1. Thanks for this post, James. I finally looked more closely at the Rapture the other day and realized it’s the First Resurrection. I found out there were 3 groups with different timelines on the Rapture but the one that is actually right is at the end of the tribulation period. Christ says it 3 times. robschannel.com has an article on why the pre-trib rapture is false which gives the Bible cites.
   Here’s one of the cites:
   Revelation 20:
   4 Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. THEY CAME TO LIFE and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. THIS IS THE FIRST RESURRECTION. 6 Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.

   Reply ↓

2. James,

   Thanks for this post. I think you posted something on this subject before regarding those who are “taken” as those who are destroyed like those who were destroyed in the flood of Noah. That is a powerful insight and God provided me an opportunity to use it in explanation yesterday with a friend. Also, in this article, your further insight with regards to the “flood” and its connection to Daniel 9 was also helpful in application to the destruction of Jerusalem via the Romans in 70 a.d. I have studied in the O.T. that term (flood) in connection with the invasion of the Assyrians in the devastation of the Northern Kingdom and later the invasion of the Babylonians as the overflowing of the Euphrates. I think there is one O.T. reference to the flooding of the Nile in reference to an invasion of Israel from the south. But the connection of Jesus’ words in Matthew 24 to the invasion of the Romans as a “flood” and its connection to Daniel 9 is significant. Your explanation in relation to Noah’s “flood” surely does nail down the proposition that the “taken” ones are the wicked and not the righteous, and totally undermines the application of those who promote the rapture doctrine. Thanks again for that.

   I would like to ask some questions that will take more than the 200 characters that I have left. I will write them later and give my perspective.

   Reply ↓

   • Richard, I fixed the typos in your post. All is well!

     Reply ↓

3. “No Private Interpreation” remember?
   verse 24:39 English taken = “swept them all away.” ἦρεν (ēren)
   Verb – Aorist Indicative Active – 3rd Person Singular
   Strong’s Greek 142: To raise, lift up, take away, remove.
   ———–
   24:40 “will be taken”
   παραλαμβάνεται (paralambanetai)
   Verb – Present Indicative Middle or Passive – 3rd Person Singular
   Strong’s Greek 3880: From para and lambano; to receive near, i.e. Associate with oneself; by analogy, to assume an office; figuratively, to learn.
   ———–
   Conclusion English translation “took” and “taken” are not the same words.

   Reply ↓

   • First of all, I am sharing the interpretation of John Gill who lived in the 18th century, the first Baptist preacher to write a commentary of the entire Bible. It was something many Christians used to believe before John Nelson Darby came along with his false doctrines about Matthew 24 throwing half of it in the future.
     John Gill writes:
     Then shall two be in the field
     About their proper business, of husbandry, ploughing, or sowing, or any other rural employment: the one shall be taken;
     not by the preaching of the Gospel, into the kingdom of God, or Gospel dispensation; though such a distinction God makes, by the ministry of the word, accompanied by his Spirit and power; nor by angels, to meet Christ in the air, and to be introduced into his kingdom and glory; but by the eagles, the Roman army, and either killed or carried captive by them: and the other left;
     not in a state of nature and unregeneracy, as many are, to whom the Gospel is preached; nor with devils at the last day, to be thrust down by them into the infernal regions; but by the Romans, being by some remarkable providence, or another, delivered out of their hands;

     Yes, taken and took are not the same words in Greek, but in any language, it’s possible to use different words that have the same meaning when describing something.

     Reply ↓

4. Sorry this fails the test of eschatological basics. Jesus Christ is to return visibly, audibly and unmistakably among the clouds of power just as you quoted and prophesied. To suggest this happened in some undocumented and mysterious spectacle in 70AD is false on its face, ie. sin and death still run rampant today, the dead have not been raised to immortality, Christ and His saints are not ruling physically on earth, etc. Hyperspirtualized/hyperallegorical Amillennialism and Preterism are dangerous heresies which Paul condemned in 2 Tim. 2:17-18, also known as the Hymenaeus fallacy. Christ’s return is yet future!

   Reply ↓

   • I am not saying that Christ will not return in the future! All I’m saying is Matthew 24:40 is a fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy to the High Priest who had Jesus crucified!

     Mark 14:61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
     62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

     Who was Jesus talking to? The High Priest and his people! They were young enough to still around in 70 AD.

     Bible commentators of the 17th and 18th century believed this was talking about 70 AD when the Roman army was destroying Jesusalem and the Temple. Jesus appeared in the clouds as a sign to the Jews who rejected Him that what is happening is punishment from God! It’s a prophecy of the past. Christ will ultimately return in the future.

     Reply ↓

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>