Rapture vs NONE rapture (dialogue to all christians)

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Children can be possessed by demons. Go on a mission trip sometime.

I lived on the mission field for over 2 years with drug addicts. Never once did I see a demon possessed person, and I lived with hundreds of different ones.

I can answer that REALLY quickly, where did you go to? Which nation or nations?

Spain and Croatia. Heroin was the main drug these guys were addicted to.

Originally posted by DISRAELI

Originally posted by HeFrippedMeOff

Dewey it's the marriage feast! Have you not read that those who come in without a wedding garment will be cast out? Does the parable of the virgins or matthew 24 mean nothing to you?

They do mean something to me, but they mean other things.
You seem to be so wrapped up in the Rapture-centric interpretations of these parables as to be completely unconscious that other interpretations can exist, or that these other interpretations held sway for the best part of two thousand years before the Rapture theorists came along with more abstruse and esoteric interpretations.Your approach seems to be the product of controlling indoctrination from one school of thought, which gave you no access to other lines of approach.
A more detailed response will have to wait until I've double-checked a few textbooks on these parables.

In my defense, I did ask you for your perfectly respectable interpretations but you didn't provide any. I hear you keep saying they exist without expounding. Help me out, read over them again and double-check and explain to me the interpretation of the marriage feast, and parable of the virgins outside of the context of the rapture that has held sway for the best part of two thousand years.

And who on earth is Dewey?

Sarcasm. Guess you didn't get it. Forget about it, just recheck and double check those interpretations you claim and let me know what you come up with. Id really like to hear how some miss the event if it happens at the end or even after the great tribulation. Don't leave out the unwise virgins, the fact that they have oil just not an extra crux, and the fact that the door is shut to them wherein the have to come later.

reply to post by SimonPeter

How have you come about to believe that 2nd Thess . and Timothy are forged ?

Consensus of scholars.

Matthew 24 was no doubt written after Jesus died as a testament to his works and teachings .

Talking about a different event.

Matthew , Daniel ,Ezekiel Zachariah Revelations all talk about the apocalypse .

Different events. Revelation and Ezekiel and Daniel I would lump in together as not being especially useful for anything. Daniel gets some credence by people on account of the name appearing in Matthew. What is going on in the NT is use of the terminology of the day, even if it is apocryphal, if it conveys a useful concept for the purpose at hand.

You seem to have spent time trying to pick apart the word of God .

It is merely your theory that everything within a binding is the word of God.

How can you know when the book of 2nd Thess. was written .

By the context of a post-fall-of-the-Jerusalem-temple-timing, for one thing, and the situation with the church.

Or exactly when Paul died .

The important fact is that Paul left the scene pretty early on, as described in Romans, where he was headed to unfamiliar territory, and probably just disappeared, and a later mythology arose where he died in Rome.

I wonder if soon you will find that there are contradictions throughout the bible and start looking elsewhere for divine guidance like so many experts I have known .

You seem to be conveying the idea of a slippery slope where once you question anything, you inevitably end with no faith. I am not afraid of that because of past experiences with God.

The fact is that we can now see much of what Paul told of in 2nd Thess. coming into reality .

Just human psychology, not hard to predict. The only real proof would be the sudden disappearance of a cross-section of society, which of course then would be too late to be of any use to the ones "left behind". Of course I do not buy into any of that nonsense. That theory is based on John N. Darby's theory that the "restraint" is actually good people who have to be removed to expose the bad people who will then all be destroyed, which is jut ridiculous from my point of view, being the reverse of saving the world, which is what Jesus originally came to do.

The Jews are going to rebuild the Temple , the NWO will be implementing the world -e money- system called the Mark of the Beast and people will Fall Away taking the mark to keep to be able to buy sell and trade .

Of course this is all just wild speculation based on the idea that Jesus only fulfilled part of prophecy and the rest "must" be fulfilled in some other way. I take that as an insult against Jesus.

And when the Temple is finished the Antichrist will seek the seat at the head of all power . Gods seat .

More wild speculation based on Darby's interpretation of 2 Thess., where he changes "seated" into "takes the seat".

Are you a Preterist?

I use only part of Preterist theory, which is that judgment was demonstrated in a way that vindicated Jesus against the ones who charged him with blasphemy.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
And I didn't say that they may have never heard of them. I said if they have the clearance to give you info about them they will not. That's treason to divulge classified information to a person not of the same clearance level.

Fair enough. I thought maybe a military person might have heard of these in passing, not the detail of them, just that they do exist and where possible locations are.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by HeFrippedMeOff

 

Dewey it's the marriage feast! Have you not read that those who come in without a wedding garment will be cast out? Does the parable of the virgins or matthew 24 mean nothing to you? Come on His return for to invite those wise virgins is not the same return as when He comes with the Father in the clouds, on a white horse clothed in scarlet coming to slay the evil one with the spirit of his mouth and brightness of his coming.

You are mixing things up as if by confusion you can bring some sort of clarity from it.

This message was for Disraeli. I was being sarcastic because his ways of arguing reminded me much of how you do it but i won't expound further. Nevertheless, believe what you want. (see next reply)

The Parables in the Gospel are about Jesus' first coming to earth by way of being born here.

I don't trust you to impart understanding judging by what our previous conversations entail. No disrespect.

The Jews were waiting for their Messiah, and missed him.

Spiritually, oil represents the Holy Spirit. Jesus said he was going away but would send us the Comforter, The Holy Spirit. We know that the virgins are those believers who possess a measure of the Holy Spirit. So we see here that not only is this parable not discussing his birth but that we are also not talking about those who don't accept Christ to begin with. The Jews are still waiting on their messiah and will accordingly (apart from 144000 elect) be duped with the rest of the world by the lying miracles of the beast.

They are not about a second coming.

I am positive I what I know to be the truth. You don't have to accept the harpazo or the evidence though. Salvation isn't completed in just the rapture.

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by HeFrippedMeOff

 

For example, for the last two thousand years people have been perfectly content to interpret the parable of the Virgins in terms of the Parousia, the final Return of Christ, and the need for faith in waiting for that event. They've always been regarded as the same event; it's not at all self-evident that they should be treated as different events.
Your line of attack seems to be to quote a basket-full of passages traditionally understood as relating to the Parousia, and to say "See, this proves the Rapture". It doesn't do anything of the kind.

Being content without explaining the unwise virgins or addressing the the marriage feast is ignorant.

You may not see these verses as explaining anything but his final coming however, as per the Word, there is a difference in coming like lightning, like a thief in the midnight hour for the wise virgins (the unwise having the door shut to them), and his coming in the clouds with the Father and a host of angels in brightness to slay the evil one.

Disregard it all if you wish but it doesn't make sense to me that you would believe that the harpazo would take place at the end while agreeing that some with a measure of the holy spirit (unwise virgins) will miss the event.

reply to post by HeFrippedMeOff

I don't trust you to impart understanding judging by what our previous conversations entail. No disrespect.

Like not finding a justification for giving military aid to a band of pirates calling themselves a state, in illegally occupied Palestine. Which proves my point that you have a cult of Bible interpretation invented and then promoted for this very purpose. And woe unto those who harm one of the least of these in the kingdom, better to have a mill-stone tied to your neck and cast into the sea.

Spiritually, oil represents the Holy Spirit. Jesus said he was going away but would send us the Comforter, The Holy Spirit. We know that the virgins are those believers who possess a measure of the Holy Spirit. So we see here that not only is this parable not discussing his birth but that we are also not talking about those who don't accept Christ to begin with.

The birth I brought up to differentiate the first coming from the second coming, which in my view will be accompanied by God's coming, where Jesus would be the one bringing those who had previously believed in him, but have died from this natural world. As for the point of the sayings of Jesus, you can look at where he described the target for them, where he describes the people who should have been already part of this kingdom come, but did not believe, for lack of light that should have been recognized by them, but rejected.

The Jews are still waiting on their messiah and will accordingly (apart from 144000 elect) be duped with the rest of the world by the lying miracles of the beast.

This is also based on a reinterpretation by Darby, where instead of being deluded by a spirit from God, as described in 2 Thess., he changes it to being deceived by false works.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by HeFrippedMeOff

 

I don't trust you to impart understanding judging by what our previous conversations entail. No disrespect.

Like not finding a justification for giving military aid to a band of pirates calling themselves a state, in illegally occupied Palestine.

No, more like Palestine claiming to be basically the sons of Abraham refusing the descendants of AIJ their rights to peace in their own land.

Which proves my point that you have a cult of Bible interpretation invented and then promoted for this very purpose. And woe unto those who harm one of the least of these in the kingdom, better to have a mill-stone tied to your neck and cast into the sea.

Careful Dewey. You prove nothing except your unruly belief that Palestine owns what God, in scripture, has given to AIJ.

Spiritually, oil represents the Holy Spirit. Jesus said he was going away but would send us the Comforter, The Holy Spirit. We know that the virgins are those believers who possess a measure of the Holy Spirit. So we see here that not only is this parable not discussing his birth but that we are also not talking about those who don't accept Christ to begin with.

The birth I brought up to differentiate the first coming from the second coming, which in my view will be accompanied by God's coming, where Jesus would be the one bringing those who had previously believed in him, but have died from this natural world. As for the point of the sayings of Jesus, you can look at where he described the target for them, where he describes the people who should have been already part of this kingdom come, but did not believe, for lack of light that should have been recognized by them, but rejected.

Go ahead and just disregard the scripture you don't like or don't understand if you want. I wish you wouldn't but you obviously can't get past the parable of the virgins or the marriage feast, or the difference in his coming with the Father with an army of angels vs coming like lighting, like a thief for the wise virgins. Dew what you Dew for believing in the harpazo isn't a necessary requirement for salvation in general.

The Jews are still waiting on their messiah and will accordingly (apart from 144000 elect) be duped with the rest of the world by the lying miracles of the beast.

This is also based on a reinterpretation by Darby, where instead of being deluded by a spirit from God, as described in 2 Thess., he changes it to being deceived by false works.

You may base it on Darby since you're the cult expert here but seriously, I'm just telling what the book says. Because you would not believe the truth I will send you strong delusion that you might believe a lie (that lie being this: that the anti-christ is Christ the awaited messiah to the jews and Imam mahdi to Islam according to the miracles he shows forth in power). I don't see how you don't get it.

reply to post by HeFrippedMeOff
This stuff about the so-called modern Israel is already occupying too much space on the "scripture" thread to get into all over. I was just pointing out what it is that you find disagreeable from my other posts, this not giving my sanction to murder.

Go ahead and just disregard the scripture you don't like or don't understand if you want. I wish you wouldn't but you obviously can't get past the parable of the virgins or the marriage feast, or the difference in his coming with the Father with an army of angels vs coming like lighting, like a thief for the wise virgins.

I'm not disregarding anything, and if it is anyone, it is you, who fail to recognize that the Gospel's purpose is to show why there is no Longer a temple cult in Jerusalem which stands as the only true place to worship God. When God came, they not only failed to recognize his coming even when they knew to expect him, but then they murdered him and the disciples that they could get their hands on. So this is why all the parables and other illusions are about them and their failure, the people who were looking right at him and listening to him.
There is no place in there which says that these are not about the people and place where he was. It is only by theorizing that people come up with the idea that it has to be about some other coming. There was a judgment which fell on the place where Jesus was crucified, and the temple was destroyed, to make way for the growth of a universal religion and body of believers who were not tied down to a single geographical location.

You may base it on Darby since you're the cult expert here but seriously, I'm just telling what the book says. Because you would not believe the truth I will send you strong delusion that you might believe a lie (that lie being this: that the anti-christ is Christ the awaited messiah to the jews and Imam mahdi to Islam according to the miracles he shows forth in power). I don't see how you don't get it.

If that is "all you know" then why were you saying something else a little while ago? It seems like you "know" a lot else, like what you were saying earlier, that it is the work of the beast, then conflating it with 2 Thess. which says nothing about a beast. I was pointing out how the founder of your cult made his own translation of the NT where he changed the delusion to a a working of deception to mislead people. Since you belong to his cult, it may be helpful to you to look at who invented all these concepts in your belief system.
All this stuff about there being an antichrist person is again the invention of John N. Darby. The point being, you are following a cult doctrine all made up by a single person, and then was promoted with big financial backing by the people who wanted to create a modern Israel to push forward world Communism.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by HeFrippedMeOff

 

Go ahead and just disregard the scripture you don't like or don't understand if you want. I wish you wouldn't but you obviously can't get past the parable of the virgins or the marriage feast, or the difference in his coming with the Father with an army of angels vs coming like lighting, like a thief for the wise virgins.

I'm not disregarding anything, and if it is anyone, it is you, who fail to recognize that the Gospel's purpose is to show why there is no Longer a temple cult in Jerusalem which stands as the only true place to worship God. When God came, they not only failed to recognize his coming even when they knew to expect him, but then they murdered him and the disciples that they could get their hands on. So this is why all the parables and other illusions are about them and their failure, the people who were looking right at him and listening to him.

Jews didn't have the oil Dewey. The virgins are about Christians and can be referenced to the churches in revelation but I wont even start that with you. I agree that there is no universal spot for worship, that it is now inside of us, but that does not negate Israel as a nation or the fact that Netanyahu has claimed that in 2013 they are going to rebuild their temple.......al aksa is not the temple of God and the image of the beast cannot be set up inside of us who are prepared with the Holy spirit so that only leaves one option.....a temple will be rebuilt which means along with other prophecy that Israel's existence is for a reason.

You may base it on Darby since you're the cult expert here but seriously, I'm just telling what the book says. Because you would not believe the truth I will send you strong delusion that you might believe a lie (that lie being this: that the anti-christ is Christ the awaited messiah to the jews and Imam mahdi to Islam according to the miracles he shows forth in power). I don't see how you don't get it.

If that is "all you know" then why were you saying something else a little while ago? It seems like you "know" a lot else, like what you were saying earlier, that it is the work of the beast, then conflating it with 2 Thess. which says nothing about a beast.

Son of Perdition/Beast #1. And I said the same thing earlier you just didn't understand.

I was pointing out how the founder of your cult made his own translation of the NT where he changed the delusion to a a working of deception to mislead people. Since you belong to his cult, it may be helpful to you to look at who invented all these concepts in your belief system.

Maybe you should pick up an interlinear bible and read it first hand, regardless of darby.

All this stuff about there being an antichrist person is again the invention of John N. Darby.

You don't have to believe in the son of perdition or the beast as being one man to whom the dragon gives his power but that doesn't make it an invention of darby.

The point being, you are following a cult doctrine all made up by a single person, and then was promoted with big financial backing by the people who wanted to create a modern Israel to push forward world Communism.

edit on 18-4-2012 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

Again, that was done in 1948 long before my time. I support their right to be there and their return in peace, not the right to murder people in order to do so. I believe there is another way but nonetheless, you know more about darby and cultism than I do. I can only tell you about what I've read in KJV scripture.

Originally posted by HeFrippedMeOff
Id really like to hear how some miss the event if it happens at the end or even after the great tribulation. Don't leave out the unwise virgins, the fact that they have oil just not an extra crux, and the fact that the door is shut to them wherein the have to come later.

I did answer you briefly, by pointing out that the parable of the Virgins is normally related to the Parousia, the final return of Christ, like everything else you’ve been quoting.
But I can do it again in more detail.
Instead of resting it on my own sole authority, I’ll quote from a couple of scholarly commentaries.

First, the commentary on Matthew(by R.T. France) in the Tyndale New Testament Commentary series. (pp.349ff)
“The parable of the bridesmaids is a further reinforcement of the same call for constant readiness for a “coming” which will be at a time no-one can predict…It is not a description of the kingdom of heaven in general, but of what will happen when God’s sovereign purpose reaches its climax in the parousia of the Son of man…The theme of the “delayed coming” was no doubt already an issue when Matthew wrote…This parable, like the last, insists that delay is no excuse for not being ready at any time… The formal finality of “the door was shut again” effectively makes the point that there is a “too late” in God’s timetable”

Next I turn to “The Parables of Jesus”, by Joachim Jeremias.(p.51)
He makes the point that this is one of a whole series of “Parousia parables”, going back to c24 v32.
“hence Matthew saw in the parable an allegory of the Parousia of Christ, the heavenly bridegroom: the ten virgins are the expectant Christian community: the “tarrying” of the bridegroom is the postponement of the Parousia: his sudden coming is the unexpected incidence of the Parousia, the stern rejection of the foolish virgins is the final judgement”.
As I said, everything in terms of the Parousia.
Jeremias argues that what Matthew is presenting is the church’s teaching, that Jesus would originally have been criticising the Pharisees and others refusing to listen to him. But that doesn’t affect my case, because the church’s teaching is precisely what I’m trying to establish.

This is also the way the parable would be explained in the Sunday-school of the average main-stream church. So if you’re genuinely unacquainted with that interpretation, you’re not as well informed as an eight year old child in one of those Sunday-schools.

You ask me to explain how the foolish Virgins miss out at the end of the story. The standard explanation would be that they miss out on salvation, they do not enter the promised kingdom. The implied reason is that they did not have enough faith to wait for the Lord.

You ask me to explain how they can miss out on salvation if they still have the “oil” of the Spirit.
This need not be what the oil signifies. “Having no oil” may simply be the device the story uses to get them away from the door at the crucial time. But in any case, the whole point of the story is that they don’t have any at the time when it matters. Whatever faith they might have had in the beginning, it has gone away.

You ask me to explain how the foolish Virgins get in through the door later on.
I don’t have to explain that detail, because it isn’t there!
You’ve made it up!
Look through the story again. The bridegroom says “I do not know you”, the door shuts firmly, and that’s it. End of story. Nothing in the parable says the door is ever opened again. That is the moral of the parable- if you do not hold out in faith, you may lose for ever your chance of entering the kingdom.

You’ve been caught out, old son!
The central plank of your theory, about Christians “coming in” in two phases, rests on a feature of the parable which doesn’t actually exist.
In short, it is fraudulent.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Your consensus is just so much speculation . And no they are the same topics . Even the Devil knows all of the scriptures and knows who Jesus is and trembles .
The Preterits theology has a few problems . One is the Mark of the Beast the other is the rebuilding of the Temple with the antichrist doing his thing . There for deny the validity of those scriptures . Kind of like the Jehovah Witness.
We have conversed before , we will converse no more .

reply to post by jmdewey60

Consensus of scholars.

Liberal scholars, and excluding some of the greatest scholars who ever lives and church fathers.


You got "consensus" correct though.

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Children can be possessed by demons. Go on a mission trip sometime.

I lived on the mission field for over 2 years with drug addicts. Never once did I see a demon possessed person, and I lived with hundreds of different ones.

I can answer that REALLY quickly, where did you go to? Which nation or nations?

Spain and Croatia. Heroin was the main drug these guys were addicted to.

Figured so, in "Western society" cultures and nations with mass media means and public or government education stan's strategy is he doesn't exist, demons are foolish, and Evolution is the dominant teaching. Go to a POOOOOOR nation without running water, electricity, witch doctors etc where the people don't doubt that God/devil, angels/messengers, demons exist and they manifest everywhere for show. They try to make the people think they have the real power, they keep people in fear. Go to a nation where that stuff from Western culture is non-existent and you'll see how real spiritual warfare really is.

reply to post by HeFrippedMeOff

Jews didn't have the oil Dewey. The virgins are about Christians and can be referenced to the churches in revelation but I wont even start that with you. I agree that there is no universal spot for worship, that it is now inside of us, but that does not negate Israel as a nation or the fact that Netanyahu has claimed that in 2013 they are going to rebuild their temple.......al aksa is not the temple of God and the image of the beast cannot be set up inside of us who are prepared with the Holy spirit so that only leaves one option.....a temple will be rebuilt which means along with other prophecy that Israel's existence is for a reason.

Thats news to me. I wasn't aware Bibi was making plans to rebuild the temple. The sacrifice was supposed to take place on Mt Moriah on Passover but it never happened. Too many people worried about muslim rioting to repel the infidels so they settled for national parks. Historically it would have been a sight to see because there hasn't been a sacrifice in 2000 years there but Sackett said that a temple isn't needed just the mount would suffice. It makes sense, Abraham didn't have a temple there when he was being tested.

reply to post by HeFrippedMeOff

I can only tell you about what I've read in KJV scripture.

Funny how you came up with exactly the same understanding that Darby did, who had to basically cloister himself up for ten years to work on his theory, then coming up with an original interpretation, that somehow had escaped all other Christians for eighteen hundred years previously.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Figured so, in "Western society" cultures and nations with mass media means and public or government education stan's strategy is he doesn't exist, demons are foolish, and Evolution is the dominant teaching. Go to a POOOOOOR nation without running water, electricity, witch doctors etc where the people don't doubt that God/devil, angels/messengers, demons exist and they manifest everywhere for show. They try to make the people think they have the real power, they keep people in fear. Go to a nation where that stuff from Western culture is non-existent and you'll see how real spiritual warfare really is.

Orrrrr, the people in these poor nations are not well educated. They are still superstitious. They have seen missionaries come and go and have been educated by them to believe a certain way. A person with a medical condition, like being prone to seizures, is demon possessed to them. I would bet that if these people were educated securlarly, these demons would go away.

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Figured so, in "Western society" cultures and nations with mass media means and public or government education stan's strategy is he doesn't exist, demons are foolish, and Evolution is the dominant teaching. Go to a POOOOOOR nation without running water, electricity, witch doctors etc where the people don't doubt that God/devil, angels/messengers, demons exist and they manifest everywhere for show. They try to make the people think they have the real power, they keep people in fear. Go to a nation where that stuff from Western culture is non-existent and you'll see how real spiritual warfare really is.

Orrrrr, the people in these poor nations are not well educated. They are still superstitious. They have seen missionaries come and go and have been educated by them to believe a certain way. A person with a medical condition, like being prone to seizures, is demon possessed to them. I would bet that if these people were educated securlarly, these demons would go away.

No, they manifest all over the place like Jesus just walked into the room. Well, He did technically when His Holy Spirit does and the person knows exactly who he is dealing with and on what authority he is there representing.

Here they aren't permitted to by satan because his strategy here is to get people to deny he exists. He cannot go against himself or his kingdom will not stand. In places where evolution and mass media are not known or taught his demons act like pro wrestlers full of testosterone, in areas where they are taught his demons act like covert agents.

Go to Haiti where witchcraft is prevalent and education is nearly non-existent and see what happens when a fire-baby walks into the room. (Person baptized with fire) Get prepared to watch the show. lol Glory to God. Go to a Western media and education driven culture and it takes a prophet or someone with the gift of spiritual discernment to spot people afflicted with demonic possession.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Go to Haiti where witchcraft is prevalent and education is nearly non-existent and see what happens when a fire-baby walks into the room. (Person baptized with fire) Get prepared to watch the show. lol Glory to God. Go to a Western media and education driven culture and it takes a prophet or someone with the gift of spiritual discernment to spot people afflicted with demonic possession.

Do you have sources? This would be easy to test.

I have seen Evangelist in Western Media do their casting out of demons. It's pretty amazing that people believe that it is real.

Here's an example of a demon possessed person in a poor country. Give me a break. It's amazing that the demon speaks English with an African accent.

Originally posted by DISRAELI

Originally posted by HeFrippedMeOff
Id really like to hear how some miss the event if it happens at the end or even after the great tribulation. Don't leave out the unwise virgins, the fact that they have oil just not an extra crux, and the fact that the door is shut to them wherein the have to come later.

t…It is not a description of the kingdom of heaven in general, but of what will happen when God’s sovereign purpose reaches its climax in the parousia of the Son of man…The theme of the “delayed coming” was no doubt already an issue when Matthew wrote…This parable, like the last, insists that delay is no excuse for not being ready at any time… The formal finality of “the door was shut again” effectively makes the point that there is a “too late” in God’s timetable”

I cannot accept this scholars "opinion" in spite of how scripture actually reads. The unwise have oil and are told to keep watching. This would necessarily mean that there is not a "too late" in God's timetable just yet. For arguments sake I will differentiate here between the Parousia in Harpazo and the Parousia in Judgment.

Next I turn to “The Parables of Jesus”, by Joachim Jeremias.(p.51)
He makes the point that this is one of a whole series of “Parousia parables”, going back to c24 v32.
“hence Matthew saw in the parable an allegory of the Parousia of Christ, the heavenly bridegroom: the ten virgins are the expectant Christian community: the “tarrying” of the bridegroom is the postponement of the Parousia: his sudden coming is the unexpected incidence of the Parousia, the stern rejection of the foolish virgins is the final judgement”.

Except that the unwise virgins are told to watch for the coming of the Son of Man but why would Jesus tell them that if the only Parousia to happen is gone?

Again, I would like to delineate between his showing up like lightning so watch else you miss it, and his showing up with the Father slaying the evil one wherein every eye sees and every knee bows.

As I said, everything in terms of the Parousia.

Parousia - Physical presence, arrival: This definition does not necessitate a continual presence from the moment of arrival, only that "an" arrival took place ie Parousia in Harpazo vs Parousia in Judgment.

Jeremias argues that what Matthew is presenting is the church’s teaching, that Jesus would originally have been criticising the Pharisees and others refusing to listen to him. But that doesn’t affect my case, because the church’s teaching is precisely what I’m trying to establish.

But one would deny the existence of any evidence outside of Paul in Thessalonians as corroboration of Parousia in Harpazo including Jesus very own words to the unwise for a theory that either disregards the unwise virgins all together or places them in the hoards of those whom it is too late to save?

You ask me to explain how they can miss out on salvation if they still have the “oil” of the Spirit.
This need not be what the oil signifies. “Having no oil” may simply be the device the story uses to get them away from the door at the crucial time. But in any case, the whole point of the story is that they don’t have any at the time when it matters. Whatever faith they might have had in the beginning, it has gone away.

Couple problems. 1) I didn't say they come through the door. 2) we are talking about an invitation to the bridegroom feast not salvation as a whole, 3) Spiritually, "oil" always represents the Holy Spirit in scripture, and 4) Why would Jesus tell the unwise ,"Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh,"(this is after they come back, after the wise have been taken) if in fact there is no more salvation and he be not talking about another Parousia?