Okay. Playtime is over.
Matthew 23:29-39 lays the foundation for
Matthew 24. For your doctrine to work:
You have yet to prove there is a gap in
Matthew 24.
Mat 24:37-38
(37) But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
(38) For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
If this is a rapture then you have a problem. This scripture states that the Coming of the Lord was like the days of Noah. During the judgment in Noah's day it was the wicked that were removed from the earth not the righteous. So it was at the Coming of the Lord. The wicked were removed not the righteous.
Mat 24:29-31
(29) Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
(30) And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
(31) And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
This is the reason that I quoted this in the beginning:
This scripture is clearly speaking of the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, yet it uses the same exact type of language that is used in my original quote. You have already agreed that my original quote was a Judgment of God. I have shown above that this is a direct reference to the Coming of Jesus and that Jesus used the same language. To refute the plain language of these passages you will have to prove that the same language means completely different things between the two. You have no biblical reason to substantiate this. Please show how your doctrine can be correct with such plain language usage. If sun, moon, and stars stop shinning when the Babylonian Empire was destroyed, then they could also do the same when Jerusalem was. You will have to show how my original quote has not happened yet for your view of
Matthew 24 to be credible.
Please show us your GAP.
You cannot prove a physical Coming of Jesus with
Acts 1:9-11. It states the “same Jesus” would return “in like manner” as the “same Jesus” “went”. The manner that Jesus left their sight was not in a physical body. The manner which he was taken from their sight was by the Cloud that took him out of their sight.
Hebrews is talking about the High Priestly duty of Jesus. You are missing the whole point of that scripture when you place
Acts 1:9-11 with it and try to prove a physical body by that. That is not good enough.
Zec. 12:10. Look at these verses: Acts
Rev. 11:13 are two examples as is
Rev 1:7,
Acts 2:23, 40. Clear references to the 70 AD Coming. A Coming you have yet to prove did not take place as Jesus said it would.
Zec. 13, Peter stated this passage by
Joel 2 were fulfilled in his generation please read
Acts 2. Peter even goes so far as to say that he was living in the Last Days. What Peter taught on the Day of Pentecost is exactly what AFP teaches. Your futurism has changed the clear message. Prove that you, not Peter are living in the Last Days.
Jesus came to save the remnant of Israel in 70 AD. That remnant was in the Church. They were saved and left, and the wicked were removed. Your doctrine is on one side of
Matthew 24 and the Word of God is on the other.
Threaded Mode
