Madkins007

OK, lets back up a bit. There is not a lot in Matt. 24 to support the concept of a rapture of the Church- a belief that is only held by a few denominations raChristianity as a whole.

The passage we are discussing is "37 As the days of Noah were, so the coming of the Son of Man will be. 38 For in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day Noah boarded the ark. 39 They didn't know until the flood came and swept them all away. So this is the way the coming of the Son of Man will be: 40 Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and one left. 41 Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and one left. 42 Therefore be alert, since you don't know what day your Lord is coming. 43 But know this: If the homeowner had known what time the thief was coming, he would have stayed alert and not let his house be broken into. 44 This is why you also should get ready, because the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect. "

The people, in the time of Noah, were not raptured, they were killed by a flood. We are told that in the time of Christ's retrun, some will be taken, andothers left.

The question is- why are some people assuming that the 'taken' are being raptured? They were not when Noah came. Why is this not being read as 'some people are going to die without any warning, so be ready'?

Madkins007

OK, lets back up a bit. There is not a lot in Matt. 24 to support the concept of a rapture of the Church- a belief that is only held by a few denominations rather than Christianity as a whole.

The passage we are discussing is Matt 24:37 "As the days of Noah were, so the coming of the Son of Man will be. 38 For in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day Noah boarded the ark. 39 They didn't know until the flood came and swept them all away. So this is the way the coming of the Son of Man will be: 40 Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and one left. 41 Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and one left. 42 Therefore be alert, since you don't know what day your Lord is coming. 43 But know this: If the homeowner had known what time the thief was coming, he would have stayed alert and not let his house be broken into. 44 This is why you also should get ready, because the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect. "

The people, in the time of Noah, were not raptured, they were killed by a flood. We are told that in the time of Christ's retrun, some will be taken, andothers left.

The question is- why are some people assuming that the 'taken' are being raptured? They were not when Noah came. Why is this not being read as 'some people are going to die without any warning, so be ready', which seems more in context.

Matt 24:31 "He will send out His angels with a loud trumpet, and they will gather His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other." is not a great support for the rapture, either.

The word 'sky' here is one of the meanings of the term 'ouranos', which also means 'universe' or 'heaven' (and is used that way alone 218 times in the NT) as well, and is translated alternately in Matt. 24 alone as 'sky' or 'heavens') Obviously, if the word should be 'heavens' or 'universe', then the verse takes on a different context, although the overall message seems to be that He will gather His people from all over the place.

The idea that since the rapture has not happened, then Matt. 24 has not been fulfilled is only valid IF the doctrine o fthe rapture is real- and it may well not be.

Madkins007

Matt. 24:7. The word for nation is 'ethos', which also means tribe, group of people, and even family. Kingdom is the word 'basileia'- and to quote Strong's Greek lexicon directly "royal power, kingship, dominion, rule; not to be confused with an actual kingdom but rather the right or authority to rule over a kingdom"

In other words- it is perfectly fitting with the concept of the Jewish world (which would have certainly included much of Rome with all the Jews living there- (By Jewish world, we mean the area of the sphere of culture, not the limited region on the map)that these 'nations' and 'kingdom' are not countries- as they are so often mis-interpreted.

By the way- this, along with the 'wars and rumors of wars' in v.6 would have been a true prophecy, as the Roman world was under the Pax Romana- the Roman Peace.

And with the death of 1.1 million Jews and the destruction of their temple, the end of sacrifices, etc., etc., etc., I think that the Jews that survived would have agreed that their world was ended. No one said all the Jews died off or anything like that, just that their world, as it existed when Jesus was saying the things in Matt 24, ended.

Madkins007

Huh. Let's see...

Matt. 24: 4 And Jesus answering said to them, `Take heed that no one may lead you astray, 5 for many shall come in my name, saying, I am the Christ, and they shall lead many astray [FULFILLED in 53-66AD. In fact, some of them had a major role in the revolts of 66 that lead to the wars of 70AD}

6 and ye shall begin to hear of wars, and reports of wars; see, be not troubled, for it behoveth all [these] to come to pass, but the end is not yet. 7 `For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places; 8 and all these [are] the beginning of sorrows; [FULFILLED with the growing unrest leading up to 70AD. The great famine of about 45AD is mentioned in Acts 11:28. Earthquakes were happeing from 37-54AD, and some nasty ones were recrded in 68AD.]

9 then they shall deliver you up to tribulation, and shall kill you, and ye shall be hated by all the nations because of my name; 10 and then shall many be stumbled, and they shall deliver up one another, and shall hate one another. 11 `And many false prophets shall arise, and shall lead many astray; [FULFILLED and discussed in Acts and some of the Epistles.]


12 and because of the abounding of the lawlessness, the love of the many shall become cold; 13 but he who did endure to the end, he shall be saved; 14 and this good news of the reign shall be proclaimed in all the world, for a testimony to all the nations; and then shall the end arrive. [FULFILLED, as per Col. 1:6 and 23]

15 `Whenever, therefore, ye may see the abomination of the desolation, that was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (whoever is reading let him observe) [FULFILLED in 70AD when Ceaser was worshipped in the Temple after it was breached and burned.]

16 then those in Judea -- let them flee to the mounts; 17 he on the house-top -- let him not come down to take up any thing out of his house; 18 and he in the field -- let him not turn back to take his garments. 19 `And wo to those with child, and to those giving suck in those days; 20 and pray ye that your flight may not be in winter, nor on a sabbath; 21 for there shall be then great tribulation, such as was not from the beginning of the world till now, no, nor may be. 22 And if those days were not shortened, no flesh would have been saved; but because of the chosen, shall those days be shortened. [FULFILLED in the aftermath of the seige and battle]

23 `Then if any one may say to you, Lo, here [is] the Christ! or here! ye may not believe; 24 for there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and they shall give great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, also the chosen. 25 Lo, I did tell you beforehand. 26 `If therefore they may say to you, Lo, in the wilderness he is, ye may not go forth; lo, in the inner chambers, ye may not believe; [FULFILLED, as mentioned above]

27 for as the lightning doth come forth from the east, and doth appear unto the west, so shall be also the presence of the Son of Man; 28 for wherever the carcase may be, there shall the eagles be gathered together. 29 `And immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from the heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken; [FULFILLED. Josephus and Tacticus record something odd in the sky durin the wars, and comets and other phenomena were recorded in ths period as well.]

30 and then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in the heaven; and then shall all the tribes of the earth smite the breast, and they shall see the Son of Man coming upon the clouds of the heaven, with power and much glory; 31 and he shall send his messengers with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his chosen from the four winds, from the ends of the heavens unto the ends thereof.


V.30 and 31 are the verses in debate. Does/did Jesus need to return in the flesh to fulfill these? The 'coming on the clouds of heaven' bit is a symbol of judgement well known to the Jews (Isaiah 19:1, Psalms 18:7-15, etc.), and in these passages, the actual presense of God is not taken to be literally, so is it to be so here? I suspect not.

IF the 'gathering of the elect' and the 'coming in the clouds' bits mean the rapture and second coming as commonly understood, then something is badly glitched here.

On the other hand, Jesus was talking to fellow Jews who would have known the symology, and probably took these verses very differently than we read them now.

Sheshbazzar

Contradiction number one:

Ex. 6:3 tells us that Abraham did not know Yahweh's name, but Gen. 22:14 tells us that Abraham named a place after him using his name. Obviously he knew his name.

From my Bible;

"And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Issac, and unto Jacob as
El-Shaddi,* but by My Name Yahweh, was I not Known to them?"

This rendering is consistent with the proclaimations of Gen.15:7 and 28:13 and with all other preceeding evidences of the use of the Name. Neither Judiasim nor Xianity are amenable to correction of their long held traditions.

*El-Shaddi, a TITLE meaning "Almighty Provider,"we believe The Elohim has but one "NAME", YAHWEH all other terms or "names" are discriptive TITLES of majesty.

Amlodhi

Hello Sheshbazzar,

Let me be the first to welcome you to this forum.


The point Tod has made (and with which I agree) is that Ex. 6:3 is not consistent with Gen. 15:7, Gen. 28: 13 or Gen. 22:14.

As you can see from my previous post, I agree with you that YHWH is the name of God, whereas El Shaddai etc., are simply descriptive titles.

Therefore, the fact that the Hebrew YHWH is used in Gen. 15:7 and Gen. 28:13 is indicative that these passages were written and/or edited at some time after "ha Shem" (the Name) was revealed to Moses. Again, an example of this retroactive inclusion would be if I were to say that Cro-magnon man roamed Europe; since the term "Europe" would have been unknown in the time referred to.

Gen. 22:14, as Tod has pointed out, is of a different nature. Here it is stated that Abraham attributed a specific name to a specific place. Hence, it would be entirely disingenuous for a later editor to retroactively insert the term YHWH into the place name of "YHWH yireh" if Abraham had actually named the place something else; "Elohim yireh" for instance.

So, again, I agree with you that YHWH is the revealed name of God. I must, however, disagree that this is consistent with the use of this Name, in Genesis, by those to whom Ex. 6:3 states it was not yet revealed.


Namaste'

Amlodhi

Tod

You are reading WAY too much into this ANALOGY with Noah! The ONLY relevant part of the analogy is this: "For in those days before the Flood people were eating, drinking, taking wives, taking husbands, right up to the day Noah went into the ark, and they suspected nothing till the Flood came and swept them all away. This is what it will be like when the Son of man comes." (vs. 38-39)

The point that the author is trying to make, which seems to be lost on you, is that "as it was in Noah's day," people will be going about their lives as usual "suspect[ing] nothing." That's all. It isn't saying that similar events will occur, only that people will be "eating, drinking, taking wives," etc., living life as usual unaware that something major is about to happen. They are going to be unprepared when people start being "taken" and others "left" behind. There is no comparison made about the actual events that occur, ONLY the unprepared state of the people prior to the occurence of the events.

You are straining hard to make "taken" mean killed and "left" mean survive! There is no precedence for this use of the language, something I've noticed you never let stop you. It simply doesn't make sense. There is no contextual reason to interpret it this way, and nowhere in the entire tirade about his second coming is violence suggested at all. The use of phrases like "gather[ing] his elect" and "one is taken, one left," however, does imply that "elect" people will be "taken."

The reference to "gather[ing] his elect" implies that the ones "taken" are the ones that are the "trustworthy servant[s]" discussed in verse 45, i.e. they are the ones rewarded.

Tod

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Madkins007

The question is- why are some people assuming that the 'taken' are being raptured? They were not when Noah came. Why is this not being read as 'some people are going to die without any warning, so be ready', which seems more in context.

LOL "more in context"?? What, pray tell, in the context of this chapter implies that ANYBODY will be killed during the second coming?

Matt 24:31 "He will send out His angels with a loud trumpet, and they will gather His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other." is not a great support for the rapture, either.

The word 'sky' here is one of the meanings of the term 'ouranos', which also means 'universe' or 'heaven' (and is used that way alone 218 times in the NT) as well, and is translated alternately in Matt. 24 alone as 'sky' or 'heavens') Obviously, if the word should be 'heavens' or 'universe', then the verse takes on a different context, although the overall message seems to be that He will gather His people from all over the place.

Yeah, and then when we look at all the verses in context, we see that references to "one is taken, one left" clarifies what is mean by him "gather[ing] his people from all over the place."

The ineptitude at communicating their thoughts your twisted interpretations would require on the part of the authors in question is absolutely mind-boggling.

Tod

Originally posted by Madkins007
Matt. 24:7. The word for nation is 'ethos', which also means tribe, group of people, and even family.

Oh now, let's by a bit more straightforward. "ethnos, prb. from etho; a race (as of the same habit), i.e. a tribe; spec. a foreign (non-Jewish) one (usually by impl. pagan): - Gentile, heathen, nation, people." (emphasis in text)

So first of all it seems this word is usually meant to imply a large scale reference: "race," "tribe," "nation," a "people." Secondly, it "specifi[es] a foreign (non-Jewish)" group and "usually...impli[es] pagan."

It seems hard to imagine this word was chosen to describe small-scale "group[s] of people" or "family"-sized conflicts among Jews! You just can't rationally get around the large-scale implications of the entire tirade.

Kingdom is the word 'basileia'- and to quote Strong's Greek lexicon directly "royal power, kingship, dominion, rule; not to be confused with an actual kingdom but rather the right or authority to rule over a kingdom"

Well my Strong's says: "basileia from basileus prop. royalty, i.e. (abstr.) rule, or (concr.) a realm (lit. or fig.): -kingdom + reign."

It is hard to believe that the use of this word means anything but what it says, "realm[s]" or "kingdom[s]" will fight among themselves!

And with the death of 1.1 million Jews and the destruction of their temple, the end of sacrifices, etc., etc., etc., I think that the Jews that survived would have agreed that their world was ended. No one said all the Jews died off or anything like that, just that their world, as it existed when Jesus was saying the things in Matt 24, ended.

And again here you interpret the word "world" so horribly loosely that one wonders why this foolish author would chose to use it considering the confusing message it sends.

Furthermore, this isn't an event "unparalleled since the world began" even to the Jews. They'd already had the same things happen at the hand of the Assyrians and the Babylonians. They'd already had their temple destroyed before, they'd already been dispersed into surrounding lands before, they had heavy casualties before, and the whole idea of a more powerful nation decimate them was simply nothing new.

Furthermore, I'm assuming you argue that every use of the word "world" in this chapter means "the Jewish world as they knew it when Jesus spoke," so I assume you interpret his statement that these events will mark "great distress, unparalleled since the world began" as referring only to the beginning of the Jewish world. So tell me then, does this too not mean "world" in the large-scale context too?

If not, to what point does it refer? Obviously the "world" of the Jews when Jesus spoke these words had changed many times. It wasn't the same "world" of the Jews during the Persian empire; It wasn't the same world of the Jews during the exile; It wasn't the world of the Jews under the rule of Kings; It wasn't the world of the Jews after the exodus; It wasn't the world of the Jews under Egyptian slavery, or the world of the Jews during the Patriarchal years.

So what exactly marks the era of this "world of the Jews as they knew it" that you speak of? In the context you use the word, we are REALLY referring to an "era" after all. It would seem more fitting for the author to use a word that better conveys this meaning if your interpretation is the correct one, but then again the gospel authors in your particular "world" aren't real adept or compotent at conveying their messages.

Madkins007

Tod-

I am a little confused (well, according to you, I am a LOT confused, which would not be unusual for me!) but, what is your stance on the rapture?

I thought you did not generally buy into the Bible (althought I could be mistaken, I'm still trying to figure out who is who around here), yet you are arguing for a doctrine that is not even believed in by many of the denominations of Christian churches.

The idea that the people in the Noah/Second Coming analogy, for example, are taken into heaven is a stretch here- they are heading into a horrible war and desolation and you are wondering where the violence is coming from?

As for the use of the word 'world' (Greek- 'kosmos') in much of the writings of the time. I have been describing it as the 'Jewish world', but which I meant (and thought I had described as) the world (culturally, geopolitically, physically) in which the Jews lived and operated, which would include not only the lands of the Middle East, but much of the Roman territories and so forth as well. Pushing the word to include ALL the planet Earth is not supported by the Bible when many uses of it clearly refer to a more limited meaning, and a lot of other passages make more sense if it is given a more intimate defintion.

The use of the word 'world', like so many others in the Bible, are just like many of the words in English. We both have multiple meanings of the words, and can both use the word in many different ways in one discussion, depending on context to help sort it out.

In the case of Matt. 24, the context of 'world' as a more regional and cultural term makes sense, if the 'end times' under discussion are 70AD. The more planetary definitions make sense of the end times have not yet happened- yet it would be odd ot me that SO MANY verses in the Gospels refer to an early time for the end times and Christ's return, and so many of the related prophecies have already come true.

The big desolation, unparalleled since the Earth began is an interesting point. God has exagerated for effect before (Ez. 5:9, 2 Kings 18:5, 23:25- admittedly not the best examples, but I could not find my copy of the 'long list' and these were handy).

(By the way, my Strong's reference, clipped and pasted straight from the reference, came from the on-line Strongs Greek Lexicon located within www.crosswalk.com- the main place I use for online searches, definitions, etc. The other cross-references are from "The Outline to Covenant Eschatology" at www.planetpreterist.com. Click on 'Outline to Preterism')

So, instead of continuing to bash heads on this, wanna talk about whether the Beast 666 was Nero or someone in our times or later?