINK it says that.

36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. This would SEEM to say what you believe. I don't think it does. Notice this verse:

39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

When will people be saying "Blessed is He that cometh..." They said it in chapter 21 as He entered Jerusalem IN SIGHT of them, riding the colt.

I posit that they will not say this until they SEE Him coming as shown in Revelation 19. They will SEE HIM as He descends to rescue them.

On the other hand, NO ONE was saying this when Titus was destroying the city!

So what generation was Jesus REALLY speaking to: of course to all generations who read these words, but in particular the generation that SEES HIS COMING. My friend, that is future, not history.

I do not interpret revelation on its own as separate or new prophecy. That would be poor exegesis, as revelation is highly symbolic and apocalyptic.
Yet, a professor at a bible college, said, as I heard Him say,

"It is wisdom to establish doctrine from the MOST COMPLETE passage of scripture on any given subject, and fill in missing pieces from the lessor scriptural passages."

For the end times, it goes without saying that Revelation is the most complete passage on the end times. This book has like 16 chapters on the future 70th week. No other passage comes close.

If you REALLY want to learn all the bible has to say on the 70th week, will you take the two or three verses Jesus spoke of, or will you use the 16 chapters in Revelation?

God did not give us Revelation to ignore. It is by its very title a REVELATION. It is therefore up to every reader to understand it. I will give you a leg up, so to speak.

The 70th week in Revelation is marked by 7's: the 7th seal starts the week, the 7th trumpet marks the midpoint and the 7th vial ends it.

The timing of the first seal is given away in chapter 5: the time of Jesus ascended and sending the Holy Spirit down.

The 5th seal is for the martyrs of the church age - so history.
The 6th seal starts the Day of the Lord and His wrath, so it is future.

Scripture declares 1st century Jerusalem is charged with all the righteous blood shed.

For these are the days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written.

Scripture the destruction of 1st century Jerusalem fulfills all that is written in regards to the days of vengeance.

As a result, this generation will be charged with the blood of all the prophets that has been shed since the foundation of the world, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the sanctuary.h Yes, I tell you, all of it will be charged to this generation.


Please address why you believe the opposite of these verses.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Sure that idea [of a rapture to heaven] is found in scripture and untold millions today believe it - BECAUSE it is found in scripture. I understand, people reading with preconceived glasses won't find it. That does not mean it does not exist.

Jesus went back to heaven, and one of His purposes was to build homes for His children.

So you believe that heaven literally contains numerous buildings, and that these are the abodes Christ promises us in John 14?

They will need those homes for the 7 years of Jacob's trouble.

Let's pretend for a moment that there literal houses in heaven, I think that's a silly idea as Jesus' point clearly is "That where I am there you will be also" not "Hey guys, you'll get some fancy cribs". But let's ignore that altogether here:

You are here clearly just making something up. Scripture certainly never says that anyone needs those dwelling places for some seven year period of tribulation. That isn't in the Bible.

But you know what is in the Bible? Christ's promise that we will be with Him. And we read in 2 Corinthians that while absent from the body we are present with the Lord. That between death and resurrection we go and be with the Lord has been the teaching of the Church for two thousand years. That's in keeping with Jesus' promise. He comes for us at our death, and we go to be home with the Lord until that day He returns, then the dead are raised bodily, for that beatific life in the Age to Come.

Many people have been to heaven and got prayed back to earth, and have SEEN these mansions. Some have seen their OWN mansion. And then returned to earth to testify. Some saw the preparations for the marriage supper taking place, while others have seen and been told the preparations are finished: heaven is just waiting now on the rapture to bring the saints home.

And people say that they were Napolean Bonaparte, Abraham Lincoln, or Cleopatra in a previous life. Some people say they bear first hand testimony to lizard people, aliens, big foot, and to seeing ghosts. Some claim by their testimony that they've had supernatural experiences of many kinds, from all religious around the world.

I have no more reason to believe any of those claims as the claims of those who say they saw heaven.

Of course, many will dismiss such personal testimonies, because they don't fit people's theories.

Ah, nice, setting up that anyone who might demonstrate a reasonable level of skepticism over outlandish and unverifiable claims is simply doing so because they don't like having their ideas challenged. This way you don't have to actually make a reasoned defense for believing these claims, you merely have to make the suggestion that your opponent is ideologically incapable of addressing the subject.

But these personal testimonies DO fit scripture. The marriage and supper will take place in heaven before Jesus descends to Armageddon. Of course that blows some theories out of the water, so to speak, so they are forced to change what John wrote, or rearrange.

Notice how you craft what you're saying to make it seem like what you're saying is "just what the Bible says", but what you are doing, and probably don't even realize it, is that you are merely making the argument that the Bible must be read in such a way as to conform with the alleged claims. Therefore a reading of Scripture is determined right or wrong, not based upon the actual merits of good exegesis and hermeneutics; but rather upon the presuppositional truth of the claims themselves. Thus the standard of Scripture is taken away and replaced with the standard of subjective experiences of a select group of modern people.

The truth is, if anyone is to get to heaven for the marriage supper, they will either have to die and get their in spirit form, or be raptured. Plain and simple. One day soon Jesus will come and get His "bride" and take us to the homes He has built for us. Believe it!

We shall all be at the banquet at the consummation of history, for the day is coming when Christ will return, the dead will rise, and God will make all things new. We shall be with God, and God will be with us, a new heavens and a new earth.

The point is, if no rapture, God would have to call off the marriage.

That great Feast shall take place in the end, when the Lord returns in glory. It has nothing to do with the false doctrine of the rapture.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Davy]

....

For these are the days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written.

Scripture the destruction of 1st century Jerusalem fulfills all that is written in regards to the days of vengeance.
....

The 1st century A.D. was not... the "days of vengeance" to fulfill all that is written.

The main Sign, and final one Jesus gave in His Olivet Discourse was that of His 2nd coming and gathering of His Church. So how can someone say the "day of vengeance" is fulfilled back in history when that event is about the day of Christ's return???

 

[claninja]

The 1st century A.D. was not... the "days of vengeance" to fulfill all that is written.

The main Sign, and final one Jesus gave in His Olivet Discourse was that of His 2nd coming and gathering of His Church. So how can someone say the "day of vengeance" is fulfilled back in history when that event is about the day of Christ's return???

So this is not about 1st century Jerusalem?

Luke 21:20-22 But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it, for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written.

 

[Davy]

So this is not about 1st century Jerusalem?

Luke 21:20-22 But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, and let those who are inside the city depart, and let not those who are out in the country enter it, for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written.

Ah, you're not really going to try and get into a posting Scripture battle with me, now are you?

Matt 24:28-31
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
KJV

Mark 13:24-27
24 But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light,
25 And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.
26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.
27 And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.
KJV

Luke 21:20-28
20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
25 And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
26 Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
KJV

Wow! what do ya know... the timing of Christ's 2nd coming and gathering of His Church He gave as happening in connection to the time of those SIGNS!

 

[claninja]

Ah, you're not really going to try and get into a posting Scripture battle with me, now are you?

I really don't care too, as your arguments are derogatory and all over the place, and don't address what I posted.

 

[Davy]

I really don't care too, as your arguments are derogatory and all over the place, and don't address what I posted.

You are bearing false witness now. You well know my postings of Scripture to back up what I say is very direct in the Truth. It's God's Truth directly within His Word that you cannot handle, and that's why you're upset. That is what following men's doctrines will do to you. But even though the time is short, you can still pray for understanding, and if you discipline yourself in His Word line upon line, instead of men's word, then you will understand His Word as it's actually written, and not how those men you follow think it is.

 

[claninja]

You are bearing false witness now. You well know my postings of Scripture to back up what I say is very direct in the Truth. It's God's Truth directly within His Word that you cannot handle, and that's why you're upset. That is what following men's doctrines will do to you. But even though the time is short, you can still pray for understanding, and if you discipline yourself in His Word line upon line, instead of men's word, then you will understand His Word as it's actually written, and not how those men you follow think it is.

Sure Davy. if its bearing false witness, Just go ahead and report me then. instead of continuing with our pointless discussion.

 

[Davy]

Sure Davy. if its bearing false witness, Just go ahead and report me then. instead of continuing with our pointless discussion.

Personal slander is one thing; denying Scripture evidence is another. When you say my posting of Scripture witness in counter of your Preterist doctrine interpretation of Luke 21 is derogatory, then that is bearing false witness, because you have evaded the Scripture which you know is futile to attack, and instead direct your attack at me personally. Do you really think others here can't see you doing that?

 

[iamlamad]

No. I put the "weight" on Jesus' clear and non symbolic words that 1st century Jerusalem's destruction would fulfill all that is written in regards to the days of vengeance through all the righteous blood shed being put on them.

Luke 21:22 tells us that the destruction of 1st century Jerusalem fulfills the days of vengeance in regards to ALL THAT WAS WRITTEN.

Matthew 23:35-36 tells us that the all the righteous blood shed would be would come upon 1st century Jerusalem.

I interpret revelation through the Gospels and Epistles. I do not interpret revelation on its own as separate or new prophecy. That would be poor exegesis, as revelation is highly symbolic and apocalyptic.

Can you provide non symbolic/apocalyptic literature that clearly spells out what else, if not 1st century Jerusalem, fulfills the days of vengeance and shedding of all the righteous blood?

Matthew 23:
39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

So which "you" was He really talking to? Did any of the Jews in 70 AD say "Blessed Is he that comes in the name of the Lord?"

Of course they didn't! It was TITUS that came and destroyed them. I doubt if any thought it was GOD behind Titus, and said those words.

So WHEN we people say these words, "Blessed Is he that comes in the name of the Lord?" Jesus said before these words, "you will not see me henceforth UNTIL You say.." Blessed Is he that comes in the name of the Lord?" In other words, this saying is tied to HIS COMING. Sorry, It was TITUS that came then; Jesus coming when the Jews will be saying this will be at the end of the time of Jacob's trouble.

Therefore verse 39 tells us Jesus words were really speaking to the END TIME generation.

 

[claninja]

Personal slander is one thing; denying Scripture evidence is another

No disagreement here.

When you say my posting of Scripture witness in counter of your Preterist doctrine interpretation of Luke 21 is derogatory, then that is bearing false witness, because you have evaded the Scripture which you know is futile to attack, and instead direct your attack at me personally.

I never stated your posting of the scripture you believe to be counter to my position is derogatory. That is your simply assumption. The derogatory remark comes from the attitude you present with in post 89:

"Wow! what do ya know... the timing of Christ's 2nd coming and gathering of His Church He gave as happening in connection to the time of those SIGNS!"

If you want to have a interesting and civil conversation that can be fruitful, I am all in. However, if you want to be sarcastic or derogatory, I'm not interested.

Do you really think others here can't see you doing that?

You responded to a post of mine that wasn't even directed at you. My post was about Luke 21:20-22, armies surrounding Jerusalem and the days of vengeance. So let's stick to that.

Why do you believe Luke 21:20-22 was not about 66-70ad, and what evidence do you have to support that belief. And let me remind you that many partial preterists and amils believe the Luke 21:20-22 is about the destruction, while verses 27-29 are still future, so simply posting the 2nd coming verses doesn't prove your point. You'll have to show why verses 20-22 are not at all related to 70ad, even though Jerusalem was destroyed in 66-70ad. Was it a type for future world ending events, was it completely coincidental and not all related to Jesus' prophecy?

 

[Davy]

No disagreement here.



I never stated your posting of the scripture you believe to be counter to my position is derogatory. That is your simply assumption. The derogatory remark comes from the attitude you present with in post 89:

"Wow! what do ya know... the timing of Christ's 2nd coming and gathering of His Church He gave as happening in connection to the time of those SIGNS!"

If you want to have a interesting and civil conversation that can be fruitful, I am all in. However, if you want to be sarcastic or derogatory, I'm not interested.




You responded to a post of mine that wasn't even directed at you. My post was about Luke 21:20-22, armies surrounding Jerusalem and the days of vengeance. So let's stick to that.

Why do you believe Luke 21:20-22 was not about 66-70ad, and what evidence do you have to support that belief. And let me remind you that many partial preterists and amils believe the Luke 21:20-22 is about the destruction, while verses 27-29 are still future, so simply posting the 2nd coming verses doesn't prove your point. You'll have to show why verses 20-22 are not at all related to 70ad, even though Jerusalem was destroyed in 66-70ad. Was it a type for future world ending events, was it completely coincidental and not all related to Jesus' prophecy?

No, I really don't care to converse with you, because you are only puking men's doctrines you've been taught, ideas that you did not get from Scripture, but instead from men's doctrines. Proof of that is your constant raging about Luke 21, when Christ's Olivet discourse is covered in 3 chapters, Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, and they all agree with each other.

 

[claninja]

No, I really don't care to converse with you, because you are only puking men's doctrines you've been taught, ideas that you did not get from Scripture, but instead from men's doctrines.

If you don't care to converse with me, why did you respond with a subjective argument, one that anyone could make about anyone they disagree with?

Proof of that is your constant raging about Luke 21, when Christ's Olivet discourse is covered in 3 chapters, Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, and they all agree with each other.

Let the readers observe that when pressed, you are unable to respond to my question about Luke 21:20-22.

 

[Davy]

If you don't care to converse with me, why did you respond with a subjective argument, one that anyone could make about anyone they disagree with?



Let the readers observe that when pressed, you are unable to respond to my question about Luke 21:20-22.

It's because you push such silly doctrines of men and think others are stupid enough here to just believe it. It's only to show how you haven't actually checked the Scriptures for yourself, but that you are just a doctrine of man groupie.

 

[claninja]

It's because you push such silly doctrines of men and think others are stupid enough here to just believe it. It's only to show how you haven't actually checked the Scriptures for yourself, but that you are just a doctrine of man groupie.

I could say the same subjective argument about you. Let's stick with objective arguments.

 

[claninja]

So which "you" was He really talking to?

The audience in front of him, hence he said you and not they or them.

Did any of the Jews in 70 AD say "Blessed Is he that comes in the name of the Lord?"

Most likely they did say this in 70ad, and every year after Jesus was crucified. This psalm (psalm 118 part of the hallel) was/is commonly recited during the feasts.

So which "you" was He really talking to? Did any of the Jews in 70 AD say "Blessed Is he that comes in the name of the Lord?"

Of course they didn't! It was TITUS that came and destroyed them. I doubt if any thought it was GOD behind Titus, and said those words.

So WHEN we people say these words, "Blessed Is he that comes in the name of the Lord?" Jesus said before these words, "you will not see me henceforth UNTIL You say.." Blessed Is he that comes in the name of the Lord?" In other words, this saying is tied to HIS COMING. Sorry, It was TITUS that came then; Jesus coming when the Jews will be saying this will be at the end of the time of Jacob's trouble.

Therefore verse 39 tells us Jesus words were really speaking to the END TIME generation.

A lot of opinion here, but this doesn't address what I asked. So i'll ask again:


Can you provide non symbolic/apocalyptic literature that clearly spells out what else, if not 1st century Jerusalem, fulfills the days of vengeance and shedding of all the righteous blood?