There is more than 1 resurrection

[George Antonios]

It seems a major, though unwitting, source of disagreement among us stems from general ignorance (and I don't mean that in a nasty way) of the fact that progressive Biblical revelation clearly identifies more than just one general resurrection.
Without that New Testament revelation, we are limited to an Old Testament level of revelation on this issue.
John stated it black-on-white that there are two resurrections separated by 1,000 years, writing:
Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. Rev 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, Rev 20:8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. Rev 20:9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. Rev 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. Rev 20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. Rev 20:12 [and here's your second resurrection, 1000 years later] And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God ; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. Rev 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. Rev 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Please, if possible, take the time to watch the video, because some the objections that may be raised may be answered therein.

Have a great weekend in the Lord guys

https://www.youtube.com/c/DrGeorgeAntonios

 

[FreeGrace2]

Hi George,

Yes, there are 2 resurrections; one for believers, which occurs at the end of the Tribulation, and one for unbelievers, at then end of the Millennium. You were perceptive to see the 2 in Rev 20.

Those who believe in a pre-Tribulational rapture cannot explain the end of Tribulation resurrection, and especially the words "first resurrection" in v.6, referring to the resurrection following the Tribulation. They are forced to say that the "first resurrection" is in 2 parts; 1 before the Tribulation and 1 after the Tribulation.

But that kinda voids the meaning of 'first'. There can only be one "first".

Great post!

 

[George Antonios]

Hi George,

Yes, there are 2 resurrections; one for believers, which occurs at the end of the Tribulation, and one for unbelievers, at then end of the Millennium. You were perceptive to see the 2 in Rev 20.

Those who believe in a pre-Tribulational rapture cannot explain the end of Tribulation resurrection, and especially the words "first resurrection" in v.6, referring to the resurrection following the Tribulation. They are forced to say that the "first resurrection" is in 2 parts; 1 before the Tribulation and 1 after the Tribulation.

But that kinda voids the meaning of 'first'. There can only be one "first".

Great post!

No sir, they are not all forced to say that since many of us clearly see that there is more than one rapture. There is indeed a tribulation rapture, and there is indeed a pre-tribulation rapture. Hence the debate. Each can't see the other side of the coin.
I appreciate the reply.

 

[FreeGrace2]

No sir, they are not all forced to say that since many of us clearly see that there is more than one rapture. There is indeed a tribulation rapture, and there is indeed a pre-tribulation rapture. Hence the debate. Each can't see the other side of the coin.
I appreciate the reply.

Can you point to a verse that clearly indicates that there is a pre-tribulational rapture? All the verses that are used in support of a pre-tribulational rapture say nothing about Jesus taking the raptured people to heaven.

Thanks.

 

[George Antonios]

Can you point to a verse that clearly indicates that there is a pre-tribulational rapture? All the verses that are used in support of a pre-tribulational rapture say nothing about Jesus taking the raptured people to heaven.

Thanks.

Well, would you agree that the 7-year tribulation is Daniel's 70th week?

 

[FreeGrace2]

Well, would you agree that the 7-year tribulation is Daniel's 70th week?

Yes, of course. But I asked for a verse that clearly indicates that Jesus takes the raptured believers up to heaven. I can't find any.

Thanks.

 

[George Antonios]

Yes, of course. But I asked for a verse that clearly indicates that Jesus takes the raptured believers up to heaven. I can't find any.

Thanks.

Yes, I understand. We can go there soon. But please indulge me a little.

Of the 70 weeks, whereof the tribulation is the last, Gabriel specifically tells Daniel:
Dan 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people [Jews] and upon thy holy city [Jerusalem],

So if Gabriel himself restricts the 70th week to the Jews and Jerusalem, and then Jeremiah also specifically does so in the same age as Daniel, writing that the tribulation is even the time of Jacob's trouble (Jer.30:7), how can I then say that the 70th week is determined upon the church as well, in the face of two prophetic restrictions to Jews and Jerusalem?

And then Paul confirms the flip-side of the coin, who in the context of discussing the future judgment of Israel, says: 1Th 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,

Can you see my quandry?

 

[FreeGrace2]

Yes, I understand. We can go there soon. But please indulge me a little.

Ahh. Thought so.

Of the 70 weeks, whereof the tribulation is the last, Gabriel specifically tells Daniel:
Dan 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people [Jews] and upon thy holy city [Jerusalem],

So if Gabriel himself restricts the 70th week to the Jews and Jerusalem, and then Jeremiah also specifically does so in the same age as Daniel, writing that the tribulation is even the time of Jacob's trouble (Jer.30:7), how can I then say that the 70th week is determined upon the church as well, in the face of two prophetic restrictions to Jews and Jerusalem?

And then Paul confirms the flip-side of the coin, who in the context of discussing the future judgment of Israel, says: 1Th 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,

Can you see my quandry?

I don't see any of this as proof of a pre-Trib rapture.

Let's start with 1 Thess 5:9. The contrast is between God's anger over sin and salvation. God exercises wrath upon His own people for grievous sin. Research the word "wrath" in Exodus and Numbers and see how many times it is used of God's dealing with the Israelites. And keep in mind from 1 Cor 10:1-11, they were believers.

Also Eph 5:6 was written to believers.

Now for the issue of the Tribulation being only for the Jews. I've heard people claim that because of that, it was not written for the church.

However, Rev 1:1-3 and Rev 22:16 say basically the same thing. And v.16 says specifically that John was writing "to the churches". The book opens with letters to 7 churches in Asia Minor.

So, it is perfectly clear that Revelation IS for the churches. All of it. So, now the question: why? Since there are no verses that tell us that Jesus comes down to earth, raptures people and then takes them back to heaven, I find no reason to think He will.

In fact, comparing all the so-called pre-Trib rapture verses with clear 2nd Coming verses, I see only parallel.

Your turn.

 

[George Antonios]

I don't see any of this as proof of a pre-Trib rapture.

I don't see how you don't see that. Gabriel said it's for the Jews. So it's for the Jews. Rather straightforward.

Let's start with 1 Thess 5:9. The contrast is between God's anger over sin and salvation. God exercises wrath upon His own people for grievous sin. Research the word "wrath" in Exodus and Numbers and see how many times it is used of God's dealing with the Israelites. And keep in mind from 1 Cor 10:1-11, they were believers.

The immediate context is indeed the Jews.

Paul wrote this in chapter 5:
1Th 5:9 For God hath not appointed US to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,

After he had written this about the Jews in the same epistle in chapter 2:
1Th 2:16 Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon THEM to the uttermost.

So, scripture with scripture, by the same author in the same epistle I am told: the wrath of God is against the Jews for rejecting his Son but we the church (who accept his Son) are not appointed to wrath. Of course the "wrath" of chapter 5 is not just the generic wrath of God against the lost but it's the tribulation since he speaks of the day of the Lord, then sudden destruction (the 2nd half of the trib) coming after a period of Jewish peace and safety (the 1st half of the trib). Furthermore, the image of a woman travailing in pain then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape is consistently used of scripture as a description of Israel:

Jer_4:31 For I have heard a voice as of a woman in travail, and the anguish as of her that bringeth forth her first child, the voice of the daughter of Zion, that bewaileth herself,

Jer_6:24 We have heard the fame thereof: our hands wax feeble: anguish hath taken hold of us, and pain, as of a woman in travail.

And there's Israel in the middle of the tribulation as such:
Rev 12:1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars [Israel and the 12 tribes as proved by Genesis 37]:
Rev 12:2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

Yes of course that those are churches in Revelation, but there's a double application there. You can spiritually preach them as types of today's churches, but that's not the primary doctrine. Those are doctrinally Jewish churches (called-out assembly) in the tribulation, not the body of Christ.
Chronologically, according to the Bible, the word "church" was first applied to a body of Jews under the Old Testament. That's how Stephen describes the Exodus Jewish people:
Act_7:38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

The problem is that we are biased when it comes to the word church, because we are New Testament Gentiles, to always imagine that the word always refers to a body of NT Gentiles in the body of Christ. It doesn't.

Keep in mind that I agree with you, there is indeed a tribulation rapture, that's undeniable. It's just not a rapture of church-age Christians, but rather of tribulation saints and churches who will believe and obey God after our rapture.

 

[mmksparbud]

Well, would you agree that the 7-year tribulation is Daniel's 70th week?

Nope!

 

[FreeGrace2]

I don't see how you don't see that. Gabriel said it's for the Jews. So it's for the Jews. Rather straightforward.

Yes, it is straightforward that the focus of the Tribulation is on Israel. But that doesn't mean the NT believers won't be there.

Remember, the NT church age began after Christ's ascension. When did God remove Israel as a nation for rejecting their Messiah? 70 AD. A fairly long time later.

I have no problem with the NT church alongside Jews in the Trib.

The immediate context is indeed the Jews.

Paul wrote this in chapter 5:
1Th 5:9 For God hath not appointed US to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,

After he had written this about the Jews in the same epistle in chapter 2:
1Th 2:16 Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon THEM to the uttermost.

I addressed 1 Thess 5:9 already.

So, scripture with scripture, by the same author in the same epistle I am told: the wrath of God is against the Jews for rejecting his Son but we the church (who accept his Son) are not appointed to wrath.

This particular "wrath" is in sharp contrast to salvation, so this "wrath" is a specific reference to hell/lake of fire. I believe that is obviuos.

Of course the "wrath" of chapter 5 is not just the generic wrath of God against the lost but it's the tribulation since he speaks of the day of the Lord, then sudden destruction (the 2nd half of the trib) coming after a period of Jewish peace and safety (the 1st half of the trib). Furthermore, the image of a woman travailing in pain then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape is consistently used of scripture as a description of Israel:

Jer_4:31 For I have heard a voice as of a woman in travail, and the anguish as of her that bringeth forth her first child, the voice of the daughter of Zion, that bewaileth herself,

Jer_6:24 We have heard the fame thereof: our hands wax feeble: anguish hath taken hold of us, and pain, as of a woman in travail.

And there's Israel in the middle of the tribulation as such:
Rev 12:1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars [Israel and the 12 tribes as proved by Genesis 37]:
Rev 12:2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

Yes, the focus of the Trib is on Israel. But that doesn't demand exclusion of the NT church.

Yes of course that those are churches in Revelation, but there's a double application there. You can spiritually preach them as types of today's churches, but that's not the primary doctrine. Those are doctrinally Jewish churches (called-out assembly) in the tribulation, not the body of Christ.

ALL the NT churches are the body of Christ. John specifically wrote to 7 NT churches, all of which were in Gentile lands. I don't even know what is meant by a "Jewish church", other than Jews attending. But the churches were real NT churches planted by Paul and other apostles.

The problem is that we are biased when it comes to the word church, because we are New Testament Gentiles, to always imagine that the word always refers to a body of NT Gentiles in the body of Christ. It doesn't.

All the churches that John wrote to were in Gentile lands, and consisted of both Jews and Gentiles. No doubt more Gentiles than Jews.

Keep in mind that I agree with you, there is indeed a tribulation rapture, that's undeniable.

Right. And every verse that describes the Second Coming Advent of Christ is PARALLEL with the passages that are used to teach a pre-Trib rapture.

It's just not a rapture of church-age Christians, but rather of tribulation saints and churches who will believe and obey God after our rapture.

Well, I'm still waiting for any verse that clearly shows a pre-Trib rapture where Jesus comes down and then goes back up. Kinda like a U-turn.

Not trying to be sarcastic.

I firmly believe that EVERY believer after Christ's ascension is in the body of Christ. I don't see how it can be any other way. Even the Trib saints who are martyred.

 

[George Antonios]

Yes, it is straightforward that the focus of the Tribulation is on Israel. But that doesn't mean the NT believers won't be there.

Remember, the NT church age began after Christ's ascension. When did God remove Israel as a nation for rejecting their Messiah? 70 AD. A fairly long time later.

I have no problem with the NT church alongside Jews in the Trib.


I addressed 1 Thess 5:9 already.


This particular "wrath" is in sharp contrast to salvation, so this "wrath" is a specific reference to hell/lake of fire. I believe that is obviuos.


Yes, the focus of the Trib is on Israel. But that doesn't demand exclusion of the NT church.


ALL the NT churches are the body of Christ. John specifically wrote to 7 NT churches, all of which were in Gentile lands. I don't even know what is meant by a "Jewish church", other than Jews attending. But the churches were real NT churches planted by Paul and other apostles.


All the churches that John wrote to were in Gentile lands, and consisted of both Jews and Gentiles. No doubt more Gentiles than Jews.


Right. And every verse that describes the Second Coming Advent of Christ is PARALLEL with the passages that are used to teach a pre-Trib rapture.


Well, I'm still waiting for any verse that clearly shows a pre-Trib rapture where Jesus comes down and then goes back up. Kinda like a U-turn.

Not trying to be sarcastic.

I firmly believe that EVERY believer after Christ's ascension is in the body of Christ. I don't see how it can be any other way. Even the Trib saints who are martyred.

I was trying to take a more macro-view before going into specific details, like the fact that the church was a mystery and a separate body.
I think the difference in what we see (except for 1Th.5) is probably the glasses we are wearing. I am wearing dispensational glasses and you are wearing (possibly) reformed glasses. I suspect you'd argue you're not wearing any glasses, but in a sense, so would we all.

Now, salvation is not always salvation from hell: 1Ti_4:16 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee. But Timothy was already saved from hell. The idea there is being saved from the snares of the devil like pride (1Ti.3:6), and bringing down the judgment of God on his flesh, not his soul (1Co.5:5).

1Ti_2:15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. Evidently, Paul isn't saying a woman is saved from hell by bearing children, he is saying she will be saved from dying during child-birth.

So, we can't overrule the tribulation context of 1Thessalonians 5 just because it's also true that there is salvation from hell. As noted, the context is the tribulation there and the context must be respected. Again, salvation is not always the salvation of the soul from hell. It depends on the context.

Look at the breakdown of the passages at hand:

1Thessalonians 4:13-18 is undeniably the rapture of the church
1Th 4:13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
1Th 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
1Th 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
1Th 4:18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

Dovetailing with the aforementioned, the context of 1Thessalonians 5:1-3 is undeniably the tribulation:
1Th 5:1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.
1Th 5:2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.
1Th 5:3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.

But given what Paul had told us in 1Thessalonians 4, he goes on to reassure us:
1Th 5:4 But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.
1Th 5:5 Ye are ALL the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness.
1Th 5:6 Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober.
1Th 5:7 For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night.
1Th 5:8 But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation.
1Th 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath [the one he just finished describing in vss.2-3], but to obtain salvation [in context, salvation from the wrath to come, the sudden destruction, the day of the Lord, i.e. the tribulation of vss.2-3] by our Lord Jesus Christ,
1Th 5:10 Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.
1Th 5:11 Wherefore comfort [about not having to go through the tribulation, in context of vss.2-3] yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do.

Sum:
1) Paul tells us of our rapture (1Th.4:13-18)
2) Paul then tells us of a coming tribulation (1Th.5:1-3)
3) Paul comforts us about salvation from the coming tribulation (1Th.5:4-11)

 

[FreeGrace2]

I was trying to take a more macro-view before going into specific details, like the fact that the church was a mystery and a separate body.

I don't think has any relevance to a rapture.

I think the difference in what we see (except for 1Th.5) is probably the glasses we are wearing. I am wearing dispensational glasses and you are wearing (possibly) reformed glasses. I suspect you'd argue you're not wearing any glasses, but in a sense, so would we all.

Actually, I wear contacts. But I'm having cataract surgery next week, so will probably be in glasses anyway.

But, I am also a dispensational type. Absolutely not reformed, or Arminian.

Now, salvation is not always salvation from hell: 1Ti_4:16 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee. But Timothy was already saved from hell. The idea there is being saved from the snares of the devil like pride (1Ti.3:6), and bringing down the judgment of God on his flesh, not his soul (1Co.5:5).

I fully agree. In fact, I've heard that more than half of all mention of salvation in Scripture refers to temporal deliverance.

Look at the breakdown of the passages at hand:

1Thessalonians 4:13-18 is undeniably the rapture of the church

It is undeniably a "gathering" of believers, both dead and alive. There is no mention at all of returning to heaven.

1Th 4:13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
1Th 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
1Th 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
1Th 4:18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

Dovetailing with the aforementioned, the context of 1Thessalonians 5:1-3 is undeniably the tribulation:
1Th 5:1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.
1Th 5:2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.
1Th 5:3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.

But given what Paul had told us in 1Thessalonians 4, he goes on to reassure us:
1Th 5:4 But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.
1Th 5:5 Ye are ALL the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness.
1Th 5:6 Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober.
1Th 5:7 For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night.
1Th 5:8 But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation.
1Th 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath [the one he just finished describing in vss.2-3], but to obtain salvation [in context, salvation from the wrath to come, the sudden destruction, the day of the Lord, i.e. the tribulation of vss.2-3] by our Lord Jesus Christ,
1Th 5:10 Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.
1Th 5:11 Wherefore comfort [about not having to go through the tribulation, in context of vss.2-3] yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do.

There is no mention of being taken to heaven in any of these passages.

Sum:
1) Paul tells us of our rapture (1Th.4:13-18)

Our gathering.

2) Paul then tells us of a coming tribulation (1Th.5:1-3)

Yes.

3) Paul comforts us about salvation from the coming tribulation (1Th.5:4-11)

Still not seeing any clear reference to being taken to heaven.

Not trying to be difficult here.

However, after having read through the NT about monthly for nearly 2 decades, just last year a verse really jumped out at me, that I had never thought about before.

Acts 3:21 - Heaven must receive him until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets. NIV

My NIV is a previous edition, and has "must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything".

Wow. So I looked up the Greek word.

Strong's Concordance
dechomai: to receive
Original Word: δέχομαι
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: dechomai
Phonetic Spelling: (dekh'-om-ahee)
Definition: to receive
Usage: I take, receive, accept, welcome.
HELPS Word-studies
1209 déxomai – properly, to receive in a welcoming (receptive) way. 1209 (déxomai) is used of people welcoming God (His offers), like receiving and sharing in His salvation (1 Thes 2:13) and thoughts (Eph 6:17).

1209/dexomai ("warmly receptive, welcoming") means receive with "ready reception what is offered" (Vine, Unger, White, NT, 7), i.e. "welcome with appropriate reception" (Thayer).

[The personal element is emphasized with 1209 (déxomai) which accounts for it always being in the Greek middle voice. This stresses the high level of self-involvement (interest) involved with the "welcoming-receiving." 1209 (déxomai) occurs 59 times in the NT.]

What I noticed was the word "until". iow, Jesus is received in heaven UNTIL "the times come to restore everything".

It is clear to me that the Millennial Reign WILL "restore everything".

So it seems "remain" isn't a bad choice of words, though not the actual Greek word in the original. So, when Jesus ascended to heaven, He is "received until the times come to restore everything".

Sure sounds to me like He will remain in heaven until the Second Advent.

From my own Baggster & Sons Greek lexicon:

"to receive into and retain, contain" and Acts 3:21 attached to that rendering.

So "retain" and "remain" are certainly closely related words.

I believe that Acts 3:21 is evidence that Jesus remains in heaven (received in heaven) until the Second Advent.

Not to mention there are no verses that describe believers being resurrected and taken to heaven.

Just saying.

 

[Amittai]

George you are doing what you said we shouldn't be doing in another post.

You are reading bad dispensationalism into and not out of Scripture. Our dispensation spans many thousands of years (perhaps since Adam or before, or since Enosh or Enoch or at a pinch Noah or Nimrod) subdivided into Old and New Testaments and the angel spoke to Daniel about God's people as a whole and not excluding Gentiles.

(Additionally we don't know the exact numerical value of the figures but that is "secondary".)

Most expositions apparently presented diachronically contain facets that overlap in real life.

In the adoption case you are bringing out simple and crucial qualities in God's work in us, obscured by prevalent bad teachings. This time you are trying to do what isn't there namely demonstrate that the first round of raptures greatly precedes the end of Tribulation - Scripture only leads us to strongly believe (as probability) it will probably be an exceedingly brief time before.