Are The Rapture and Second Coming separate events?

This is a question that has been important to the Rapture debate for awhile.  It's not a simple yes or no.

I Thessalonians 4 and Revelation 19 are definitely about different events.  Problem is the term "Second Coming" isn't actually in The Bible at all.  The word "Coming" in the Greek Parusia, is used in I Thessalonians 4 not Revelation 19.  Revelation never uses "Coming" in reference to Jesus at all.  I prefer to refer to his Second Advent which includes both events just as his first Advent had more then one "coming".

Pre-Tribbers agree those two chapters of The Bible are separate events, and make their argument against Post-Trib dependent on that to an extent.  Problem is, here is how one Pre-Trib website defines them.

The Bible must see the Rapture (Jn. 14:1-4; I Cor. 15:51-58; 1 Thes. 4:13-18) and the Second Coming (Zech. 14:1-21; Matt. 24:29-31; Mk. 13:24-27; Lk. 21:25-27; Rev. 19) as separate events, because when the verses are compared they describe two very different scenarios:

The excerpts from the Olivte Discourse they listed by any standard resemble I Thessalonians 4 way more then Revelation 19.   And of course the Rapture has to be not in Revelation at all for them.

Here is some of how they break it down.

Rapture — believers meet Christ in the air
Second Coming — Christ returns to the Mount of Olives to meet the believers on earth

The Mount of Olives is only identified as relevant in Zechariah, but we know form Isaiah 63 that Jesus is in Edom first when he comes on a White Horse. Zechariah is consistent with this.  Jesus is in fact back already in the prior Chapters (12-14 are all one prophecy), Israel has already "Looked upon me whom they pierced".  The Mount of Olives is merely where he starts his second Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem.

Christians want to see the Mount of Olives as relevant to his return because it gives symmetry to the Ascension where he left from there.  But I'm afraid there is no solid Biblical basis for it.

Rapture — living believers obtain glorified bodies
Second Coming — living believers remain in same bodies

Good so far I guess.  Nothing said about the Revelation 19 event precludes change however.

Rapture — believers go to heaven
Second Coming — glorified believers come from heaven, earthly believers stay on earth

This is where the problem really begins.  Because Matthew 24 and Mark 13 clearly describes Jesus taking his people from the Earth to Heaven.

Rapture — no signs precede it
Second Coming — many signs precede it

This is the reason they need Matthew 24 to not be about The Rapture.  At any rate Paul in II Thessalonians 2 refers back to what he talked about in 1 Thessalonians 4 and clarifies that signs will proceed it.

Rapture — revealed only in New Testament
Second Coming — revealed in both Old and New Testaments

I believe there are at least two maybe three Rapture passages in the Old Testament, and even Pre-Tirbbers are beginning to accept this.

Matthew 24 uses the word Parusia which Paul also does in I Thessalonians 4.   Revelation doesn't use it at all.

Matthew 24 and II Thessalonians 4 refer to Jesus coming in the Clouds, in Revelation 19 and Isaiah 63 he comes on a White Horse.  But the Son of Man is on a Cloud in Revelation 14.

Matthew 24 and II Thessalonians 4 and 1 Corinthians 15 refers to a Trumpet, Revelation 19 does not,  Revelation's Last Trumpet was the 7th in Chapter 11, which alludes to the Bema Judgment and the Resurrection of the Dead.

The word Harpazto from which via Latin we get Rapture from I Thessalonians 4 is used in Revelation in Chapter 12.

Two Comings per Advent

One thing all Futurist views on The Rapture besides Post-Trib have in common is believing When Jesus Comes in the Clouds (commonly called The Rapture) and when he comes on a White Horse in Revelation 19 and Isaiah 63 are two separate Comings.

That is why Post-Tribbers often define themselves as not believing in The Rapture at all,.  What they really mean is not believing in it as a separate event.  They may also nit-pick about the word not being Biblical, but that's for another study.

That's key to how we're often made fun of in Post-Trib circles, saying we believe in Two Second Comings, or that Revelation 19 is really the Third Coming.

I believe there are only two Messianic Advents, the Advent of the Suffering Servant, and the Advent of the Lion of Judah.  But something Post-Tribbers should keep in mind next time they want to mock us for believing in "Two Second Comings", is that the First Advent had two Comings as well.

The actual Physical Incarnation, which we celebrate on December 24-25th but I believe actually happened on the First of Tishri which fell on the 11th of September 3 B.C.   However I do believe it was probably during Chanukah he was conceived (The Annunciation and the Visitation), as well as the day the Magi presented their Gifts.

And The Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem, commemorated on Palm Sunday, which occurred on the 10th of Nisan of 30 A.D.

You may be thinking, "those aren't separate comings at all".  They are indeed different from how the two future Comings dispensationalists believe in relate to each other, but that's natural, the Second Advent will be different from the First.  "But He didn't leave the Earth and Return to Heaven between those two events."  That's besides the point.

The Point is, even though The Triumphal Entry wasn't even the first time Jesus entered Jerusalem, (we know from Luke 2 and Johns' Gospels he always pilgrimaged there on the major feast days since he was 12 as The Law required).

But that is the day Jesus Judged the people for not successfully Date Setting in Luke 19:41-44.  That's the day he entered Jerusalem in exactly the conditions foretold in Zachariah 9:9, with the people singing Psalm 118, in the Nisan pointed to by the 70 Weeks Prophecy , on the 10th of Nisan when the Passover Lamb is presented before being slain on the 14th.  No fulfillment of Messianic Prophecy was or will be more precise.

In the interest of comparing the First Advent to the Second.  I think the Triumphal Entry can be viewed as a Type of when he comes Riding on a White Horse.  That is when he will do what the people wanted him to do the first time (Liberate Israel from Roman Oppression).  And Because I think the 70th week will be fulfilled in Nisan years just as the first 69 were, I think it could well happen on the same day.

Therefore I think the the Nativity Narrative is perhaps a Type of the Coming in the Clouds.  That is an odd comparison to make.  But I've argued elsewhere independent reasons for seeing the Mid-70th Week Rapture as linked to the Fall Feasts.  Of course my reasons for placing the Nativity on the First of Tishri aren't directly Biblical, but I feel are Biblically backed.

Revelation 12 is a symbolic summery of History, the first five verses of which are already in the past.  But perhaps it also correlates to signs seen in the Heavens at this time, the signs seen on September 11th 3 B.C. do have a a parallel to Revelation 21.  And Luke 21:25 refers to "signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars" the Pre-Wrath assumption about that I consider flawed.  And I've talked about the reasons for possibly seeing The Rapture here.  Remember, the Chapter divisions aren't in the original text, the Vision in Revelation 12 could therefore be argued to still be part of the 7th Trumpet.

You may think I'm starting to learn towards the September 23rd 2017 AD date Popular on YouTube.  But I take issue with that since at this point it'd require us to already be in The 70th Week.  Which I don't think we can be in since The Temple isn't standing yet.  It's mostly Pre-Tribbers promoting that date.  The idea that there is something astronomical as an additional layer of meaning to Revelation 12 is worth looking into.  But one must never forget that first and foremost The Woman is Israel.

The fact is however, the term "Second Coming" isn't Biblical, it's just his Coming.  So don't build doctrine on numbers games.  His first coming was a more then one day event, so will the second be.

Update:  I now have changed my mind as Jesus birth-date, and think contrary to modern trendy opinion He was born on December 25th.  Doesn't change the overall point of this post, only effects the same day typology.  The Tishri Holy Days still have possible relevance to the first advent.  The event that chronology begins the Gospel narrative, Zachariaz in the Holy Place, I now place near maybe even on Yom Kippur.  Also you'll notice that in John 7, it's during the middle of the Feast of Tabernacles He appears unexpectedly.