One Taken, One Left? by Steve Wohlberg........Mathew 24:40 interpretation

Bible Reader - Bible Guy
@badfish (208)
United States
December 5, 2009 6:58pm CST
Jesus Christ said said, "Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left" Mt 24:40. Countless Christians apply this verse to the "Great Disappearance" when believers will suddenly vanish - leaving their clothes, shoes, necklaces, and wedding rings on Earth. Such an interpretation is professionally illustrated in Left Behind: The Movie. In many prophecy books on this subject, unbelieving spouces are described as waking up in the morning only to discover that their believinghusbands or wives have been "taken" or raptured to heaven. All who are "left behind" must endure the "seven years of tribulation" and the rise of the Antichrist. But they have a "second chance" to be saved. Is such an interpretation, popular though it may be, really what Jesus meant in Mathew 24:40? Let's look closely at the context to find out. "Mathew 24:27 - Jesus said, "For as the Lightning comes out of the east, and shines even to the west, so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be." This verse is clearly describing Christ's visable and ultra-glorious Second Coming. Few disagree here. "Mathew 24:30. 31 - Jesus continued, "Amen 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 poew and great glory. And he shall send his angel, with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to another." Once again, the second Coming of Jesus Christ is clearly described. This coming will be literal, visable, loud, and glorious. All the world will see it. "Mathew 24:36 - "But of that day {the day of the second Coming}and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but My father only. " once again, the context is the second coming "Mathew 24:37 - "But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be, For as in the days that were before the flood they were eathing and drinking marrying and giving in marrage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the son od man be. " Jesus clearly compares his second coming with Noah's flood. This flood came suddenly upon the lost "and took them all away" In other words, they were lost - with no second chances. Christ said, "...so shall the coming of the son of man be." "Mathew 24:40 - "THEN [capitols added] shall two be in the feild; the one shall be taken and the other left." The all-important question is: When is "then"? Does this verse describe the sudden disappearances of millions of Christians before a seven-year period of tribulation, as is taught in Left Behind? Or is it talking about the salvation of one and the destruction of another at the second coming of Jesus - at the end of the world? For those willing to closely examine the context, the answer is clear, According to the preceding verses of Mathew 24:27, 30,31, 36, 37-39, the answer is - "one shall be taken" and "one shall be left" at the visable, audible, glorious, flood-like Second Coming of Jesus Christ! And just like in Noah's day, when that time finally come there will be no second chances. http://www.whitehorsemedia.com
1 person likes this
2 responses
@Harley009 (1420)
• India
9 Dec 09
I don't know what exactly is Mathew 24:40, but what I understood is it will be like flood at the time of Prophet Noah; Right believers will be taken and all remaining will be left off. I agree with the second coming of Jesus, Jesus will come again, live here, he will abolish all evil things, false beliefs, He will kill anti-christ( Dajjal) He lead believers and will die. Mathew 24:27 says about a lighting, I'm not sure whether it is jesus or not, But there is some Islamic records that there will be some fire spreading from east to west as a sign of Hour. Many of these verses you repeatedly says "Son of Man", but Christians want to say Son of God. Mathew 24:36 says Hour knoweth to No man, but only my Father, This Shows Jesus was not a god, he was a man - a creation of God, he don't know about everything. But God knows everything and God knows when the Last Hour is. Jesus will not mind Who ever believe that Jesus is God or Son of God, but he will mind the people followed words of Jesus "Lord our God is ONE", "There shall be no Image or likeness to God, neither up in the sky nor down in earth", "Keep commandments to achieve salvation", "No one will enter kingdom of heaven unless you follow laws and commandments" . And whoever followed the last messenger - the Comforter - the spirit of truth - who meant for us all until last time. Peace.
@badfish (208)
• United States
9 Dec 09
The Lightning spreading from east to west is a old testament reference to the destruction of Babylon from the east by King Cyrus. Christians believe Jesus to Be Son of Man and Son of God. According to the Bible Jesus is God, John 1:1,14; 5:18; 13:13 14:9 10:30, In revelation he is called the Alpha and Omega. 22:13 He declares he is "I AM" to the Jews in the Temple in John 8:58 Mat 1:23 God with us
1 person likes this
@Harley009 (1420)
• India
10 Dec 09
If Jesus is God why he call Father or Lord or God in many places? Jesus = God then Jesus = Father = Lord. Then why Jesus call a Lord or God? If you look at the Greek text of John 1:1, you can see that English translations are mis-translated. Greek words 'ho-theos' and 'ton-theos' has different meaning but translations used same word 'God' (If there had Hebrew of this would be more clear) John 1:1 will be : In the beginning the word was, and the word was with God, and the word was a god (deity). So it says In the beginning a word was there with God, and it was "A god", i.e. Only One deity of worship. for John 1:14, look from previous verses as well. It says 'word' was made flesh. It means a word from God created a man of flesh. God create what he wills. Jesus was created without a man's intervention and it was by a word from God, God will just say a word like "be" and it will come into being, it is his power. Likeness of Jesus is like of Adam, Adam was created without father and mother, it also was a word from God to create him. John 5:18, Just see what Jesus reply for the accuse of the Jews in next verses. "He says Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. 5:20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel." He making it clear that he is not God, and he is doing what God says and what God shows to him. John 13:13 says calling him master, but if you read next verses Jesus says 13:16 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him. Also Bible says:- Mark 10:17,18 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. Jesus says don't call him even good, and in other place referring as master and lord isn't it a contradiction? John 14:9 says that what Jesus's works and doing are not his own, it is from God, God is doing it through him. and it is given to identify that Jesus proclaims the words and messages from God. Read verses around John 10:30 and read on, what Jesus says there after? Believe in his work so that know he is son of God. "I and Father are one" used in context that Jesus is conveying the same message that the God/Father says. Alpha and Omega means, the belief in Jesus is only meant for his time. i.e. It start from the time of Jesus and it end by the time of Jesus. i.e. Jesus was meant only for the lost sheeps of Israel. And Jesus gave good news of a comforter. Mathew 1:23, readm Mathew 1:22, it says revealed another prophet and using the meaning of a quotation from OT, which says coming of 'Immanuel', which equate to the nae JESUS said in 1:21. And it says it is 'being interpreted as' God with us. When God do some favors to us, we used to say 'God is with us', it is the same thing. God did a favor by sending a prophet to them and to save them from sin by guiding them to truth. so "God with us" fine. What do you think the meaning of the following Bible verses? Mathew 24:36 says Hour knoweth to No man, but only my Father "There shall be no Image or likeness to God, neither up in the sky nor down in earth", "Keep commandments to achieve salvation", "No one will enter kingdom of heaven unless you follow laws and commandments" . Peace.
@badfish (208)
• United States
11 Dec 09
The Same Greek word is used in both occurences of the word "God" in John 1:1. This same word is used in many contexts, whether it refers to the Only True God or whether it is refering to a false god - such as a man made god (1 Cor. 8:5) or Satan as the god of this age (2 Cor. 4:4). The apparent differences in spelling between the word "God" in the phrase "and the word was God" ("theos") and in other places, (even in the previous phrase, "and the word was God"(theon) is due to an inflection in the Greek Language. Each Greek Noun normally has 8 or 9 forms (cases & number)in which it can appear. In the first instance in John 1:1 it is the nominative case (indicating the subject or predicate nomitive - equal to the subject). But it is the same word for "God", and in both phrases here indicates the One and Only True God. So the apparent difference is spelling is not because "Theos is a different word than "theon", but is a different form of the identical word. in John 1:1 the fact is there is no definate artical in front of the word "God" ("theos") in the phrase "and the Word was God". The confusion arises from an assumption that if there is no definate artical in the Greek, then it must have an indefinate meaning and thus should be translated with the indefinate artical ("a" or "an"). In certain instances, when the Greek omits a definate artical, it may be appropriate to insert an indefinate artical for the sake of English translation and understanding. But we cannot assume that this is always appropriate. Greek does not operate in the same way as English does in regards to the use of the words "the" and "a" . In many instances in which English would not include the word "the", the Greek text includes it. (We don't see it in the English translaations because it would sound non-sensible in our language.) And in many cases where the Greek omits the definate artical, the English translation requires it to convey the correct meaning of the Greek. Therefore it cannot be assumed that if the definate article is absent, then an indefinate article should be inserted. Furthermore, even though the Greek language does not have an "indefinate article" like we think of in English, the is a way in Greek for the writer to indicate the indefinate idea and thus avoid confusion. This is done in Greek by using the Greek indefinite pronoun "tis". In John 1:1 there is no definate article in front of the word "God" in the phrase, "and the Word was God". However, in this instance, it cannot just be assumed that the word "God" is meant to be "indefinate", and therefore an indefinate article used in the English translation. Because the first use of the Word "God" in John 1:1 ("the Word was with God") clearly refers to the Only True God, the Eternal Pre-exsistant Creator, more than likely John would have used a different Greek construction than he did if he had meant for this next phrase ("and the word was God") to refer to a lesser god, and did not want to confuse this with the True God he had just mentioned. If John meant to avoid confusion, when making such a definitive statement, he could have done so by using this "indefinate pronoun" ("Tis") as an adjective. This would have made it clear that the Word was "a certain god". but not the one he was just refering to. for examples of this refer to verses Mark 14:51, Luke 8:27, Luke 1:5, and Luke 11:1 among many many more. So, It Seems that by the Greek grammatical structure in this statement, John is indicating that the Word (Jesus Christ - John 1"14) is the same essence and nature as God the Father. John 1:1 stands translated correctly in Most Bibles including KJV NIV etc. John 1:1 states Jesus Is GOD
@livewyre (2455)
7 Dec 09
No, the all important question is 'who do you believe Jesus Christ is?' There are many schools of thought who preach about Revelation and other prophecies as though these were the message whereas the gospel of Christ is the actually message of the Bible as a whole. Personally, I have heard them all over many years and I believe the scripture to be inconclusive and the arguments to be (permanently) unresolved. I don't think it matters a jot whether there are seven years before or after any tribulation or rapture - I am happy in the knowledge that God has prophesied about the times to come and that means he is in control of these times no matter what happens. To me, much of this remains a mystery (after all who, before Christ understood the prophecies about Jesus?) yet, the knowledge that the end times are mapped out is enough. I also believe that to try to understand and interpret these prophecies is probably foolishness. The idea of one taken and one left behind can be understood at a simple level - there will come a time when there are those that will be saved and those that will be lost. Not making a choice will become, in itself, a choice.