You have been answered ad-nausea.
No, you responded ad nauseam. None of them were correct answers when measured by what is stated in scripture. Not one.
You act as if Jesus doesn't return on a white horse...
Never happened. What I did do is point to the silence of scripture.
yet have never explained the purpose of that verse.
The onus is not on me. You were the one who brought up the white horse and you are the one failing to prove he leaves heaven and comes to earth on a white horse. Attempts to shift the onus are fallacious, and it's something you've done throughout the thread.
You never explained what is meant by Jesus will return the same way in which He left as per the angels comment.
I did, actually. I, unlike you, provided more than a half-dozen verses from the whole of scripture, both Old and New, explaining what is "meant." I used scripture to understand scripture. I did not use a man-made hermeneutic invented in the 19th century. You did that. It is because you stuck to that failed model that Jesus leaving on a white horse AND coming on a white horse were never proven.
The Noah prophecy is part of Jesus' answer to the question...
Yep. That's not a point in dispute. What is in dispute is your interpretation of Jesus' words. I looked at scripture. You looked to a 19th century man-made hermeneutic.
what will be the sign of Your coming...Jesus mentions people will be having "good times".
Yep. They had good times all they way up to the point when the flood took away those outside of God's covenant to be destroyed. You, using a 19th century end-times model invented in the 19th century make the text say the exact oppositie of what it literally states:
the ones taken away were destroyed!!! That passage has absolutely nothing to do with any rapture, separated or not, but that is what the modern futurist model teaches its adherence to do: Ignore what is stated. Make scripture say things it does not state.
This makes perfect sense for a pre-trib return...
No, it does not. It makes no sense at all. It is quite literally nonsensical.
...but not a return at the end of the tribulation as the world will be pretty much devastated by them.
The exact same text in which the appeal to Noah is made by Jesus explicitly states the disciples will be handed over to tribulation and immediately after the great tribulation they will see more signs and they are not to be mislead.
Modern futurism denies it all. It misleads.
So, I am therefore back to my earlier point: perhaps what you tire of is the inability to provide actual scripture stating what you claim, and the frustration of near-constantly having to look at scripture stating the exact opposite or being silent. I empathize. I used to be a dispy. I very much know what you're going through.
Do not hate the messenger.
If you haven't done so already, then read Kim Riddlebarger's "
A Case for Amillennialism," and Robert Clouse's "
Four Views on the Millennium." You do not have to agree with Riddlebarger's position, but you will find he is a better exegete than any dispensationalist you have ever read, even Thomas Ice.