After the Rapture

The correct reading, straight from the greek New Testament, is "tes thlipseos tes megales" (thV qliyewV thV megalhV) the word I have transliterated "tes" is a definite article. Just to make sure I was recalling this correctly I have checked two greek textbooks and two dictionaries and I am correct. Vines also agrees that this verse does contain the definite article and even notes that the KJV's translation of this verse is wrong.

 

As I said, the Greek New Testament I am reading from says 'ek megas thlipsis' there is no definite article there.

And don't tell me my Greek New Testament is wrong. It is the Received Text that it comes from instead of text based on documents thrown away.

those documents were thrown away for a reason... they were rubbish!

 

==Real scholarly, and Christian, approach that is.

The textus receptus usually translates "ek tes" as "from the" or "of the" (Rev 21:6). If the textus receptus does not contain the definite article ("tes") in Rev 7:14 then it is wrong. How do I know? The earliest, and best, texts contain the definite article in Rev 7:14.

Also in the context of the Rev 7:14 "the great tribulation" makes more sense than "great tribulation". The KJV translates Matt 24:21 as "great tribulation" instead of "a great tribulation" (NASB). Yet it is still clear in the KJV, from the context, that a specific period of time is in view and not tribulation in general (Dan 12:1). The same can be said for the KJV's poor translation of Rev 7:14. It is clear, from the context, that a specific period of time is in view.

Btw, the NKJV also translates this verse as "the great tribulation". I don't know if they did that because of the definite article, which does appear in Rev 7:14, or if they did that because of contextual reasons. Either way even they noted the clear meaning of the text.

 

The Word of God in Revelation 7 says "great tribulation", not 'the great tribulation'. Nor does it say in that chapter that 'those who came out of great tribulation' were beheaded.

 

Yup, clear as mud.

 

==Actually, as I have shown from the text and all the major translations except the KJV, it does say "the great tribulation". It is also clear from the context that a specific time of tribulation is in view and not tribulation in general.

kai eirhka autw, kurie mou, su oidaV. kai eipen moi, outoi eisin oi ercomenoi ek thV qliyewV thV megalhV, kai eplunan taV stolaV autwn kai eleukanan autaV en tw aimati tou arniou.

 

==The above represents some of your statements in this discussion. Is this your idea of intelligent Christian discussion about the text of the Word of God? I certainly hope not.

 

It is no secret that the text used by Westcott and Hort was found in a garbage can...

Now, while in some instances one man's junk is another man's treasure, in the case of the WH text, it should have been left in that trash can where it belonged.

 

==Certainly not an example of Christian scholarship. Instead of discussing the text (etc) you resort to calling a translation of the Word of God "garbage". I have already pointed out the contextual issue and the fact that the textus receptus translates the phrase the same way in other places. In short, you are still avoiding the main issues here. You need to discuss the merit of ek thV qliyewV thV megalhV instead of just dismissing it as garbage.

 

Types etc.

Accountable - You brought up something interesting. Historian Dave MacPherson has researched the origins of the various rapture views for more than 35 years. He found that the earliest Scriptural foundation for the pretribulation rapture view rested entirely on ONLY types and symbols (such as the Jewish feasts - on which there has been no agreement among Darby, Scofield, Walvoord, Lindsey etc.) and on various unexplained symbols in the book of Revelation. He discovered that it took the earliest pretrib developers in Britain 40 years to settle on the "correct" pretrib symbol - and that during those decades it was a race from competitors to try to find a symbol earlier and earlier in the book in order to get out of more and more of that final book's horrors! That is, they started near the end of that book and focused on the harvests. Then they kept looking earlier, stopping at the 2 witnesses and the man child and the 144,000 and then looked at Philadelphia and finally settled, as many have, on Rev. 4:1 ("come up hither")! The earliest developers admitted there was no CLEAR pretrib statement which is why they read pretrib into the symbols! Imagine - the whole theory actually rests on only unexplained symbols! Red faces all around!!!

 

==Let me break it down for you, ok? Dave MacPerson is to the Post-Tribulation Rapture view what Jack Van Impe is to the Pre-Tribulation Rapture view. Serious scholars, on either side, don't take these guys seriously. There is much better material, on both sides, than that of MacPherson and Impe.

You call Dave MacPherson an "historian", excuse me but the man is not a trained historian (no history degrees). MacPherson has a BA in English and spent the first part of his life as a newspaper worker. While that degree and profession is very respectable it is not history. History, like Theology and English, is a field of study that requires a person to know how to "do history". How to do proper historical research, historical reporting, etc. Any person can be interested in history and study it on their own but a historian is a person who has been trained in history at some level.

What you need to do is examine the evidence yourself. Instead of leaning on MacPherson, or anyone else, you should do your own homework. Become familiar with the arguments for both positions, study the passages used by both positions, study the theologians who have promoted both positions, look back through the writings on this subject throughout church history, etc.

For me, what someone believed in 1830 does not determine what I believe in 2007. I can study the Scriptures for myself and come to my own conclusions on this. I have done so. If I believe the person in 1830 was correct I agree with them. If I believe that person in 1830 was wrong I disagree with them.

 

==I hope not. I am still trying to get a straight answer from "His Blood Spoke My Name on Rev 7:14". Maybe I need to start a new thread on that over the next few days? :thumbs:

 

I want to say something on Rev. 7:14. Recently, they argue about 'the great tribulation'. Some saying KJV is error, they debate about which version is correct on Rev. 7:14. In KJV doesn't say 'the', it says, 'out of tribulation'.

Actually, Rev. 7:14 is very clear telling us that, these who already has been through tribulation before they being be gathered to Christ. This verse doesn't mean that the saints shall be escape from the coming tribulation. It shows us that, they already been through tribulation before being gathered together. This group is clearly identifed as Church.

The context of Revelation chapter talking about rapture follow after the sixth seal occured(Rev. 6:12-15) same as Matt. 24:29-31.

Many believe 144,000 Jewish males shall evangelize the gospel over the world after church raptured. It doesn't saying it.

The first part of Revelation chapter 7 talk about 144,000 shall be sealed. The last part of chapter 7 talk about all saints over the world shall be gathered together(rapture).

Same with Revelation chapter 14. Revelation chapter 14:1-13 explain more clear on identify of 144,000, whose are they. It tells us, they are 'the firstfruits', 'redeemed from the men'(sinners), 'virgins'. These are not just men only, also, it included women. Notice it says, 'virgins' of Rev. 14:4. I am sure that they(pretribs) intepreting 'They which were not defiled with WOMEN', means, all males, who refuse sex with women(intepreting it into literal and physical).

But, it speaks of spiritual meaning. It tells us, these people who refuse compromising with world. Rev. 17:5 speaks of wicked world, this verse is not speak of literal woman or harlots either, it speaks of evil worldly things of the system. So, in Rev. 18:4 God warns his people, to come OUT of her. Clearly, it means, all saints(both male and female) are commaned do not compromising with world, to be separated form the world.

So, that mean we must be virgin, to be pured life, walking godly daily.

That what Revelation chapter 14:1-13 talking about.

144,000 pictured as the Church.

Rev. 14:14-20 talking about the harvest of the world same with Matt. 13:39-42; Matt. 25:31-33. Christ shall send his angels to gathering all nations, to separated saints(sheep) from sinners(goats), and all sinners shall be cast away into the fire at the judgment day follow Christ's coming.

Bible teaching us, there shall be the only ONE future gathering at the end of the age. There is the only ONE judgment day at the end of the age. THere is the only ONE coming at the end of the age.

That why I disagree with dispensationalism doctrine.

Also, it teaches us, our gathering together(rapture) always include with second advent same time not either 3 1/2 or 7 years before as what pretrib teaching.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

It says, "out of great tribulation"

This same "great tribulation" is mentioned in Matthew 24:21 and in verse 22 it mentions the elect being saved during this time. Wouldn't that mean that there is salvation during the time of great tribulation?

Are you saying this refers to the church? Please explain this portion

 

Church have been through many tribulations for many centuries. Right now, Church is suffering tribulations. Church is not yet out of great tribulation, we are still in this present world, are persecuting by sinners. We will be finally out of great tribulation WHEN Christ shall come with his angels to gathering us - 2 Thess. 1:4-7.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

As to the waiting for an answer to Revelation 7:14, I gave an answer. It was not accepted because you are trusting in the W&H text. I do not.

Revelation 7:14 does not say 'the great tribulation'
Only the 144,000 sealed servants of God will be saved during the tribulation.
All others will believe the lie and be damned because they received not the love of the truth.