The Rapture or the Second Coming

[EarlyActs]

Because Jesus doesn't return on a white horse. And there is no pre-trib rapture.

Is there a removal from the wrath of God on the last day?

 

[Paul]

The answer you demand is unknowable. It could be tomorrow or it could be in two years.
Judging from Rev 13 and the beast system that is currently being established it sure sounds like it's closer than we think.

What is understandable is what must take place first before the Son of Man returns on the clouds of heaven. Christ's 2nd coming.

I would state to you Rev 11 is a sign that can't be mistaken. 1260 days as I read and these two belong to Christ. The beast is the one who is allowed by God to overpower and kill these two witnesses after their testimony has been completed as decreed by God Himself. Their bodies lay in a public place for 3 1/2 days as the world looks on and gloats at their demise. God raises them up again and they stand on their feet, then they ascend alive again to heaven as the whole world looks on. I get the impression this is Gods final warning so if any in those days has even a shred of faith they will believe. The beast is now in the world with the powerful deception to deceive all those who don't believe and refuse to repent and love to do evil into following Him so they with be condemned. While many in Jerusalem give glory to God suggesting they become members of the body of Christ.

You can't miss these signs.

The bowl judgments are the last of God judgments and are the judgments that plunge the beast's kingdom into darkness.

The beast and his false prophet on acts on his behalf and their armies, visible and invisible, are defeated by Christ and His armies not mankind.

A coming of the Lord for the battle on the great day of God Almighty.
Rev 16:15
15“Look, I come like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and remains clothed, so as not to go naked and be shamefully exposed.”

A temple not yet built again.
2thess 2:
He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming.

Zech 14 - The mount of olives is split in two to make a way of escape from the surrounding armies, Armies defeated by a coming of the Lord not mankind. I believe it's the earthquake as noted in Rev 11 that splits the mount of olives in two.

You will flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with him.

 

[Eleanor]

Yeah, I believe thats now, false religion, man exalting his will over Gods will

That's been here all along. . .I think that is too easy.

 

[Josheb]

Arguments from silence???? Do you read your own post?

And now we have tu quoque.

Jesus returns back just like the bible says He will do.

That is true. The problem is the modern futurism you preach is not what the Bible teaches. The rapture and Jesus' return are not two different events separated by large periods of time.

WHAT????? You already lost that argument.

Only in your imagination.

The verse says....and please read it slowly..."strike down the nations". Where do you think the nations are? On Mars?
With righteousness He judges and wages war....The armies follow Jesus on white horses. Did you read that part? Was Jesus riding around in circles in heaven with the armies following Jesus trotting around while riding His horse in a circle?

Show me where the Bible explicitly states Jesus is physically on the earth when any of that happens. No one disputes things happen on earth. The question is "Is Jesus physically on the earth when those things happen, or are they commanded from heaven where he sits enthroned?"

When you come up dry and discover scripture never actually states Jesus is physically on the earth, please have the courtesy to acknowledge that fact - the fact of scripture - and respect everyone here enough by acknowledging the separated rapture position is reached by inference only, and not what scripture actually states.

Yes, you stated that before.....What I just did was show you Jesus LEAVES heaven. Gitty up?

No, you did not "show" that. What you did was add an inferential interpretation of what is stated, and you did that in direct contradiction to other scripture. Psalm 110:1 contradicts EVERYTHING you preach. God told Jesus to stay seated at His right hand until God defeat's all the Son's enemies. That is what the entire book of Revelation describes. Jesus is enthroned in heaven while a huge pile of stuff happens in both the heavens and the earth and when all his enemies are defeated he comes down to earth in the new city of peace. That is what scripture says and, unlike you, I can actually point to scripture that explicitly states what I post.

So show me the verse that explicitly states Jesus is physically on earth.
Show me the verse that explicitly states the white horse has left heaven.
Do not delay. Show me the verses in your next post. No obfuscation. All that is requested is an explicit statement in scripture.

Noooooooooooooo. You need to get over your concept....In the previous paragraph just above I pointed out several descriptions in the verses that show Jesus left heaven.

No, what you did was post eisegetically interpreted inferences. That is not scripture.

I should give you a trophy for trying to answer...thing is, it's only a honorable mention.

You should stick to the topic being discussed and post actual explicit statements in scripture and not eisegetically inferential nonsense.

1. Show me the verse that explicitly states Jesus is physically on earth.
2. Show me the verse that explicitly states the white horse has left heaven.

Do it now, please.

 

[Josheb]

No I didn't....and to be honest I shouldn't have to explain it to you...BUT...I will. No one knows the date of the pre-trib rapture. Got it?

No, I do not get it and neither do you. If the rapture occurs after the seven-year tribulation then you have marked the timing of the rapture. If your claim is correct then everyone knows when the rapture will occur. It will occur seven years after the tribulation begins. You've just contradicted the doctrine of imminence.

Likewise, since the doctrine of imminence teaches Jesus can come at any time, the teaching that says Jesus will come after the tribulation means he cannot come any time. Jesus cannot come at any time AND come only after the seven years. If Jesus can come any time, then he can come tomorrow, he can come on day one of the tribulation, or day forty-three of the tribulation, or mid-way, or three-quarters of the way through the tribulation He can come ANY time!!!

But modern futurism says, no, he will come after the tribulation and that will take seven years.

You have, in fact contradicted yourself. No Christian can believe both the doctrine of imminence AND modern futurism.

Now, I suppose if you know the date the tribulation begins you can add 7 years to that day and figure it out. Thing is the tribulation doesn't have to begin at the moment of the pre-trib rapture.

So, no contradiction.

When the tribulation begins is irrelevant. If it started tomorrow, then we'd all have the beginning of the countdown. We'd all know Jesus is coming back in seven years. We'd all know the doctrine of imminence is mistaken. If the tribulation started on October 12th, 2027, then we'd all know the countdown had begun. We'd know Jesus was coming seven years after that date and not any time before then. If the tribulation started in 2040 we'd then know Jesus is coming in 2047 and not before then. If the tribulation started in the year 10787 we would then know Jesus is returning in 10794 and not before then. Even if the tribulation begins one month, three months, or one year after everyone has been wisped off the earth we'd know Jesus is returning seven years after the tribulation and not before then. Jesus will not and cannot return tomorrow because the rapture has not happened and the tribulation has not begun and ended. You have just delayed Christ's coming by at least seven years!

Modern futurism does not adhere to the doctrine of imminence.
Every time a modern futurist appeals to the doctrine of imminence s/he contradicts himself.


And I am still waiting on you to post some scripture as requested.

1. Show me the verse that explicitly states Jesus is physically on earth.
2. Show me the verse that explicitly states the white horse has left heaven.

No inferences. Explicit statements. No delays. No digressions. Just post the scripture or acknowledge they do not exist.

 

[Arial]

Rev 19:11-16.

Can you look it up or would you like me to post a link?

I have addressed that in other threads with you as has @Josheb. He addressed it in this post. You ignored it then and you ignore it now. All your do is give your view as though it is the only possible valid one. Then you keep pushing people to answer the same question again and post posts as though they never had. Is it that there is only one answer (yours) and until a person agrees that you are right, they have not answered. When one asks someone to give an answer to something, one is supposed to actually consider the answer they gave.

Also, it is self-absorbed when a person demands that others answer questions but never answers any questions asked of them. And when someone considers that they are above the rules and cannot cease breaking them.

Rev 19 11-16 states quite clearly that what John is recording is a vision of something that takes place in heaven. From other scriptures we know that it has its counterpart on earth. Jesus destroys the wicked and judges the inhabitants of the earth. Since the actions that are taking place in heaven involve spirit beings who are invisible to us, it can only be expressed through signifying. Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show unto his servants even the things which must shortly come to pass: and he sent and signified it by his angel unto is servant John;

Signify: semaino. To show by a sign, indicate, or make known. One of the first rules of interpretation is to interpret according to what the Bible itself says it is doing. So, here we have Jesus being revealed. "The Revelation of Jesus Christ. And we have the announcement that what follows will be signified. That is, shown using symbolism. What Jesus is doing in heaven past, present, and future is being shown to us. We already have the account of how it took place on earth in the other books of the Bible.

 

[CrowCross]

And now we have tu quoque.

{edit}

That is true. The problem is the modern futurism you preach is not what the Bible teaches. The rapture and Jesus' return are not two different events separated by large periods of time.

It's only separated by about 7 years. Thing is, you're locked into your eschatological belief...despite the Word of God speaking against your theology concerning this issue.

Only in your imagination.

{edit}

Show me where the Bible explicitly states Jesus is physically on the earth when any of that happens. No one disputes things happen on earth. The question is "Is Jesus physically on the earth when those things happen, or are they commanded from heaven where he sits enthroned?"}{editface-palm....come on Josheb...In Rev 19 Jesus is sitting on a white horse...not on His throne.

I did show you...post 197. Here it is again...
WHAT????? You already lost that argument. The verse says....{edit}.."strike down the nations".{edit}
{edit}

Yes, you stated that before.....What I just did ws show you Jesus LEAVES heaven.{edit}

When you come up dry and discover scripture never actually states Jesus is physically on the earth, please have the courtesy to acknowledge that fact - the fact of scripture - and respect everyone here enough by acknowledging the separated rapture position is reached by inference only, and not what scripture actually states.

{edit} You've reached that conclusion through inference only. {edit}

No, you did not "show" that. What you did was add an inferential interpretation of what is stated, and you did that in direct contradiction to other scripture. Psalm 110:1 contradicts EVERYTHING you preach. God told Jesus to stay seated at His right hand until God defeat's all the Son's enemies. That is what the entire book of Revelation describes. Jesus is enthroned in heaven while a huge pile of stuff happens in both the heavens and the earth and when all his enemies are defeated he comes down to earth in the new city of peace. That is what scripture says and, unlike you, I can actually point to scripture that explicitly states what I post.

LOL...that's what you make the scripture say. Sitting on the throne in heaven . {edit}
You are wrong and misread Psalm 110:1. Wanna know how? Read on Josheb.
Zech 14:3 Then the LORD will go out to fight against those nations, as He fights in the day of battle. 4 On that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half the mountain moving to the north and half to the south.

Sounds like the BIBLE is saying Jesus will get off His throne, mount a white horse then come to earth and stand on the Mt. of Olives.
If you noticed Jesus stands on the Mt. of Olives BEFORE the enemies are defeated. This means Jesus isn't confined to the throne until the enemies are defeated.
This means you have misinterpreted Psalm 110:1.

So show me the verse that explicitly states Jesus is physically on earth.
Show me the verse that explicitly states the white horse has left heaven.
Do not delay. Show me the verses in your next post. No obfuscation. All that is requested is an explicit statement in scripture.

I did above. Show me how they are wrong instead of making your claims.

No, what you did was post eisegetically interpreted inferences. That is not scripture.

You should stick to the topic being discussed and post actual explicit statements in scripture and not eisegetically inferential nonsense.

{edit}

1. Show me the verse that explicitly states Jesus is physically on earth.
2. Show me the verse that explicitly states the white horse has left heaven.

{Edit}

Do it now, please.

 

[Josheb]

Because Jesus doesn't return on a white horse. And there is no pre-trib rapture.

Rev 19:11-16.

Can you look it up or would you like me to post a link?

Let's take a look at the passage and see what it actually, explicitly states compared to what you've made it say.

Revelation 19:11-16
11And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war. 12His eyes are a flame of fire, and on His head are many diadems; and He has a name written on Him which no one knows except Himself. 13He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. 14And the armies which are in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, were following Him on white horses. 15From His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may strike down the nations, and He will rule them with a rod of iron; and He treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty. 16And on His robe and on His thigh He has a name written, “KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.” 17Then I saw an angel standing in the sun, and he cried out with a loud voice, saying to all the birds which fly in midheaven, “Come, assemble for the great supper of God, 18so that you may eat the flesh of kings and the flesh of commanders and the flesh of mighty men and the flesh of horses and of those who sit on them and the flesh of all men, both free men and slaves, and small and great.”

Do a search for the word "earth." It is nowhere found in that text. Nowhere. Do a search for the word "heaven." That word is found. In John's vision the heavens are opened and it is in heaven that he sees the white horse. The Faithful and True is riding a white horse in heaven and what is he doing? While riding the white horse in heaven he is judging and waging war. The white horse is explicitly stated to be in heaven, and nowhere does it state he ever leaves. In point of fact, that passage explicitly reports everything described in the passage is happening in heaven. Neither Jesus nor the white horse has left heaven.

Jesus is NOT on earth in Revelation 19:11-19.

You are wrong, @CrowCross.

The reason you are wrong is because you've believed modern futurist teaching and NOT what scripture actually, factually explicitly states about the white horse.

I, however, have given you the benefit of the doubt and provided an opportunity for you to prove your position with equally explicit scripture. Show me the verse that explicitly states the white horse has left heaven. Absent that verse and given what Rev. 19:11 explicitly states this part of your eschatology is demonstrably incorrect. Don't dely, don't obfuscate, don't change the subject, don't digress. Just show me the verse.


Show me the verse that explicitly states the white horse has left heaven.

 

[Josheb]

Another Yawn...already did.

No, you did not. Revelation 19:11-19 does NOT state what you say it says. Post #208 proves it.


Show me the verse that explicitly states the white horse has left heaven.

.

 

[CrowCross]

I have addressed that in other threads with you as has @Josheb. He addressed it in this post. You ignored it then and you ignore it now. All your do is give your view as though it is the only possible valid one. Then you keep pushing people to answer the same question again and post posts as though they never had. Is it that there is only one answer (yours) and until a person agrees that you are right, they have not answered. When one asks someone to give an answer to something, one is supposed to actually consider the answer they gave.

Also, it is self-absorbed when a person demands that others answer questions but never answers any questions asked of them. And when someone considers that they are above the rules and cannot cease breaking them.

Rev 19 11-16 states quite clearly that what John is recording is a vision of something that takes place in heaven. From other scriptures we know that it has its counterpart on earth. Jesus destroys the wicked and judges the inhabitants of the earth. Since the actions that are taking place in heaven involve spirit beings who are invisible to us, it can only be expressed through signifying. Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show unto his servants even the things which must shortly come to pass: and he sent and signified it by his angel unto is servant John;

Signify: semaino. To show by a sign, indicate, or make known. One of the first rules of interpretation is to interpret according to what the Bible itself says it is doing. So, here we have Jesus being revealed. "The Revelation of Jesus Christ. And we have the announcement that what follows will be signified. That is, shown using symbolism. What Jesus is doing in heaven past, present, and future is being shown to us. We already have the account of how it took place on earth in the other books of the Bible.

You might want to read what I just posted to @Josheb in post 207. I pretty much responded to your post there.

To address another point your trying to make...I ask you, is Revelation all symbolic?

 

[CrowCross]

No, you did not. Revelation 19:11-19 does NOT state what you say it says. Post #208 proves it.


Show me the verse that explicitly states the white horse has left heaven.

.

Verse 15. 15 From His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may strike down the nations, and He will rule them with a rod of iron; and He treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty.

Zech 14:3 Then the LORD will go out to fight against those nations, as He fights in the day of battle. 4 On that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half the mountain moving to the north and half to the south

Now, show me a verse where Jesus is riding in circles in heaven on a white horse. Giddy up?

 

[Arial]

If you've ben following me you would have seen that is only one way to demonstrate the pre-trib rapture. We've dicussed the other reasons.

Unfortunately, what you present does not demonstrate a pre-trib rapture. It only demonstrates a Dispensational pre mil hermeneutic used to interpret. What needs to be done in order to continue in that vein is for you to show the hermeneutic being used, demonstrate why it is valid, followed by a thorough exegesis of both the passage being used (the white horse thingy) and the one you are applying it to (the 1 Thess passage). You are starting with the assumption of a pre-trib rapture before you have established that there is such a thing. (from Scripture not from suppositions, declarations, of a repeating of the beliefs of "teachers" of this pre-trib rapture and their evidence). IOW, a trip back to the counsel of the Berans is in order because it was never done. None of the counter posts have even been taken into consideration. It seems that if plausibility, carefully worked through and presented, becomes impossible to discount, in the same manner of exegesis and hermeneutical base from which it is derived and offered, then it simply disappears by ignoring, as though none of it had ever been said. Or is met with a series of violations of rules 2.1 and 2.2.

Will you ever address the White Horse being missing from the ascention?

A white horse is not missing from the ascension. It was never there. You are asking that of a person who uses a Reformed hermeneutic as their base and a covenant framework around interpretation. It does no good to ask them a question that comes strictly out of a different hermeneutic (and no exegesis just eisegesis) and expect them to give an answer that would satisfy you. It never did any of the times it was dealt with, and it won't the next time either. It is not questions like this that need to be answered. It is the validity of the interpretive framework being used that needs to be established.

I have to chuckle at you....you try to put down dispensationalism by laying your bad hermenuitics on everyone. As if you have all the answers.
You should be thanking me for pointing out the white horse.

Before you made that remark, did you look at what was offered to know whether or not it was a bad hermeneutic? Or did you just say it was and consider that the fact that it was different than yours all you needed to know to know it was bad? And it is not my hermeneutic. It is the Reformed hermeneutic. It if you had actually read the OP and posts in it, you would know that. If you had actually read the posts that address directly the seven dispensations in dispensationalism---apart from any of the comments I made about them (though I do show why they are antithetical to Scripture, so that would be helpful) you could make an informed decision as to which was bad and which was good. The Dispensational dispensations and what they entail are not mine either, or even my opinion. They are the ones Dispensationalism gives.

I did not need you to point out the white horse to me. I have been aware of it for over forty years. Even though I agreed with a pre-trib rapture for over half of that time because no other options were offered to me, and even a teaching of how to read and interpret the Bible was absent from the pulpit or any Dispensational writings and was never used by authors and preachers either; that white horse remained an unexamined mystery. However, I never thought Jesus would literally return on a white horse and armies on horseback would fight the final battle! It was when I began to pay attention to the words that the Bible says about it's own writings that things fell into their proper place. Things that are invisible because they are in a realm that is invisible to us are being depicted the only way they can be. With symbolic images that express the literal event. And that Revelation is not a book of only foretelling of things, but the revelation being given is Jesus. A peak into the heavenly realm to see what was going on there, that we were experience here on earth through the means of men.

Considering you can't reply to the white horse not being at the ascention properly and convincingly would you like to move on to the times of Noah or Daniel 12?

Since I have already stated that I do not consider that the Bible ever says a literal white horse will be present at his return, how can I address an assertion that the white horse is woodenly literal, and then explain something about the white horse that I do not believe? No, I would not like to move on to Noah or Dan 12. Everything that I said about them in various other threads was not even considered or properly dealt with and they won't be this time either. Since all these things you claim as absolute truth, and consider that good enough as an argument, are coming out of a Dispensational hermeneutic---and they do have one, though it often contradicts itself---it is the interpretive methods that need to be stated and demonstrated as valid. It would also be helpful if, having set up a dispensational framework of interpretation, Dispensationalism used exegesis of the scriptures instead off eisegesis.

 

[Arial]

You might want to read what I just posted to @Josheb in post 207. I pretty much responded to your post there.

To address another point your trying to make...I ask you, is Revelation all symbolic?

I did read it. Before what I posted to you and I stand by all that I said.

To address another point your trying to make...I ask you, is Revelation all symbolic?

See post #212, #206

 

[CrowCross]

A white horse is not missing from the ascension. It was never there.

Exactly. There was no white horse present at the ascension. The white horses are not present at the resurrection/rapture. (first Thes 4) But, they are present at the second coming. (Rev 19)

Before you made that remark, did you look at what was offered to know whether or not it was a bad hermeneutic?

You presented no biblical verses to support your opinion...your interpretation. On the other hand, I did.

that white horse remained an unexamined mystery.

Really? Well it's been solved.

Since I have already stated that I do not consider that the Bible ever says a literal white horse will be present at his return,

Even if the white horse is symbolic...Jesus didn't ascend into heaven with that symbology. This is yet another issue you refuse to address.

Proper hermeneutics when looking at the full council which contains what the angels said in Acts 1 provides more information and helps us connect the dots and figure out what you call a mystery.

 

[Josheb]

You might want to read what I just posted to @Josheb in post 207. I pretty much responded to your post there.

I read it. It's a pile of dross not worth the time it took to write or the space it takes up in the thread. Jesus is not on a white horse in Zec 14. That is just another example of you not reading what is actually stated, making eisegetic inferences and expecting everyone to agree, and NOT doing what was aksed. = Post a scripture that explicitly states Jesus is physically on earth on a white horse that has left heaven in a separated rapture.

When you cite Zec 14:3 you are contradicting yourself because there's no white horse.

AND if the passage in which the verse occurs was read literally then Jerusalem would be destroyed. The text states an earthquake occurs and the earthquakes is so huge that it splits the land in two for miles. An earthquake the violent would literally destroy Jerusalem. The Mount of Olives is less than five miles from Jerusalem. The valley created by the earthquake is at least nine miles in length and it splits mountains in two! If the passage is taken literally then the passage is teaching the destruction of Jerusalem!!!

If Jerusalem is destroyed then there's no one to save and nothing over which to rule. A literal reading of Zechariah 14 would make a millennial rule meaningless and that would then mean.....

You have contradicted yourself again.

So, you, therefore, did NOT do what you think you've done.

AND you have not answered the question asked.

What you have done is, once again, demonstrate a profound mishandling of scripture and an allegiance to modern futurism that is greater than an allegiance to what scripture states.

To address another point your trying to make...I ask you, is Revelation all symbolic?

No.

However, now that you have asked, the modern futurist hermeneutic requires the modern futurist to read scripture literally. If you were to actually practice the futurist hermeneutic with any consistency we might actually get further along in this discussion. If you actually read scripture literally, as the hermeneutic dictates, then you would.....

• Acknowledge Revelation 19:11-19 is part of a vision, and NOT a factual report of what factually happens.
• Acknowledge the vision states the white horse is in heaven and never states the white horse leaves heaven.
• Acknowledge the vision states Jesus, the one identified as "Faithful and True," is also in heaven and is never stated to leave.
• Acknowledge the vision states the armies are in heaven and never reported to leaving heaven.
• Acknowledge the kings orf the earth assembles their armies but that is the end of the passage. The armies are never reported fighting. They are assembled, but no fighting is reported.
• Acknowledge the fact that instead of the assembled armies fighting the beast is seized and thrown into the lake of fire! The rest are "killed with the sword," but it is still never stated Jesus has left heaven.
• Acknowledge the sword Jesus holds is in his mouth, not his hand, and it is with the sword in his mouth that the nations are struck down and ruled.
• Acknowledge the vision states Jesus is King of Kings and Lord of Lords in heaven while riding the white horse in heaven. He does not have to come to earth to be King of Kings and rule the nations with his sword.

But you do not acknowledge the facts of the text. You make stuff up and the stuff you invent directly contradicts what is explicitly stated.

If the book of Revelation is ALL symbolic then 1) other scripture is the first and best interpreter of the symbols and 2) without the use of other scripture the symbolism of Revelation can be made to say anything and none of us will ever prove anything because everyone's position is an equally valid eisegesis. Eisegesis is to be avoided at all costs.
Where Revelation is symbolic the first and best interpreter of what is symbolic is other scripture. That means...

The mention of a "white horse" should be understood in the context of scripture's prior use of that symbol.
The mention of the "Faithful and True should be understood in the context of scripture's prior use of that phrase and its symbolic meaning.
Likewise, the mentions of fiery eyes, diadems, and the unknown name should all be understood by what prior scripture has stated about those symbols, how scripture defines them, and what the significance of that meaning has for the passage in Revelation.

If Revelation 19:11-19 is not ALL symbolic then what is literal and what is symbolic needs to be sorted out. All that is symbolic in Revelation 19:11-19 should be understood as prior scripture defines it, not as a theology invented in the 19th century defines it apart from and in contradiction with scripture, especially when that theology contradicts its own hermeneutical requirements.

And you have never bothered to do any of what I just listed. You are one of this forum's worst exegetes. That problem is very common in modern futurism.

Now..... I just answered your question AND I did so with specificity and a modicum of detailed explanation. I have not received answers to the questions I have asked. Responses are not answers. Abuses of scripture are not answers. You have NOT provided a single verse that explicitly states Jesus has left heaven and physically come to earth prior to Revelation 21, and you have NOT provided a single verse that explicitly states the white horse has left heaven. What you've done is post verses that do not explicitly stated what is claimed, verses that you eisegetically interpret to infer a leaving from heaven when the verses do not actually explicitly state any such thing.

Please do so now.

 

[Josheb]

Verse 15. 15 From His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may strike down the nations, and He will rule them with a rod of iron; and He treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty.

Yep. That is what the verse states. The problem is what the verse states is not what you preach.

As I have just posted in post 215, the sword is in his mouth, not his hand. He is wielding that sword while riding in heaven. What the text states is he's riding around in heaven ruling the nations while in heaven, and nowhere does the text state he leaves heaven. There's no mention of his being on earth at all.

So..... you, therefore, have NOT answered the question asked. You were asked to provide a verse that explicitly states Jesus is physically on earth and Revelation 19:11-19 makes no such explicit statement.

Zech 14:3 Then the LORD will go out to fight against those nations, as He fights in the day of battle. 4 On that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half the mountain moving to the north and half to the south.

I have already explained that passage, too, but I will add two more comments. First, Zec 14:3 explicitly states the LORD, not the Lord, sets foot on the Mount of Olives (see Ps. 110:1), and to Zec. 14:3 does not report the LORD's setting foot on the Mount of Olives occurs prior to any tribulation. You add to the text to make it say something it does not actually state.

Now, show me a verse where Jesus is riding in circles in heaven on a white horse. Giddy up?

I have never said Jesus was riding in circles. The fact is the very text you cite explicitly states Jesus is seen in heaven. Jesus is not seen on earth.

Revelation 19:11
And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war.

The white horse and its rider are seen in heaven.

Show me the verse where the white horse is explicitly stated to leave heaven. Do not infer it.

 

[Arial]

Exactly. There was no white horse present at the ascension. The white horses are not present at the resurrection/rapture. (first Thes 4) But, they are present at the second coming. (Rev 19)

Dispensational interpretation based on a presupposition of a pre-trib rapture. That is an improper way to ever get an accurate interpretation of scripture.

For a different perspective that is not based on presuppositions or eisegesis, but flows naturally out of a correct view of the Bible, according to what it is, a continuous forward flow from creation, to a curse, to a promise, Gen 1-3), of the historical perspective of God's plan of redemption; see posts #206, 208, 212, 215, 216, and OP "Bible Study" in Bible Questions and Study.

 

[brightfame52]

How long is a generation in your understanding? I'm 66. If I live to be 80 that would mean Jesus will be returning within the next 14 years. Is that what you mean when saying Jesus is coming to judge the world and usher in eternity soon?

Yeah something like that, but we dont know for sure

 

[brightfame52]

That's been here all along. . .I think that is too easy.

Yeah but its been fully developed now. Just about every local congregation is apostate preaching a false man exalting gospel, and even in most cases its cleverly disguised.

 

[Arial]

You presented no biblical verses to support your opinion...your interpretation. On the other hand, I did.

Is that your answer to the question of whether or not you actually read the OP I referenced before you said it was a bad hermeneutic? Or is it just a remark unrelated to the question?

Really? Well it's been solved.

As I said in the comment you are responding to, it was unresolved and unexamined in my days of ore-trib-premil Dispensationalism. It was resolved for me when that interpretive framework was replaced by a covenant framework that keeps the Bible as one story from Gen 3 on, following the creation account that establishes who God is and who man is. The story of Christ redeeming. So why on earth are you saying that you have resolved the mystery with your interpretive frame work of dispensations? You are interpreting literally what the Bible itself says is presented in symbols, I have already showed you why that is necessary. It is the heavenly perspective of Christ's work, that until that was done, all we had was the earthly, human perspective.

Even if the white horse is symbolic...Jesus didn't ascend into heaven with that symbology. This is yet another issue you refuse to address.

I have never refused to address it because it has never before been presented to be addressed. My answer is, "So what if the same symbolism was not used?" There was no symbolism at all used in the record of his ascension. Does that mean it didn't happen just as it was said to happen. But here is something concerning that, that you completely ignored. The actual non symbolic account of how he will return: Rev 1:7 Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all the tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so. Amen.

No white horse there either.

Proper hermeneutics when looking at the full council which contains what the angels said in Acts 1 provides more information and helps us connect the dots and figure out what you call a mystery.

What hermeneutic is that? The "full council of God" applies to exegesis. The hermeneutic is the interpretive method. In this case, the two being put on display are Covenantal and Dispensational. The Covenantal/Reformed does begins with the Bible as a unity between OT and NT consistent with its beginning in Gen 1, with Christ always the protagonist ( it is his story of him redeeming). Redemption is the overarching story/plan of redemption.

Dispensationalism does not have Christ even entering the picture until some of prophecy, and even then it is national Israel that is the sole focus and receiver of these prophecies, not Christ.