You talk about " you have to assume things not in evidence."
Your the one developing a theory out of whole cloth. You said that the people who disappeared were taken by the Romans. And yet Christ says "And He will send forth His angels with A GREAT TRUMPET and THEY WILL GATHER TOGETHER His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other."
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
To eisegete a passage means to add in one's own biases. I simply pointed out that the phrase "one taken" does not mean "raptured". To read "rapture" into the passage means that you inserted your own personal bias. I proved the bias by refuting your claim that Jesus taught it. I demonstrated that by pointing you to His actual words regarding the event. In that event, where He even explained it in plain words demonstrates that there is no "rapture", rather it is the wicked who are removed and the saved remain. That is the exact opposite of what you added to those "taken" passages.
The Bible doesn't use the word trinity and yet is a tenet of the Bible.
But you and I can show in Scripture this tenet. You cannot do so with a "rapture". The "rapture" is a relatively modern concept, and is not recognized as any doctrine ever taught by the Church prior to the invention of Dispensationalism. The Trinity, on the other hand has been with us from the beginning.
Furthermore, though the concept of the Dispensationalist's Rapture is not taught in Scripture, the word does indeed exist in the Bible, it is the Latin word "rapturo" which is read in the English as "caught up". There is a whole lot of eisegeting that takes place where "caught up" is to be understood as a secret return, seven years of partying, followed by a glorious return.
The pet prooftext of the Rapture Enthusiasts is found in 1 Thess 4:17 then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. This is where we find the latin word we get "rapture" ...deinde nos qui vivimus qui relinquimur simul rapiemur cum illis in nubibus obviam Domino in aera et sic semper cum Domino erimus... Interestingly, the "meet", or 'άπάντήσις'is used in Mat 25:6 the parable of the virgins where they go out to meet the bridegroom; and it is also used in Acts 28:15 when the towns people came out to meet Paul. The idea is that we don't go up meet Christ and then leave, but that it is akin to going outside the city gates to approach a coming dignitary and escort them back to the city. This type is found on the first day of the Passion week when the people came out to our LORD entering Jerusalem on the back of a donkey and escorted Him in. That time it was humility on a donkey, in the future, it will be our King in Glory.
You said that the people who disappeared were taken by the Romans.
I gave you the Full Preterist view, and I believe I also gave you the view I prefer which is the Partial, or Realized Millennial view. Besides, you are not on good ground by suggesting that the Matthew 24 passage is a rapture passage. The evangelical revisionism claims a silent Rapture, "A Great Trumpet" doesn't fit too well with that Silent Rapture theory. It does fit in quite swimmingly with my prefered Realzied Millennial view.
Thanks for your thoughts (except the childish insult part)