ECT Raptured__ What is it? Who is will be? When will it happen?

[Cross Reference]

The children of the bride remain mortal, as well as others who heeded the warnings of Rev.ch 14.

Not one person will be born from above (born again) during the 3.5 years of witness.

Psa 72:10 The kings of Tarshish and of the isles Will bring presents; The kings of Sheba and Seba Will offer gifts.
Psa 72:11 Yes, all kings shall fall down before Him; All nations shall serve Him.

LA

Does that mean they can't be saved?

 

[Cross Reference]

There are many things wrong with your statement.
Here are a couple of them.

Revelation 12:5 5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.​

The only person caught up in Revelation 12:5 is Jesus Christ, who was caught up in Acts 1:9.

You are saying Jesus was caught up twice?

Jesus was caught up 2000yrs prior to this event in Rev 12:5-6 which states it will be an immediate catching away of her man-child. Jesus was on earth thirty three years prior to His ascension. In addition, Mary was not driven into the wilderness for 31/2 yrs while the "remnant of her seed" was sought out for destruction. This is too elementary, my friend to mis-construed.

Nowhere in scripture is the "tribulation" listed as a 7 year period.

But it does speak of a 31/2 yr period of time of great tribulation for the Christian doesn't it?

Based on the actual description of the "tribulation" in Matthew 24 and the other gospels, the tribulation came upon the inhabitants of Judaea 40 years after the death of Jesus on the cross.

It doesn't fit that those Judeans were of the seed of the "woman" of either of Gen. 3:15 or Rev. 12:5-6. Indeed, they were driven out by the wrath of God __ not by any tribulation experience not meant for them for their purification.

May I remind you there are some OT prophecies that have a double fulfillment. Here's one in particular that is woefully overlooked:

Ps 22:16 — For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.

First fulfillment, when Jesus hung on the cross:

". . . . They shall look on him whom they pierced." John 19:37 (KJV)

Second fulfillment, when He comes again in "Clouds of Glory" per Mark 13:26:

"Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him." Rev 1:7

 

[Cross Reference]

Matt 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 all describe the rapture in detail and say that it occurs, quote "after the tribulation"

What do you *"see" as the need to be caught away AFTER the tribulation?


* in quotes for the benefit of Wbm and Timontheas.

 

[oatmeal]

If "rapture" means to be "caught away" and there is only one place in scripture where the words "caught away" are used to explain the OP,__ Rev 12:5 which is to happen 3 1/2 yrs into the 7 year period called the "tribulation". Nothing else fits.

I Thessalonians 4:13-18 before the wrath Romans 5:9, I Thessalonians 1:10

 

[Daniel1611]

What do you *"see" as the need to be caught away AFTER the tribulation?


* in quotes for the benefit of Wbm and Timontheas.

To be removed before the wrath of God is poured out. They're 2 different events. The tribulation is what the world does to the church and the wrath is what God does to the world.

YouTube After the Tribulation the movie. The best thing you will ever see about the rapture and its packed with scripture

 

[Cross Reference]

To be removed before the wrath of God is poured out. They're 2 different events. The tribulation is what the world does to the church and the wrath is what God does to the world.

The tribulation is what the world does to the church

By God allowing it __ and for what reason do you suppose He does allow it?

Can that not be the second coming rather than another "catching away"?

You might want to consider it because Israel will burn the weapons of warfare for 7 years. (Eze, 39)

 

[Daniel1611]

By God allowing it __ and for what reason do you suppose He does allow it?

Can that not be the second coming rather than another "catching away"?

You might want to consider it because Israel will burn the weapons of warfare for 7 years. (Eze, 39)

The rapture happens at the second coming. That's pretty clear. There is one second coming, one rapture and one resurrection. For a pretrib rapture, you need multiple of them all.

 

[Cross Reference]

The rapture happens at the second coming. That's pretty clear. There is one second coming, one rapture and one resurrection. For a pretrib rapture, you need multiple of them all.

No, it is not pretty clear, not if the intent of Jesus is to reside on earth to rule and reign for 1000 yrs. How do you figure anyone needs be "caught away" prior to that except for those who will reign with Him when He returns to "rule the nations with a rod of iron", i.e., the "man child" of Rev 12:5? No one will be caught away when it is that the feet of Jesus will stand on the mount of Olives.

 

[genuineoriginal]

You are saying Jesus was caught up twice?

No, why would you think that?

Jesus was caught up 2000yrs prior to this event in Rev 12:5-6 which states it will be an immediate catching away of her man-child.

The child being caught up in Revelation 12:5 happened the same year as the crucifixion, almost 2000 years ago. It is not a future event.

In addition, Mary was not driven into the wilderness for 31/2 yrs while the "remnant of her seed" was sought out for destruction.

Mary is not the woman in Revelation 12.

This is too elementary, my friend to mis-construed.

You seem to have misconstrued it quite well.

But it does speak of a 31/2 yr period of time of great tribulation for the Christian doesn't it?

Not in Revelation 12.

It doesn't fit that those Judeans were of the seed of the "woman" of either of Gen. 3:15 or Rev. 12:5-6.

This has nothing to do with Genesis 3:15.

 

[genuineoriginal]

No, it is not pretty clear, not if the intent of Jesus is to reside on earth to rule and reign for 1000 yrs. How do you figure anyone needs be "caught away" prior to that except for those who will reign with Him when He returns to "rule the nations with a rod of iron", i.e., the "man child" of Rev 12:5? No one will be caught away when it is that the feet of Jesus will stand on the mount of Olives.

The Rapture happens when Jesus returns in the clouds and every eye shall see Him, then the bowls of the wrath of God is poured out on the unrepentant. The feet of Jesus touch the mount of Olives at the end of the battle of Armageddon.

 

[Cross Reference]

The Rapture happens when Jesus returns in the clouds and every eye shall see Him, then the bowls of the wrath of God is poured out on the unrepentant. The feet of Jesus touch the mount of Olives at the end of the battle of Armageddon.

How can that be when, being "caught away" . . . . doesn't suggest every eye will see Him, does it?

Have you ever read Ezek. 38 and 39?

 

[Cross Reference]

No, why would you think that?

Your words, not mine, suggest that.

The child being caught up in Revelation 12:5 happened the same year as the crucifixion, almost 2000 years ago. It is not a future event.

The man -child in Rev 12:5 is caught up immediately after being born. He can't be Jesus.

Mary is not the woman in Revelation 12.

Then you contradict yourself because Jesus was born of Mary.

You seem to have misconstrued it quite well.

I don't believe so by all you can't explain.

Not in Revelation 12.

"And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child." . . ." And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ." Revelation 12:13,17 (KJV)

If you view the woman as being the true, invisible, committed, universal, Church of Jesus Christ and the remnant of her seed as being these folk: ". . . . . . which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. . . . overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death. Revelation 7:14; 12:11 (KJV) you will then see what I believe to be an accurate summation of the nominal/average Christian who will go through the tribulation especially if you read Rev 13 as that which leads up to the events of Rev 12.

I think we are beginning to see this taking shape by wittenessing current events.

This has nothing to do with Genesis 3:15.

Inasfar as a "woman" is mentioned in a prophetic way, it does, though I don't her see other than being Mary. But notice, her child isn't caught up and only "bruises" the head of the serpent which the evidence can be witnessed as such.

 

[genuineoriginal]

The man -child in Rev 12:5 is caught up immediately after being born. He can't be Jesus.

The man child can be no one other than Jesus.
See Revelation 2:27 and Revelation 19:15
The timeline of Revelation 12 covers a 2000 year period of time, Jesus was not caught up immediately after He was born, but there was not much time between the two events when compared to 2000 years.
Or haven't you heard that 1000 years is like a day for God?

Then you contradict yourself because Jesus was born of Mary.

The woman in Revelation 12 is symbolic of Israel, as shown by the symbols of the sun, moon, and twelve stars.
The woman is not Mary.

If you view the woman as being the true, invisible, committed, universal, Church of Jesus Christ

The woman is not the true, invisible, committed, universal, Church of Jesus Christ, since that would make the verse state that the church gave birth to Jesus.

you will then see what I believe to be an accurate summation of the nominal/average Christian who will go through the tribulation especially if you read Rev 13 as that which leads up to the events of Rev 12.

Revelation 12 leads up to the events of Revelation 13, not the other way around.
Revelation 13 comes at the end of the 2000 year period of time that is covered in Revelation 12.

 

[Cross Reference]

The man child can be no one other than Jesus.
See Revelation 2:27 and Revelation 19:15
The timeline of Revelation 12 covers a 2000 year period of time, Jesus was not caught up immediately after He was born, but there was not much time between the two events when compared to 2000 years.
Or haven't you heard that 1000 years is like a day for God?


The woman in Revelation 12 is symbolic of Israel, as shown by the symbols of the sun, moon, and twelve stars.
The woman is not Mary.

The woman is not the true, invisible, committed, universal, Church of Jesus Christ, since that would make the verse state that the church gave birth to Jesus.


Revelation 12 leads up to the events of Revelation 13, not the other way around.
Revelation 13 comes at the end of the 2000 year period of time that is covered in Revelation 12.

Why not take your lunch break. I am and won't be back to continue any longer in this with you.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Why not take your lunch break. I am and won't be back to continue any longer in this with you.

For any who are interested in the different interpretations about the woman in Revelation 12, here are the major ones:

_____
The Woman of the Apocalypse is a figure from Chapter 12 of the Book of Revelation (ca. 95 AD). Her identity has been the subject of a wide variety of interpretations.
...
One strain of Catholic tradition assigns the identity of the woman to the Virgin Mary ...
However, most of the ancient commentators identified her with the Church ...
The commentary of the New American Bible (the official Roman Catholic Bible for America) states that "The woman adorned with the sun, the moon, and the stars (images taken from Gn 37:9–10) symbolizes God’s people in the Old and the New Testament. The Israel of old gave birth to the Messiah (Rev 12:5) and then became the new Israel, the church, which suffers persecution by the dragon (Rev 12:6, 13–17); cf. Is 50:1; 66:7; Jer 50:12."
...
Commentators who adhere to Reformed Theology and are amillennial in their eschatology identify the woman as the Church, and the man-child she gives birth to are the saints.
...
Dispensational Premillennialists, and Amillennialists who believe in multiple valid interpretations will often identify the woman as the nation of Israel. ...
Lutheran scholar Craig Koester, for example, says, "The woman encompasses the story of Israel, from whom the Messiah was born, as well as the story of the church, which was persecuted after Jesus' death and resurrection
...
Christian Scientists understand the woman in the Apocalypse to symbolize "generic man, the spiritual idea of God
...
The Woman is also identified as Eve because she is part of the three-way conflict also involving her Seed and the Dragon ...
_____​

 

[HisServant]

The real question is... what did she mean to the 1st century audience... it definitely wasn't Mary.. it was probably themselves.. the bride of Christ.

 

[rougueone]

The real question is... what did she mean to the 1st century audience... it definitely wasn't Mary.. it was probably themselves.. the bride of Christ.

Wrong thread.

 

[kayaker]

The Jews are God's people, and the tribulation mentioned in Matthew 24 is only on the Jews.

The followers of Christ were warned to flee Jerusalem when they saw the signs in order to escape the tribulation.

History records that the followers of Christ fled to Pella when they saw the Roman armies in 66 C.E. in fulfillment of the prophecy.

Not arguing the balance of your post, Genuineoriginal... God's people were the Israelites (Deuteronomy 7:6, 7, 8, 9) who were commanded to not mingle with the Canaanites, etc (Deuteronomy 7:1, 2, 3). I can accept the argument all Israelites were Jews, but I cannot accept the argument all Jews were Israelites (Revelation 2:9, 3:9). Paul made this subtle distinction in Romans:

Romans 9:6, 7, KJV: "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel. 7) Neither, because they are the SEED of Abraham, are they all CHILDREN (of Abraham): but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called (Genesis 21:12 KJV)."​

Please keep in mind Paul's subtle distinction of Abraham's "seed" v. "children" while listening to Jesus' dialogue with His detractors:

John 8:33 KJV "We be Abraham's seed and were never in bondage to any man..."​

The Israelites were in bondage in Egypt, so those who instigated Jesus' crucifixion were not Israelites. Yet, Jesus affirmed 'they' were "Abraham's seed" in John 8:37 KJV. Keeping Paul's subtle distinction in mind, listen further to Jesus' mention regarding those contemplating His crucifixion:

John 8:39 KJV "They answered and said unto Him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham."​

Ahh! Jesus affirmed those contemplating His crucifixion were "Abraham's seed," but then Jesus suggested they were not "Abraham's children." And, that was the same subtle distinction Paul maintained in Romans 9:6, 7.

In fact, if you take a closer look at Genesis 25:1, 2, 3, 4... you'll find Moses said Abraham's 'progeny' via his wife Keturah were "the children of Keturah," not Abraham (Genesis 25:4 KJV). If you're willing to take this notion a little further... Judah, prophesied progenitor of Messiah (Isaiah 65:9), was married to a Canaanitess (1Chronicles 2:3) daughter of the Canaanite Shuah (Genesis 38:2), contrary to Deuteronomy 7:1, 2, 3 that Ezra noted some 1,400 years later in Ezra 9:1, 2. Judah's Canaanite father-in-law Shuah (Genesis 38:1, 2) was the 'son' of Keturah (Genesis 25:1, 2, 4).

If you're willing to follow the rabbit hole a little further... Judah's third and surviving Canaanite son Shelah (Genesis 38:6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 26) survived to procreate (Numbers 26:20 KJV). Ezra specifically exlcuded Judah's Canaanite son Shelah, and "The sons of Shelah the son of Judah..." (1Chronicles 4:21) from the tribe of Judah in 1Chronicles 4:1. Those members of the tribe of Judah in 1Chronicles 4:1 included Judah's son Pharez, via Judah's daughter-in-law Tamar (Genesis 38:29 KJV), Pharez's son Hezron (1Chronicles 2:4, 5), and so forth.

Therefore, Judah's descendants via his Canaanite son Shelah (Numbers 26:20) were "Abraham's seed" (John 8:37 KJV, Romans 9:6, 7), they just weren't Israelites (John 8:33 KJV), and neither were they "Abraham's children" (John 8:39 KJV, Genesis 25:1, 2, 4, KJV). Jesus was a descendant of Pharez (Matthew 1:5 KJV), son of Judah and his daughter-in-law Tamar. Those who instigated Jesus' crucifixion were the Canaanite descendants of Judah and his Canaanitess wife (1Chronicles 2:3, Genesis 38:2): "Abraham's seed" (John 8:33 KJV, John 8:37 KJV), but NOT "Abraham's children" (John 8:39 KJV, Genesis 25:1, 2, 3, 4, Romans 9:6, 7. The descendants of Judah via his daughter-in-law Tamar were authentic Jews in God's plan. The descendants of Judah via his Canaanitess wife were NOT Jews (Revelation 2:9, 3:9), and 'they' instigated Jesus' crucifixion fulfilling Genesis 3:15 KJV... and, the saga continues even further!

kayaker

 

[Lazy afternoon]

The real question is... what did she mean to the 1st century audience... it definitely wasn't Mary.. it was probably themselves.. the bride of Christ.

The woman of Rev.ch 12 can only be Heavenly Zion.

Heb 12:22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels,
Heb 12:23 to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect,
Heb 12:24 to Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.

The woman who flys into the wilderness is the same woman but speaking of her children.

Rev 12:14 But the woman was given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness to her place, where she is nourished for a time and times and half a time, from the presence of the serpent.

LA

 

[Lazy afternoon]

Not arguing the balance of your post, Genuineoriginal... God's people were the Israelites (Deuteronomy 7:6, 7, 8, 9) who were commanded to not mingle with the Canaanites, etc (Deuteronomy 7:1, 2, 3). I can accept the argument all Israelites were Jews, but I cannot accept the argument all Jews were Israelites (Revelation 2:9, 3:9). Paul made this subtle distinction in Romans:

Romans 9:6, 7, KJV: "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel. 7) Neither, because they are the SEED of Abraham, are they all CHILDREN (of Abraham): but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called (Genesis 21:12 KJV)."​

Please keep in mind Paul's subtle distinction of Abraham's "seed" v. "children" while listening to Jesus' dialogue with His detractors:

John 8:33 KJV "We be Abraham's seed and were never in bondage to any man..."​

The Israelites were in bondage in Egypt, so those who instigated Jesus' crucifixion were not Israelites. Yet, Jesus affirmed 'they' were "Abraham's seed" in John 8:37 KJV. Keeping Paul's subtle distinction in mind, listen further to Jesus' mention regarding those contemplating His crucifixion:

John 8:39 KJV "They answered and said unto Him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham."​

Ahh! Jesus affirmed those contemplating His crucifixion were "Abraham's seed," but then Jesus suggested they were not "Abraham's children." And, that was the same subtle distinction Paul maintained in Romans 9:6, 7.

In fact, if you take a closer look at Genesis 25:1, 2, 3, 4... you'll find Moses said Abraham's 'progeny' via his wife Keturah were "the children of Keturah," not Abraham (Genesis 25:4 KJV). If you're willing to take this notion a little further... Judah, prophesied progenitor of Messiah (Isaiah 65:9), was married to a Canaanitess (1Chronicles 2:3) daughter of the Canaanite Shuah (Genesis 38:2), contrary to Deuteronomy 7:1, 2, 3 that Ezra noted some 1,400 years later in Ezra 9:1, 2. Judah's Canaanite father-in-law Shuah (Genesis 38:1, 2) was the 'son' of Keturah (Genesis 25:1, 2, 4).

If you're willing to follow the rabbit hole a little further... Judah's third and surviving Canaanite son Shelah (Genesis 38:6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 26) survived to procreate (Numbers 26:20 KJV). Ezra specifically exlcuded Judah's Canaanite son Shelah, and "The sons of Shelah the son of Judah..." (1Chronicles 4:21) from the tribe of Judah in 1Chronicles 4:1. Those members of the tribe of Judah in 1Chronicles 4:1 included Judah's son Pharez, via Judah's daughter-in-law Tamar (Genesis 38:29 KJV), Pharez's son Hezron (1Chronicles 2:4, 5), and so forth.

Therefore, Judah's descendants via his Canaanite son Shelah (Numbers 26:20) were "Abraham's seed" (John 8:37 KJV, Romans 9:6, 7), they just weren't Israelites (John 8:33 KJV), and neither were they "Abraham's children" (John 8:39 KJV, Genesis 25:1, 2, 4, KJV). Jesus was a descendant of Pharez (Matthew 1:5 KJV), son of Judah and his daughter-in-law Tamar. Those who instigated Jesus' crucifixion were the Canaanite descendants of Judah and his Canaanitess wife (1Chronicles 2:3, Genesis 38:2): "Abraham's seed" (John 8:33 KJV, John 8:37 KJV), but NOT "Abraham's children" (John 8:39 KJV, Genesis 25:1, 2, 3, 4, Romans 9:6, 7. The descendants of Judah via his daughter-in-law Tamar were authentic Jews in God's plan. The descendants of Judah via his Canaanitess wife were NOT Jews (Revelation 2:9, 3:9), and 'they' instigated Jesus' crucifixion fulfilling Genesis 3:15 KJV... and, the saga continues even further!

kayaker

Jesus and Paul were not making distinctions of the flesh but of the faith.

Anyone could become an Israelite or Jew by coming into the covenant with God in the OT.

LA