Luke 17:30-37

[Kij421]

30"It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed. 31On that day no one who is on the roof of his house, with his goods inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything. 32Remember Lot's wife! 33Whoever tries to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it. 34I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. 35Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left."

37"Where, Lord?" they asked.
He replied, "Where there is a dead body, there the vultures will gather."

30Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

31In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back.

32Remember Lot's wife.

33Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.

34I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.

35Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

36Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

37And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord? And he said unto them, Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together.

I'm including both, because WH translations don't include verse 36, which while it's not important to my question, is probably still important in the long run.

So, I was reading this in my studies this morning, and I stumbled on verse 37. Jesus is asked by his disciples, "Where, Lord?" in reference, I think, to where are those that are taken taken. Either that or they're asking where those that are left will be. Not sure, but I think it's the former.

Anyway, Jesus says (and I'll just use the NIV translation for simplicity), "Where there is a dead body, there the vultures will gather."

What does that mean? At face value, yes, that makes sense, but in context to Christ describing the rapture and the end of days and answering "where", what does that mean? Does it mean that those raptured go to where those that die go? Does it mean that those left are left to death and decay?

What do you think?

[nikolai42]

30"It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed. 31On that day no one who is on the roof of his house, with his goods inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything. 32Remember Lot's wife! 33Whoever tries to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it. 34I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. 35Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left."

37"Where, Lord?" they asked.
He replied, "Where there is a dead body, there the vultures will gather."

30Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

31In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back.

32Remember Lot's wife.

33Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.

34I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.

35Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

36Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

37And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord? And he said unto them, Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together.

I'm including both, because WH translations don't include verse 36, which while it's not important to my question, is probably still important in the long run.

So, I was reading this in my studies this morning, and I stumbled on verse 37. Jesus is asked by his disciples, "Where, Lord?" in reference, I think, to where are those that are taken taken. Either that or they're asking where those that are left will be. Not sure, but I think it's the former.

Anyway, Jesus says (and I'll just use the NIV translation for simplicity), "Where there is a dead body, there the vultures will gather."

What does that mean? At face value, yes, that makes sense, but in context to Christ describing the rapture and the end of days and answering "where", what does that mean? Does it mean that those raptured go to where those that die go? Does it mean that those left are left to death and decay?

What do you think?

My opinion? Those that are "taken" are the wicked, the judged. They are killed. It is an earthly description of judgment. That's what happened, for example, in the great plagues that struck Europe in the Early and Middle Ages - some people inexplicably had natural immunity. So the effect of it was that this sickness affected thousands - even millions - while others living in the midst of it were untouched. I think you'll find that missionaries that minister to lepers and other stricken peoples have similar testimonies of God's protection.

Of interest, and possibly related, is the record of one of the earlier plagues (a few hundred years AD, if I recall) when Rome was in decline. For the stretch of about 1 year, the sun was virtually blacked out. It resulted in unbelievably massive changes in a short period of time. Agricultural, economic (because the two were inextricably linked then) and political changes all at once. If one were so inclined, that could be seen as a possible fulfillment of Matthew 24:29.

You can probably tell that I don't subscribe to the standard rapture view. If anything, I would say the rapture would be the other way around (the rapture of the wicked). After all, doesn't the parable of the wheat and the tares say that the tares are TAKEN and burnt up and the wheat is left? And weren't those killed in Noah's flood taken while Noah eventually landed back on solid ground again? And if Lot's wife is to be used as an example...

[Kij421]

Interesting. You've pointed out that I have a presupposition towards these verses. I will definitely think on this.

Just from what I've seen you write (and correct me if I'm wrong, please), but you believe that the days of the Son of Man (referenced earlier in Luke 17) were fulfilled (at least partially if not entirely) in the early AD years with the fall of Rome and all that?

My question in response to your statements would point towards Revelation 14:14-20. That section of scripture refers to two different harvests, one by one who looks a Son of Man and reaps, and one by an angel who gathers grape clusters for the winepress. If reaping is the act of harvesting with a scythe or sickle with the end goal of gathering, and gathering grape clusters is also gathering, is this a third "taking" from the one Christ described in 3 of the 4 Gospels, or is one of these harvests the same? I guess I'm asking if the rapture is a rapture of evil, and those that are good remain, under the assumption that the Great Tribulation (seals, trumpet, bowls, millennial reign, judgment of Satan) is yet to come, does that mean that those that follow Christ are the only ones left to go through that?

Slightly off topic, what do you believe is to come? Just curious.

I really hope that my question is not phrased in a sense that you might take it as an attack. I'm really new to this whole "debating and discussing Scripture" thing and am not very good at it so far. I've always been one to just accept Scripture and decide for myself without really discussing it.

[nikolai42]

Interesting. You've pointed out that I have a presupposition towards these verses. I will definitely think on this.

Just from what I've seen you write (and correct me if I'm wrong, please), but you believe that the days of the Son of Man (referenced earlier in Luke 17) were fulfilled (at least partially if not entirely) in the early AD years with the fall of Rome and all that?

At this point in time, I would say that I have to see the days of the Son of Man as either being recurring or ongoing. There are many things in the Olivet Discourse I don't understand, but I think part of it was fulfilled in 70AD and much of it is ongoing. But it could very well be that the judgment of Rome is associated with some of those things that are said to come upon the world (since in some cases, it seems as though that that is the way "world" is used). That said, I am not a preterist.

My question in response to your statements would point towards Revelation 14:14-20. That section of scripture refers to two different harvests, one by one who looks a Son of Man and reaps, and one by an angel who gathers grape clusters for the winepress. If reaping is the act of harvesting with a scythe or sickle with the end goal of gathering, and gathering grape clusters is also gathering, is this a third "taking" from the one Christ described in 3 of the 4 Gospels, or is one of these harvests the same? I guess I'm asking if the rapture is a rapture of evil, and those that are good remain, under the assumption that the Great Tribulation (seals, trumpet, bowls, millennial reign, judgment of Satan) is yet to come, does that mean that those that follow Christ are the only ones left to go through that?

I'll have to review that passage to make a better statement, but I believe that the rapture (so called) is really the resurrection at the end of "time". In that view, Revelation 14:14-20 could be seen as the resurrection first, the separation second and the judgment third. But again, I'll have to review to make specific application.

Slightly off topic, what do you believe is to come? Just curious.

I believe we are near the end of the age. And I believe the end of this age is to usher in an entirely new age described at the end of Revelation. That is, the eventual universal establishment of the Kingdom on earth (a new earth? I don't know if it will be a replacement earth or a renewed physical earth....). But before that can happen, great and terrible judgment - the likes never before seen or heard - will take place. Possibly in the heavenlies first (see my recent post on The Battle of Armageddon for some of my thoughts on why it is more spiritual than it seems is commonly believed) and then in the natural - with the destruction of substructures, structures and superstructures. Physical, economic, political and religious. It will all come tumbling down. Many of these things have been judged, but I'm not sure their actual retribution has been issued. They are, as it were, in holding for the "Great and terrible day of the Lord". The trials of men will only increase - and the spiritual distress that we will see will be immense. It may or may not result in cataclysmic war (nation against nation) but it will result in literally earth-shattering destruction. Again, that could be from the spiritual upheaval - not necessarily nuclear war etc....

That's the way I see it right now, anyway.

I really hope that my question is not phrased in a sense that you might take it as an attack. I'm really new to this whole "debating and discussing Scripture" thing and am not very good at it so far. I've always been one to just accept Scripture and decide for myself without really discussing it. :P

Not at all! I enjoy the interaction. As for "just accepting scripture", I have found that even when I have apparently done that, there are times where what I was accepting was more my own ideas than what scripture actually says. Study to show thyself approved... is certainly an appropriate scripture in this case.

[nikolai42]

My question in response to your statements would point towards Revelation 14:14-20. That section of scripture refers to two different harvests, one by one who looks a Son of Man and reaps, and one by an angel who gathers grape clusters for the winepress. If reaping is the act of harvesting with a scythe or sickle with the end goal of gathering, and gathering grape clusters is also gathering, is this a third "taking" from the one Christ described in 3 of the 4 Gospels, or is one of these harvests the same? I guess I'm asking if the rapture is a rapture of evil, and those that are good remain, under the assumption that the Great Tribulation (seals, trumpet, bowls, millennial reign, judgment of Satan) is yet to come, does that mean that those that follow Christ are the only ones left to go through that?

Having had a little time to look at the passage, I have to admit I don't have a full answer. While the prophecy seems at first glance to be clearly referencing two distinct activities, I would caution that - especially with the Book of Revelation - there is a fine line that has to be tread when it comes to interpretation. What do I mean? Well, this is one of the more important books when it comes to considering EVERY word spoken - and all in context. Remembering that John is seeing a vision, his descriptions cannot be complete (or rather, exhaustive), but only give a snapshot. Which means that even with every written detail, we are still left having to rely on his description (and, of course, the Holy Spirit!) to understand what is being said. Just from the standpoint of study, I would refer again back to Matthew 13:30 :

Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.
Matthew 13:30

If we are to take these passages as parallel, then it must be admitted that the order can be most easily gleaned from Matthew's version. And given the symbolic nature of visions, we must rest as much as possible on clearer methods of interpretation than our own (pre)conceptions as to what is being said. While I do admit there is every possibility that two distinct acts are here referenced, I can't agree that I am doing justice to the whole text to subscribe to a pre-wrath rapture of the saints based on this passage. Rather, I have to see this as judging the wicked FIRST. Is it possible that these two passages are NOT parallel? Sure. Matthew uses grain, John sees a vision with the reaping of grapes. So, I suppose there could conceivably (at least in theory) be a case made for two separate sets of judgments on the just and unjust. In a more general reference, I would note that there is only one detailed account of reaping in the passage even though it is mentioned 2 or 3 times with 3 different angels. And given that this is a passage dealing mainly with judgment (which clouds are supposed to portend in apocalyptic and/or prophetic literature), I would say that this is basically saying that this is a time for judgment of the wicked. And as it applies to the whole book, note that there is an angel who carries the everlasting gospel to the earth. This chapter, taken alone, may well be a snapshot of the unfolding of judgment as it pertains to the church age....but again, that's just my way of saying that these interpretations are more safely made based on more concrete fundamentals.

I am an historicist when it comes to this book (and that of the book of Daniel). That is, I believe that prophecy is fulfilled in an ongoing revelation or unfolding. It isn't all jammed into a small amount of time either in the past or present, but shows the Lord's dealings - mainly as it pertains to the church. I have reasons for this, but I think I'd be going well off topic if I were to delineate them here.

I hope that response is of some use and/or interest to you.

[Kij421]

Okie dokie. I was just wondering. It was unrelated from my original point, and I was curious as to what you thought about it. I don't really have anything to say in response, since you pretty much said what I was going to say already. But I do believe that a number of prophecies God gave in the Old Testament were fulfilled, and then fulfilled on a greater level. Like, in Isaiah, wasn't there a young woman who gave birth to a child named Immanuel then, too?

And as a side note, if by pre-wrath you mean the belief that before even a seal is broken, we get raptured up? Yeah, I'm not down with that either.

Anyone else have any idea on Luke 17:37?

[bradmc]

since he is talking about the days of noah and this is a direct comparison I think it is much more likely that the ones taken are the ones raptured or taken up out of the judgement. fyi

[Sammer]

since he is talking about the days of noah and this is a direct comparison I think it is much more likely that the ones taken are the ones raptured or taken up out of the judgement. fyi

But one could say that is the very reason the argument could be made that the ones 'saved' never leave the earth.

[bradmc]

in Noah they were taken up out of the earth into an ark the rest for left for judgement of course then after death they would have gone to hades which the bible always describes as lower or down or descending not taken up.

so lets look at the word "taken" in the greek:paralambano

Definition: 1) to take to, to take with one's self, to join to one's self
1a) an associate, a companion
1b) metaph.
1b1) to accept or acknowledge one to be such as he professes to be
1b2) not to reject, not to withhold obedience
2) to receive something transmitted
2a) an office to be discharged
2b) to receive with the mind

Sounds like a good thing to me.

[nikolai42]

in Noah they were taken up out of the earth into an ark the rest for left for judgement of course then after death they would have gone to hades which the bible always describes as lower or down or descending not taken up.

so lets look at the word "taken" in the greek:paralambano

Definition: 1) to take to, to take with one's self, to join to one's self
1a) an associate, a companion
1b) metaph.
1b1) to accept or acknowledge one to be such as he professes to be
1b2) not to reject, not to withhold obedience
2) to receive something transmitted
2a) an office to be discharged
2b) to receive with the mind

Sounds like a good thing to me.

But taken by whom? Scripture doesn't say.

Remember, Noah never really left the earth. He was kept through that which destroyed the earth.

As I recall, though, Jesus says "Remember Lot's wife." Was she taken or left?

[bradmc]

as a side not and since Kij already mentioned it I thought this was interesting:

NET © Luk 17:36 [[EMPTY]]
NIV © biblegateway Luk 17:36 [[EMPTY]]
NLT © biblegateway Luk 17:36 [[EMPTY]]
BBE © SABDAweb Luk 17:36 [[EMPTY]]
NRSV © bibleoremusLuk 17:36 [[EMPTY]]
NASB © biblegateway Luk 17:36 "Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other will be left."
KJV © biblegateway Luk 17:36 "Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left."

[Kij421]

I'm enjoying this discussion. Sadly, I don't have anything to contribute at this time.

as a side not and since Kij already mentioned it I thought this was interesting:

NET © Luk 17:36 [[EMPTY]]
NIV © biblegateway Luk 17:36 [[EMPTY]]
NLT © biblegateway Luk 17:36 [[EMPTY]]
BBE © SABDAweb Luk 17:36 [[EMPTY]]
NRSV © bibleoremusLuk 17:36 [[EMPTY]]
NASB © biblegateway Luk 17:36 "Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other will be left."
KJV © biblegateway Luk 17:36 "Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left."

Yes, Master Brad. I see the wisdom of your ways. My wife, however, would rather have the most accurate Bible, and if there is scripture that is disputed, she would rather not have it in there. /shrug