neural
Truth Seeker
Posts: 113
|
Post by neural on Aug 19, 2019 3:15:49 GMT -6
I know this is an older thread, but Venge pointed out something that has fascinated me for a while. When Jesus is speaking of the end, He talks about how two people will be working in the field and one will be taken, and one left. Two women working in the mill. One taken, one left.
I know food is a necessity, but that doesn't exactly sound to me like a situation where a massive portion of the worlds population has been wiped out by fire, disease, etc. And it strikes me as odd that regardless of who is taken and who is left, we have examples of pairs of people where one is a believer and one isn't. There doesn't exactly seem to be that "Get the Christians! Turn them in to the anti-Christ!" mentality that we often associate with what will happen in the tribulation. In fact, I'd venture to say that on their own, those two situations sound like common every day life in some parts of the world.
This goes along with His statement about things being as they were in the days of Noah. People eating, drinking, and being given in marriage. *completely* unaware of what was about to happen, right up until the very day it happened, and we know He was talking about His return.
I just find it curious that things seem so "business as usual" at that point in time.
|
|
|
|
Post by venge on Sept 9, 2019 7:03:45 GMT -6
neuralJust saw this. The business as normal mentality that Christ shows us in that passage warrants another look. Some people are looking for meteors falling, vegetation loss, poisoned waters, mans blood in the ocean. Yet, we have a different perspective from Christ. Neural, have you thought about the “one is taken and one is left”? Why does the one taken have to be raptured? Can one taken be wicked? Basically, are we sure of the understanding? If a wicked was taken, where would he go? Because why would the good be taken to where vultures/birds of prey are? Which are man eaters and have in OT poetry been represented as men as they also represent lions devouring their prey (other men). Just a thought...
|
|
|
|
Post by mike on Sept 9, 2019 11:00:38 GMT -6
neural Just saw this. The business as normal mentality that Christ shows us in that passage warrants another look. Some people are looking for meteors falling, vegetation loss, poisoned waters, mans blood in the ocean. Yet, we have a different perspective from Christ. Neural, have you thought about the “one is taken and one is left”? Why does the one taken have to be raptured? Can one taken be wicked? Basically, are we sure of the understanding? If a wicked was taken, where would he go? Because why would the good be taken to where vultures/birds of prey are? Which are man eaters and have in OT poetry been represented as men as they also represent lions devouring their prey (other men). Just a thought... In context from Luke 17:22-29, Jesus recounts the days of Noah & Lot. everything was business as usual then suddenly the destruction came. I'm not sure why He would shift gears and go polar opposite with the example. I see where you are coming from, but not sure if the Lord would change the message like that. He spoke pretty plainly and clearly to the disciples, right? What I am not certain about is the end of the chapter in verse 37 And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord? And he said unto them, Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together.The KJV translates aetos as eagle, not vulture. A vulture is a scavenger, feasting on dead carcasses but eagles dont do that, they hunt their prey. Albert Barnes notes - Where, Lord? - Where, or in what direction, shall these calamities come? The answer implies that it would be where there is the most "guilt and wickedness." Eagles flock where there is prey. So, said he, these armies will flock to the place where there is the most wickedness; and by this their thoughts were directed at once to Jerusalem, the place of eminent wickedness, and the place, therefore, where these calamities might be expected to begin. |
|
|
|
Post by venge on Sept 10, 2019 4:56:58 GMT -6
mike That’s my point mike 😏 In the time of Noah and Lot what happened? Wickedness of man, fighting, bloodshed etc In Lots time: 1. Persecution in cities 2. War of the 5 Kings 2. Sodom and Gomorrah destroyed And after all this, right before the wrath, he is removed to another city. Both went through difficult times. They were both saved from destruction but not from the difficult trying times. I will reply back on eagles later. At work!!
|
|
|
|
Post by unno0ne on Sept 19, 2019 4:27:40 GMT -6
neural Just saw this. The business as normal mentality that Christ shows us in that passage warrants another look. Some people are looking for meteors falling, vegetation loss, poisoned waters, mans blood in the ocean. Yet, we have a different perspective from Christ. Neural, have you thought about the “one is taken and one is left”? Why does the one taken have to be raptured? Can one taken be wicked? Basically, are we sure of the understanding? If a wicked was taken, where would he go? Because why would the good be taken to where vultures/birds of prey are? Which are man eaters and have in OT poetry been represented as men as they also represent lions devouring their prey (other men). Just a thought... Because the word 'taken' is the word 'Paralambano' - taken AS A FRIEND OR COMPANION. |
|
|
|
Post by venge on Sept 19, 2019 7:03:34 GMT -6
neural Just saw this. The business as normal mentality that Christ shows us in that passage warrants another look. Some people are looking for meteors falling, vegetation loss, poisoned waters, mans blood in the ocean. Yet, we have a different perspective from Christ. Neural, have you thought about the “one is taken and one is left”? Why does the one taken have to be raptured? Can one taken be wicked? Basically, are we sure of the understanding? If a wicked was taken, where would he go? Because why would the good be taken to where vultures/birds of prey are? Which are man eaters and have in OT poetry been represented as men as they also represent lions devouring their prey (other men). Just a thought... Because the word 'taken' is the word 'Paralambano' - taken AS A FRIEND OR COMPANION. Why don't I copy it here for readers: Transliteration: paralambanó Phonetic Spelling: (par-al-am-ban'-o) Definition: to receive from Usage: I take from, receive from, or: I take to, receive (apparently not used of money), admit, acknowledge; I take with me. /pará, "from close-alongside" /lambánō, "aggressively take" It is to come close and take aggressively or the action of taking someone/something with strong intention That does not change the idea that the one to be taken could be the wicked. The idea of a friend or companion is absent in the usage of paralambano and is not made in the original scripture. Look at what commentators have to say: Ellicott: The form of the expression is somewhat obscure, and leaves it uncertain which of the two alternatives is the portion of the chosen ones. Is the man who is “taken” received into fellowship with Christ, while the other is abandoned? or is he carried away as by the storm of judgment, while the other is set free? Barnes: One shall be taken - The word "taken" may mean either to be taken away from the danger - that is, rescued, as Lot was Luke 17:28-29, or to be taken away "by death." Probably the latter is the meaning. Meyer: It is no doubt admissible to interpret the expression in the hostile sense: the one is seized (Polyb. iii. 69. 2; similarly Baumgarten-Crusius) or carried off (Matthew 4:5; Matthew 4:8; Numbers 23:27; 1Ma 3:37; 1Ma 4:1), namely, to be punished. But the ordinary explanation harmonizes better with the reference to Matthew 24:31, Expositers: one is taken, one left. The reference may either be to the action of the angels, Matthew 24:31 (Meyer), or to the judicial action of the Son of Man seizing some, leaving free others (Weiss-Meyer). The sentences are probably proverbial (Schott), and the terms may admit of diverse application. Pulpit: There is some doubt as to the destiny of the two classes named. Are the good "taken" and the evil "left"? or are the evil "taken" and the good "left"? Some suppose that the terms allude to the sudden approach of a hostile army by which some are taken prisioners and others allowed to escape; or, since in the parable the tares are first gathered for the burning, those taken must be the wicked, those left are for storing in the everlasting garner. On the other hand, many commentators understand the verbs in a sense opposite to that mentioned above. There is no common ground on what is correct and what is incorrect as either can be deduced, though some view one or the other with a greater certainty. And as I finished with my previous post, it was just a thought... |
|
|
|
Post by venge on Sept 19, 2019 8:16:42 GMT -6
unno0ne Let me pose a little more on this. and mike to reply from a previous post above on eagles and vultures. Both words are used in various translations and I will post it below. Notice in verse 39, the ones taken were the wicked ones. This models verses 40-41 where one is "taken" and one is left. The idea is that the ones taken are actually the wicked ones to be tossed into utter darkness. Noah was never removed from the flood. He was in the flood and saved from it but the rest we not saved and were taken away. If applied to Noah, it would read as (IMO): Noah entered the ark and all the wicked were taken away to be destroyed, but Noah and his family were left alive to be preserved. That is how it is intended to be read. Look at Matthew 13:41-43 The angels gather the wicked. Then they cast them into a furnance of fire. Here, the wicked are gathered to be destroyed while the righteous are preserved. The same in the parable of the net. Both are separated. Just as Noah was separated from the wicked when the flood comes. The just are saved by being preserved but the wicked are taken to be destroyed by the fire. Christ had said: The wicked are gathered FIRST. They are taken to be burned. The wheat are saved. The other issue is the word for eagles/vultures Transliteration: aetos Phonetic Spelling: (ah-et-os') Definition: an eagle Usage: an eagle, bird of prey. Each course gives it as a bird of prey. As a matter of fact, aetos has been used to describe armies that devoured their enemies as birds of prey do. Similar, the lion was used as an animal that devoured its prey and this also is used in other portions of scripture. In Luke, notice the disciples ask him where? Where is the question to "one be taken and one left". And Christ answers with these 2 passages. Dead corpses are associated with birds of prey. These dead corpses are not meant to convey the idea of just men being slain. Because Christ is telling them "dont go there because they will hear of false Christ's". These are the wicked that are slain by God's wrath. So if the bodies are a warning, the bodies are those taken by the flood, and those that do not go are preserved and left alive.
|
|
|
|
Post by Natalie on Sept 19, 2019 11:17:38 GMT -6
I have actually heard it similar to you, venge. They then connect it with the sheep and goats judgment. The sheep are left and the goats are taken away.
|
|
|
|
Post by unno0ne on Sept 19, 2019 17:18:43 GMT -6
Venge, I'm sorry you are so adamant to stay here for the Tribulation.
You debate ad nauseum - you are blind to YOUR opinion while Scripture is clear ON ITS FACE that we, the church, are NOT HERE through the Tribulation.
No matter how many words you want to type to try to twist and constrain the Word to your desired opinion.
You're in for a pleasant surprise very soon, brother.
|
|
|
|
Post by mike on Sept 19, 2019 20:47:11 GMT -6
Venge, I'm sorry you are so adamant to stay here for the Tribulation. You debate ad nauseum - you are blind to YOUR opinion while Scripture is clear ON ITS FACE that we, the church, are NOT HERE through the Tribulation. No matter how many words you want to type to try to twist and constrain the Word to your desired opinion. You're in for a pleasant surprise very soon, brother. Welcome to the forum...pump your brakes please. I would prefer you support your position rather than disparage a view which may have some merit if you perhaps be inclined to thoughtfully review it. As this not be essential to salvation there is no reason to call someone blind to a position you may not see or understand. Please consider that the tone of your response says "i'm right and youre wrong" which is in violation of our rules here. Please refer to rule 3. Thank you |
|
|
|
Post by boraddict on Sept 19, 2019 23:33:12 GMT -6
I had always understood that the sheep were Christ's followers (righteous Israel) and the goats were rebellious Israel. So, the separation of the sheep and the goats is moving the followers of Christ (the sheep) from the rebellious goats.
Matt. 25:33-34, 41
This separation of the sheep and the goats is not the wheat from the tares because the tares are not Israel.
|
|
|
|
Post by venge on Sept 20, 2019 7:50:31 GMT -6
Venge, I'm sorry you are so adamant to stay here for the Tribulation. You debate ad nauseum - you are blind to YOUR opinion while Scripture is clear ON ITS FACE that we, the church, are NOT HERE through the Tribulation. No matter how many words you want to type to try to twist and constrain the Word to your desired opinion. You're in for a pleasant surprise very soon, brother. Well, I very much believe scripture shows this. Do I want stay for tribulation? Of course not. Did Paul, Timothy, James or any new Christian want to be eaten by lions? Burned? Crucified? Tarred? Boiled? Beheaded? Did not Christ say to us to take up your cross and follow him? Or whoever dies for his friend is a good thing; and what better friend we die for than Christ. But you are correct, scripture is clear. The issue is that everyone does not see it the same way. I have great love in my heart for the Lord and the brothers. Though I wish more would understand this position, I am not casting them down. Christ said whoever is for me is not against me. Dividing the brothers is wrong. We are to pray, talk about scripture and let the HS work. I am fearful of God. I would not post something I feel strongly about and encourage others if I felt it wasn’t scriptural. Everyone here is able to make up their own mind. All I want from them is to look at scripture and read it in your own Bible yourself. Believe or don’t (Rev prophecy stuff). Just love God and your fellow man. Please him and others before yourself. When the tribulation does happen, and Christians are here for it as I believe, just be faithful to the end. That’s what Christ asks of us. Patience, love, and faithfulness. Help others during this time of difficulty. |
|
|
|
Post by disciple4life on Feb 2, 2020 10:39:14 GMT -6
Hello @natalie, Natalie and my fellow watchmen.
I know, Natalie you also mentioned that there was at least one other thread on this topic, but mike just posted this fantastic video in another thread and I wanted to post it here.
The thing that makes it really click, is to look at this chart that Natalie posted, and the verses, first. Then, look at the points below, and then watch the video linked at the end. It's quite short, about 14 minutes or fewer.
This is Nelson Walters, whom I was not familiar with before this video, but as Mike said he has really put a lot of time and diligent study into his work and it's certainly worth taking the time to listen/watch.
While it's not the focus of this video, he cross-references multiple passages re the Day of the Lord, and in the process, makes it unmistakably clear - that the Day of the Lord is always connected with wrath, fury, and judgement [Second Coming] and is totally different and distinct from the Day of Christ, - the Rapture, which is a wedding.
**Just consider the parable of the 10 bridesmaids. 5 Wise and 5 foolish. This is a rapture passage. The Bridegroom comes with a Shout. Christ said that the 5 bridesmaids were Foolish [Some translations say wicked] because they didn't know the hour. It wasn't some unknowable, surprise event. The Foolish/wicked ones were not watching. Hmmmmm.
There is solid, historical evidence that shows that the "Thief in the Night" was a well-known Hebrew idiom that specifically referred to the High Priest. He would come through the Temple at night, to see if any of the Temple Guard were sleeping.
When he found any sleeping, he would set their cloak on fire. The guard would wake up, shocked and embarrassed and have to throw off his cloak, running naked into the temple court. For those, watching, they were not caught "literally off guard" by the High Priest.
For this reason, Paul said that "We are not children of the night, but children of the day, so that Day will not surprise us like a thief in the night." Wow. wow. Nothing in scripture supports the notion of a surprise rapture.
Paul also said that the rapture will be with a great Shout. [Wedding, the Bride comes with a Shout]. Paul also said that the rapture happens at the Last Trump -  Every Jewish reader and person hearing this over age 8 instantly recognized this. It was as clear to the audience as "Day of Turkey" or "Day of Fireworks" is to any American. It is Yom Teruah - aka "Feast of Trumpets" which is literally Day of Shouting.
There are 2 witnesses who have to be questioned independently by the Sanhedrin -all of whom were experts in astronomy. The two witnesses had to confirm the sighting of the New Moon, in Jerusalem. When two witnesses saw the New Moon, and it was confirmed by the Jewish high council, they blasted the Shofars with series of long blasts and alternating series of short, rapid staccato blasts - 99 times.
***Then, there is a special name for the 100 th blast, - the "Last Trumpet" - it is Tekia Ha Gadol. This was the longest loudest blast, - as long as the trumpeter could blow. Because it was sometimes cloudy or overcast, or raining, that is why Feast of Trumpets is a 2 day Feast, and the "Feast that No One Knows the Day or the Hour."
Jews to this day, believe that the Great resurrection will happen at Feast of Trumpets. It is also seen as the Day that the door of Heaven will open. Then, 10 days later, on Day of Atonement, the Door of heaven is shut.
One of the widely known themes of this day is a Wedding.
The First four feasts were all in the Spring and were very close together. These four are inseparably linked to Christ's first Advent. Then there was a long gap between the Spring and the Fall. Hmmmm
It is for this very reason that the Fall Feasts are also inseparably linked to Christ's second advent. The next feast to be fulfilled is Feast of Trumpets, or The Day of Shouting - the Last Trump.
Let that percolate just a bit. All the clues of Paul match the clues of Christ and the clues in the parables.
Maranatha, brothers and sisters.
|
|
|
|
Post by mike on Feb 2, 2020 11:44:00 GMT -6
disciple4life - i believe Nelson hols a pre-wrath view. For the record my point in sharing his info is to help others at the least consider other possibilities. If we are caught up at the beginning of a 70th week (assuming we still have 3.5 or 7 yrs to go after that) I am all for it! However it does me (personally) to not be caught off guard, and not be asleep and consider other potential rapture timing events. venge has also shared some solid arguments with me on this too! Again its just me but I gain nothing by stating "the rapture must come before (Trib, Anti-Christ, etc)". I'll be caught up or raised to life either way 😃
|
|
|
|
Post by boraddict on Feb 2, 2020 20:28:37 GMT -6
Rapture (chart 1) #1 (using NKJV) John 14:1-3 1Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. 2 In My Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also."
1 Thessalonians 4:14-17 14For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus.
15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. 16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.
vs Second Coming
Colossians 3:4 When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory. (I am not sure this is clearly a Second Coming verse)
Zechariah 14:5 5Then you shall flee through My mountain valley, For the mountain valley shall reach to Azal. Yes, you shall flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Thus the Lord my God will come, and all the saints with Him.
Jude 14-15 14 Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, 15 to execute judgment on all, to convict all who are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.”
Rev 19:14 And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, followed Him on white horses. (looking back at 19:7-8 to see who this is--the Bride of Christ)
Hi Natalie, My wife and I “battle” over the exegesis/interpretation of several of the passages you cited above. She says “Saints” can also mean “only angels” and not necessarily “the elect/believers.” I have been unable to convince her no matter what I do...look at Greek, other passages, etc. if you know a sure 100% way for me to show her conclusively that Saints can only mean believers in these passages I’m all ears. I would like to put that discussion to bed and of course I wouldn’t mind if she said these words, “Okay holy.....you are right (this time)!” Lol Hi Holy. Last year I was reading some of Denver Snuffer's work wherein he claims to have received revelation from God. Snuffer is an LDS (Mormon) break away living in Salt Lake City. Interestingly, he has quite the following and has the financial resources to back up his message. I carefully read Snuffer's work looking for the indicators by which we know that scripture is written. Some of those indicators are, types & shadows, similes, chiasmi, to name a few. However, Snuffer's writings wherein he quoted his revelation from the Savior does not contain any scriptural indicators. I was quite disappointed; nevertheless, the evidence showed that Snuffer's quote from the Savior was incorrect due to the lack of verifiable indicators. You know, the mannerisms that the Savior speaks and how he has his prophets write scripture. Thus it is that Snuffer is indeed a false prophet and quite full of himself. This brings me to your question about how to show an individual that "saints" means "believers" here upon the earth. The interesting thing is that the very question validates that we are talking about scripture. That is, the Savior does not force doctrine upon anyone and we are free to choose. The very fact that you choose one interpretation and your wife chooses another shows that the word "saints" by definition is scripture. In many cases the debate is unwinnable and I would offer that you approach the subject with this in mind. There will however come a time that your wife will be able to see this greater truth. For example: "heaven" in the Book of Revelation does mean "a place beyond this earth"; yet, the greater meaning of the word "heaven" in the Book of Revelation is this earth. That is, the word "heaven" in the Book of Revelation means this earth. If you do not know this then the difficulty in you embracing this greater truth about the word "heaven" is comparable to your wife's difficulty in embracing the greater truth about the word saints. Had Snuffer included words such as "heaven" with the double meanings then it would have been much more difficult for me to see his lack of supporting evidence. He should have included multiple similes and types such as Moses leading the Children of Israel from Egypt that aligns with God leading the Saints from the U. S. both of which occur after 400 years of captivity (the shadow). You know, 1620 to 2020 is 400 years. Snuffer in all his genius could not write scripture. How about Isa. 28:11 that is one of my favorites. Post Script: The people of strange lips are both the prophets that arise from the dust and the enemy armies that are coming our way. Please notice that the sealed works of the prophets (OT) have become more understandable (arising from the dust) in the last 10 to 20 years (ie. dead sea scrolls that literally arose from the dust @ 1947). Additionally, as the war progresses then the enemy will capture and teach our people with stammering lips. Thus, one teaching is from loving prophets (OT) and the other teaching is by an enemy army via warfare. |
|
Every Jewish reader and person hearing this over age 8 instantly recognized this. It was as clear to the audience as "Day of Turkey" or "Day of Fireworks" is to any American. It is Yom Teruah - aka "Feast of Trumpets" which is literally Day of Shouting. 