Christianity and the End Times

quote:

---

If a minority of saints are heedful to the exhortation to watch, certainly the Son of Man will be revealed to them when raptured.

---

That would be a very odd reading even if Matthew 24 didn’t make it clear that the Second Coming was meant.

quote:

---

In Revelation 14:1-5 we see that before the major events of the great tribulation, SOME early ripened "Firstfruits" are standing in heaven before the Lamb in some heavenly Mt. Zion. We know it is in heaven because the sound of their singing is "out of heaven" (v.2)

---

On the contrary. They are standing on Mount Zion (verse 1) and hear a voice from Heaven.

quote:

---

Certainly they are raptured and the Lamb, Who is also "the Son of Man" would be mightily revealed to THEM. This revealing of the Son of Man occurs BEFORE the Son of Man is seen reaping His Harvest at the end of the chapter in verses 14 - 16

---

Certainly ? They appear to be the 144,000 from Revelation 7:1-8 and it isn’t at all clear what happens to them between the two chapters.

quote:

---

The Son of Man is revealed to the FIRSTFRUITS prior to the Son of Man being revealed to the HARVEST. So the phrase "on the day in which the Son of Man is revealed" (Luke 17:30) cannot be insisted to mean only ONE rapture.

---

It doesn’t mean any sort of Rapture.

quote:

---

I agree. But neither does it insist that all those taken are physical virgins either.

---

And your point is ?

quote:

---

The letters were practical letters to existing churches on earth at that time. Yet I firmly believe that the letters were also a PROPHECY of the development of the church on earth. And what one hears said to any ONE church is to be heeded by those who have an ear in EVERY church.

---

Whatever you believe it is a fact that the words are directed at the members of one Church - at the time the Revelation was written. It promises that some of them will be spared the hour of trial which is coming soon - when Jesus returns. Yet Jesus did not return any time soon, let alone within the lifetime of those people.

I think of all the apocalyptic texts considered Luke 17 is the only one that has a clear suggestion that it may be meant metaphorically (verses 20-21). Although a literal reading of Revelation is sufficiently implausible to suggest that may not be the intended reading.

quote:

---

I am not sure I get your point.

---

That’s apparently because you can’t remember what you said.You claimed that The Son of Man being revealed only meant that a few people would be Raptured and he would be revealed to them. However there is no mention of anyone being Raptured, nor any suggestion that the Revelation would be restricted to a very few (who already believed anyway).

quote:

---

The SOUND heard out of heaven is the SOUND of the 144,000 SINGING.

---

Since they are standing on Mount Zion and only one voice is heard from Heaven that seems unlikely.A voice from Heaven sings the song and they join in.

quote:

---

He doesn't mean that they have physically come to Jerusalem's Mt. Zion in the land of Israel geographically. It should mean that being given to the NEW COVENANT they have come in their hearts to the seat of government which has its source in Heaven.

---

That is your interpretation but it is hardly clear. The fact that they are said to be standing on Mount Zion while the voice is heard from Heaven suggests otherwise.

quote:

---

What is significant about the rapture of Revelation 14:1-5 is that the Bible does not describe the physical removing of their journey. Rather where their HEART has been for a long time they simply find one day their BODIES are there also.

---

So you say, but that is nowhere in the text. There is no mention of any Rapture at all.

quote:

---

Towards the end of this age a remnant of overcoming saints must be walking on the earth yet with hearts and minds upon the heavenly things - upon Christ reigning from Heaven. One day where their heart dwells, God will reward them by transporting their bodies there as well.

---

Colossians 3:1 does not mention any Rapture either.

quote:

---

For this reason Revelation 14 does not describe them physically GOING UP. It only says they were purchased from the earth (14:3).

---

Or maybe it doesn’t say that the were Raptured because it doesn’t mean to say that they were Raptured. Especially if they are the 144,000 from Revelation 7 which seems very likely

quote:

---

The number used is the same. But the nature of the two groups is not the same. If one assumes that the 144,000 of the twelve tribes are exactly the 144,000 firstfruits of chapter 14 then you would have a case

---

But I don't assume it, I conclude it based on the evidence of the text.Aside from the number the 144,000 are sealed to God on the forehead in Revelation 7 and those in Revelation 14 have the name of God on their foreheads.And why should the 144,000 of Revelation 7 not be considered the firstfruits - is there any significant group set aside before then ? (In the actual text of the Revelation, that is not in your assumptions)

quote:

---

The group of Firstfruits are found in heaven just prior to the major events of the great tribulation

---

If you mean Revelation 14 it neither says that they are in Heaven, nor occurs before the Tribulation.

quote:

---

"Soon" is largly subjective to human expectations. With God one day is as a thousand years. One thousand years is like one day. Two thousand is like two short days to God who is eternal.

---

When speaking to humans, human timescales would be appropriate. And promising that some among them will be preserved from an event that will not occur until long after all of them are dead seems to be more than a little disingenuous.

quote:

---

That is not exactly what I said.

---

I don’t see any significant distinctions.

quote:

---

But I think my point was that the phrase "on the day when the Son of Man is revealed" should be some rationale to insist that there could only be one rapture or that there is no rapture.

---

That isn’t much of a point. The question is not whether there might be a Rapture that isn’t mentioned the question is whether the text does mention a Rapture - indeed whether it mentions a Secret Rapture before the Tribulation. Luke 17:22-37 describes the Second Coming - after the Tribulation - and does not mention any Rapture.

quote:

---

I didn't say that there is literally only ONE VOICE heard. Come on

---

You didn’t, but Revelation 14:2 says that a voice - singular - is heard from Heaven.The assumption that it refers to the voices of the 144,000 is just that - an assumption. And one that does not fit too well with the text.

quote:

---

I see in most of your other comments a knee-jerk contrarian attitude.

---

Then you are seeing things which are not there.This is a debate site. When your entire case is based on questionable - at best - interpretations you must expect to be challenged.

quote:

---

But that the actual word rapture is not mentioned, is true.

---

That the text does not even clearly say that the 144,000 are in heaven is also true.

Revelation 6 is where things really start to get rolling. This is the chapter with the famous Four Horsemen, a conqueror, War, Famine and Death. With war everywhere there’s likely to be famine and that adds up to a lot of death.The martyrs call for God to avenge them (a bit odd if their persecutors have been dead for centuries, but there’s no hint of that in the text)Then we have an earthquake, the sun turning black, the moon red, the stars falling and the sky being rolled up like a scroll. Which is what happens at the end of the Tribulation (see Matthew 24:29, Mark 13:24-25) although more detailed here.Revelation 7 starts with the 144,000 of Israel being sealed to God, with instructions to angels not to do,any more damage to the world before that is done.Then we have the multitude who came out of the great tribulation dressed in white (like the martyrs of the previous chapter). Possibly they are meant to be Christians martyred in the Tribulation, perhaps just those who clung to their Faith through the entire thing.

Where are they taken ?In Matthew 24:31 we are told that angels will gather the elect, but not where they will go. In Matthew 25:31 we are told that the Final Judgement follows, so presumably they will be gathered with the sheep on Jesus’ right.But again, this follows the Tribulation and occurs with the Second Coming so it cannot be an early Rapture.

quote:

---

It depends upon which rapture one refers to.

---

Not only are you answering a rhetorical question, it also clearly refers to those who are taken in Matthew 24:40-41, which occurs at the time of the Second Coming.

quote:

---

The select group taken which comprise the Firstfruits (Rev. 14:1-5) (living overcomers) and which comprise the Manchild (Rev. 12:5) (deceased overcomers) are first TAKEN to the third heavens.

---

The Manchild is more usually taken to be Jesus. Note that it is said that he will rule the nations with a rod of iron as is the figure in Revelation 19:11-16 - who you identify as Jesus.

quote:

---

And the Manchild is also obviously a collective for he is described as "brothers," "their," "them," and "they" (12:10,11)

---

It is far from obvious that those verses refer to the manchild.

quote:

---

Both groups enjoy a pre-tribulation rapture to the third heavens.

---

You say that but you have yet to produce any clear reference to a pre-tribulation Rapture. It’s always inferred from dubious interpretations.

quote:

---

You may remember that I said there was a dividing line of Matthew 24:1-31 and Matthew 24:32 - 25:46. I said that up to verse 31 the answer of Jesus is addressing the disciples as to their status as Jews of the nation of Israel.

---

You’ve said it, but you have yet to produce any reason to think it true. If Matthew 24:31 is to be taken as referring only to Jews you are going to need some actual support from the text, not an assumed division which hardly supports the idea anyway.As yet there seems no reason to reject the obvious reading that those taken at the Second Coming in Matthew 24:41-42 are those gathered in 24:31 - which also occurs with the Second Coming.

quote:

---

Caught up (Rev. 12:5) also indicates taken. You don't get the big picture.

​

You don't get the relationship between things revealed in more than one place in Scripture.

---

Massive non-sequiturs are hardly a good way to convince me of your ability to understand.

quote:

---

You may go by what Manchild is "usually take to be" or what is the better interpretation. I go by the latter.

---

Then please make your case that your preferred interpretation is better. Empty bluster is not convincing.

quote:

---

Apparently, you do not know this.
But some of us do. And therefore it is no surprise that some raptured will be taken and rewarded to CO-REIGN with Christ.

---

Which doesn’t matter. The phrase is still a good reason to think they are intended to be the same person, and it’s better than anything you’ve produced to support your interpretation.

quote:

---

But it is an old debate which I feel you cannot win - to make the Manchild mean ONLY the individual child Jesus.

​

Show me where Jesus was caught up to the throne in Heaven after Mary gave birth to Him.

---

I don’t think that taking a sign in the sky literally is necessarily sensible. (I will note that, according to Acts 1:9 Jesus was taken up to Heaven). But how about you - can you show that the dead overcomers were taken up to Heaven after their literal births ? Or do we have a double standard here ?

quote:

---

Failing to notice pre-tribulation rapture is some other passages I regard as due to your dubious ability to get the larger picture. I am not sure how deep this shallowness in your understanding goes.

---

I’m not seeing it because it isn’t there. If you have big picture arguments you are free to make them, but if you try to tell me that Matthew 24:41-42 refers to events before the Tribulation without any reasonable arguments at all - as you,be been doing - it is not going to work and it is hardly my fault.

quote:

---

I listed twelve OT references. How many did you look up to examine?
Or did you just object on some general principle?

---

Your Old Testament references are by your own words to a promise to gather the Israelites together again. I am going to generously assume you are right about that. It’s still a lousy argument. Jesus’ chosen is more naturally read to refer to Christians and even if it did refer to Israelites alone the link with 24:31 remains intact.

Out of my intended sequence, but:1 Thessalonians 4 So what it says is that Jesus will return, the dead Christians will rise and then the living and risen Christians will be taken up into the sky. It also indicates that Paul expects to be one of the living.So, obviously following the Second Coming and expected in the latter part of the 1st Century AD, or very shortly after.

And yet by saying we Paul tells us that he expects to be among the living when it occurs - and at least some of his readers, too. If he did not he would have written they.

Ringo is quite right about what it says. Whether you think it is going to happen or not, Paul was wrong about when it would happen.