Since those who subscribe to amillennialism don't believe in rapture, how do they interpret Luke 17:30-34

Question

Luke 17:30-34 It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed. 31 On that day no one who is on the housetop, with possessions inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything. 32 Remember Lot’s wife! 33 Whoever tries to keep their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life will preserve it. 34 I tell you, on that night two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. 35 Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left.

Answer 1

Welcome to the S.E. Q&A. I don't identify with any particular group regarding the 1,000 years described in The Revelation, but I'll share what I think.

IMHO, Jesus was talking about the period leading up the destruction of Jerusalem in 70. He was using prophetic hyperbole to instill a sense of how serious that time would be. What he was getting at was that many would be swept up by the Romans and destroyed, and no particular group would be exempt.

Historically, Titus allowed the Jews to pack into Jerusalem for the Passover in 70; he then sealed the city. As people tried to leave the city, he crucified them, one source says 500 people per day. During the summer, his troops broke through the walls, and a vast slaughter took place.

Answer 2

i am amillenialist and what I believe this passages were in the context of the story of Noah and Lot in Genesis it indicates the main characters were taken out from destructions and the rests left behind to suffer from it. Luke uses both genders men and women to indicate a community and God's judgement is executed equally on them. It is just simply on the day of judgement God will separate the elect and the reprobate. No rapture or snatch away event like in "star trek" movie will take place.

Answer 3

for premillenialist these verses from Luke are interpreted literally but to a millenialist this is far from literal interpretation. As I observed denominations founded before the 19th century were not dispensasionalists meaning not literal interpreter but adheres to the older interpretations of early church fathers.

Answer 4

The question is based on an assumption.

"16 For, skilfully devised fables not having followed out, we did make known to you the power and presence of our Lord Jesus Christ, but eye-witnesses having become of his majesty -- 17 for having received from God the Father honour and glory, such a voice being borne to him by the excellent glory: `This is My Son -- the beloved, in whom I was well pleased;'

18 and this voice we -- we did hear, out of heaven borne, being with him in the holy mount. 19 And we have more firm the prophetic word, to which we do well giving heed, as to a lamp shining in a dark place, till day may dawn, and a morning star may arise -- in your hearts;

20 this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition, 21 for not by will of man did ever prophecy come, but by the Holy Spirit borne on holy men of God spake." (2 Pet. 1:16-21, YLT)

We are not allowed to make up our own interpretations. The word "exposition" in Young's, or "interpretation" in the KJV is Strong's Gr 1955 "ἐπίλυσις" transliterated as "epilusis" and means a release, an interpretation, untying knots, unpacking, solving problems based upon sound hermenuetic pinciples. The prefix "epi" means "upon". The word was used for unraveling, and getting to the bottom of the problem.(1)

That means that the only source for unraveling difficult passages of Scripture are the scriptures themselves. As 2 Pet. 1:21 makes clear, the author of the scriptures is the Holy Spirit. And, as He is the author of ALL of the Scriptures, then all "interpretation" or solving of each scripture must be from within the entirety of the scriptures.

In other words, the solution to God's meaning is within God's word, and only within God's word. No scripture may be used to contradict another verse or passage, or to teach an idea or concept that violates another verse. God is not the author of confusion (1 Cor. 14:33).

The concept that men and women will be lifted into the air from off the earth without first having experienced bodily death contradicts previous scripture.

"and as it is laid up to men once to die, and after this -- judgment," (Heb. 9:27, YLT)

So, the idea taught by dispensationalists that living men and women will literally be bodily lifted into the air from off the earth without notice at some future judgment day does not agree with the scripture in Hebrews.

All men/women must face bodily death, after which we will face our own judgment. There is no first article "the" in the original scriptures in Heb. 9:27. The KJV wrote it in based upon their belief system.

Therefore, as all men/women will be judged at their own physical, corporeal death, then all men/women must first physically die. We must keep the scriptures in the context in which we find them.

Luke 17:26 begins to speak of past days of judgment.

"26 `And, as it came to pass in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of Man; 27 they were eating, they were drinking, they were marrying, they were given in marriage, till the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the deluge came, and destroyed all;

28 in like manner also, as it came to pass in the days of Lot; they were eating, they were drinking, they were buying, they were selling, they were planting, they were building; 29 and on the day Lot went forth from Sodom, He rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed all.

30 `According to these things it shall be, in the day the Son of Man is revealed;" (Luke 17: 26-30, YLT)

The days of Noah - when all were destroyed. The days of Lot - when all were destroyed. What was destroyed? The living people and animals. All of the earth was not destroyed, just the wicked men and women.

Then we need to keep the same theme, the same motif. A day of judgment was ahead of the people in the first century AD when this book was written, a day in which the Son of Man would be revealed for who He is. Luke 17:24, "the Son of Man in his day", the same as saying "the Lord's Day" in Rev. 1:10, the same as saying "a day of the Lord" as used in Isa. 2:12; 13:6, 9; Jer. 46:10; Lam. 2:22; Ezek. 13:5; 30:3; Joel 1:15; 2:1, 11, 31; Amos 5:18, 20, etc.

Judgment days when the Lord "came" in vengeance against the wicked.

"For it is the day of the Lord's vengeance, and the year of recompences for the controversy of Zion." (Isa. 34:8, KJV)

The context is the same - a day of the Lord's vengeance, or the Lord's day, and is the same context as in Luke 21:22,

"22 because these are days of vengeance, to fulfil all things that have been written." (YLT)

The day of vengeance or judgment that was still ahead of those in the 1st century AD audience who heard Christ's words was the judgment that fell upon Jerusalem in AD 70. Christ was never speaking about an end-of-the-world scenario, nor the end of all time.

Those of Jerusalem who ignored Christ's warnings and still were trying to preserve their lives physically died in that battle. The word "taken" in Luke 17:34, 35 is Strong's Gr. 3880 "παραλαμβάνω" transliterated as "paralambanó" and means to receive from, to take away. Thayer's has it in the passive voice under definition 1. (2)

Who was doing the taking? Ultimately we may say that the Lord was doing the taking as it was His vengeance being called down upon the wicked, and He was the first cause. But, the action was carried out by the Romans during the siege of Jerusalem in AD 70.

Those sinful people who had called down God's judgment upon themselves and their children (Matt. 27:25) for crucifying their Messiah were taken against their will, taken by force and were killed or enslaved by the Romans in AD 70.

Those who were "left behind" were those who heard Christ tell them to flee to the mountains (Matt. 24:16), when they saw Jerusalem surrounded (Luke 21:20). Those who heard and believed Christ fled just as He had warned them to do, and were saved from that judgment destruction.

They lived out their lives, and at the time each one died, they faced their own judgment. If they died in the Lord (Rev. 14:13), if they were covered by the blood of Christ then the judgment passed over them (Passover), just as it still does for those who are in Christ today.

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." (John 5:24, KJV)

This carnal body must first die before we can be lifted into the air, and receive our crown of glory, to be translated into our new immortal body and be joined to our Lord in heaven with all of our brothers and sisters in Christ who have passed on before us. The dispensational teaching of a "rapture" is not according to scripture.

Notes:

1. Strong's Gr. 1955 - Biblehub

2. Strong's Gr. 3880 - Biblehub

Answer 5

Since those who subscribe to amillennialism don't believe in rapture, how do they interpret Luke 17:30-34

Recommend reading.

The coming of the Son of Man Luke 17:32-37

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+17+%3A22-37&version=NASB;NET;KJV

Jesus is not saying that people in Noah’s day and in Lot’s day were destroyed simply because they pursued the normal activities of eating, drinking, buying, selling, planting, and building. Even Noah and Lot and their families did these things. But the others went about such daily activities without paying any attention to God’s will, and it was for this reason that they were destroyed. For the same reason, people will be destroyed when Christ is revealed during the great tribulation. ( Matthew 24:21, 29 NASB)

Jesus stresses the importance of responding quickly to his coming, and so says (Vs 31) "On that day, the one who is on the housetop and whose goods are in the house must not go down to take them out; and likewise, the one who is in the field must not turn back. (Vs 32) Remember Lot’s wife."

When the evidence of Christ’s presence appears, people cannot let attachment to their material possessions hinder them from taking prompt action. On her way out of Sodom, Lot’s wife apparently looked back longingly for the things left behind, and she became a pillar of salt.

One will be taken and the other will be left.(Vs 34b)

Corresponds to Noah’s entering with his family into the ark and the angels’ taking Lot and his family out of Sodom. It means salvation or being left behind -suffering destruction.

Answer 6

First this is a difficult passage. Secondly, the overall context is when the Kingdom of God appears. Then Jesus says when his day arrives don't go back and get your stuff, don't try and keep your life. The implication is that you have got to get out of there fast. Yet, if one is being taken (ie raptured) where would the fleeing be, where would the turning back to get your things be. It doesn't seem to make sense. Rather it seems that the one who tarries is likely to be taken.

Thirdly, Jesus does not say who is taken and who is left, nor who takes them, nor where they are taken.

Fourthly the disciples immediately ask "where Lord?" The implication is they are asking where are they taken. It could be argued that they are asking where will this happen, but the lightening analogy seems to answer this already. Jesus answer is where the corpses are. It sounds like those who are being taken are being taken to destruction, to where the corpses are. All this matches well with the circumstance of encountering a large and powerful enemy. That is when you should flee without turning back. That is when some are taken as slaves or killed and some are left. Then there are the vultures or eagles, a possible sign of Rome. The dialogue lacks enough clarity to be certain about anything except the Kingdom is Jesus, it's coming will be clear and we ought to be ready when we see the signs and respond immediately.