There is NO rapture!!!

[Kingdom_Come]

The "rapture" is a figment of Paul's imagination. Jesus never mentioned one.

Paul never mentioned one either {context for understanding please}. He taught what Christ and the other apostles taught and what the prophets foretold.

 

[interpreter]

In my Bible, I have literally torn out the writings of Paul. He wrongly taught a rapture, and he wrongly taught hat we are saved entirely by faith and grace, as the Revelation makes clear.

 

[Gnarwhal]

In my Bible, I have literally torn out the writings of Paul. He wrongly taught a rapture, and he wrongly taught hat we are saved entirely by faith and grace, as the Revelation makes clear.

Wow... just... wow. I would say you have thrown the baby out with the bath water but then Paul never taught anything bad in the first place. Beyond that, you have actually chosen to disregard Scriptures as not God-breathed and subsequently given yourself the authority to remove them from the canon? That's an unprecedented level of audacity, new to me.

Paul did not teach rapture. John Darby taught rapture. Paul said we would escort the rightful King (Christ) into His kingdom not unlike what was done for Roman leaders of their time. Paul never said we're going anywhere for good, or that we're abandoning this world to death and decay. We're staying right here to play our roles in the drama of new creation bursting forth from old creation.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

In my Bible, I have literally torn out the writings of Paul. He wrongly taught a rapture, and he wrongly taught hat we are saved entirely by faith and grace, as the Revelation makes clear.

That seems kinda radical to me

2 Peter 3:16 As also in all the letters speaking in them about these-things in which is difficult to understand, whoany which the unlearned and unsteadfast are wresting/twisting
as also the rests of Writings, toward the own of them destruction/apwleian <684>

 

[Kingdom_Come]

In my Bible, I have literally torn out the writings of Paul. He wrongly taught a rapture, and he wrongly taught hat we are saved entirely by faith and grace, as the Revelation makes clear.

Where did he teach it?

 

[interpreter]

That seems kinda radical to me

2 Peter 3:16 As also in all the letters speaking in them about these-things in which is difficult to understand, whoany which the unlearned and unsteadfast are wresting/twisting
as also the rests of Writings, toward the own of them destruction/apwleian <684>

St. Peter was right about the writings of Paul.

 

[Kaitlin08]

In my Bible, I have literally torn out the writings of Paul. He wrongly taught a rapture, and he wrongly taught hat we are saved entirely by faith and grace, as the Revelation makes clear.

 

[Gnarwhal]

So let's back up a couple verses and read this again in common language,

2 Peter 3:14-16 (NIV)
14So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him. 15Bear in mind that our Lord&#8217;s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

So let's think on that a minute. It's not Paul, it's the ignorance of his readers and the unwillingness to educate themselves and instead write him off as incorrect. Hmm.

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

BM,

What was there to teach? Paul lays it out so clearly that only critics and unbelief don't get it. And you and a host of others on this thread are denying that Paul's writings were part of the "all scripture is inspired". Shame on you!

Wait a second. Let's remember Saint Paul's words here; But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate strife. And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will. (2 Timothy 2:23-26) NOONE has denied that St. Paul's letters are divinely inspired but it seems that you have established an interpretation and a supportive agenda and you are biting others' heads off when they disagree with you. What is it that you are trying to accomplish? You have lived on God's green Earth almost three-quarters of a century and this is your attitude in a discussion with believers? That shame is on you sir!

How can we have an intelligent debate when you can't even agree that all that is written between the two covers of your Bible? Either that, or you simply tear pages from it that you don't agree with. It must make it a lot lighter for you to carry though.....................

Frankie

Again, this is a 30-page discussion where it seems you are squeezing people's throats for not agreeing with your interpretation and where I basically stated A VERY IMPORTANT FACT that this "snatching up" business DID NOT EXIST as a teaching in the early church. This teaching is new. And how can you insult another believer personally and suggest that they tear the Holy Scriptures? I do not agree with your interpretation, because it didn't exist when the church was established. That teaching was not passed down to saints, the champions of faith, the apostles. The Orthodox Church has never promoted the rapture as it is presently stated. In fact, the 2000-year history of the unbroken Church does not contain any reference to such an event. Although, the dating of the rapture is argued by its supporters to predate the 1800’s, they have been extremely hard pressed to prove their case. Nevertheless, it is important for us, Orthodox Christians, clearly understand their own faith so that they might not be carried away by such myths as the rapture... Hence I made my comment. Basic rule of biblical exegesis, if a verse exists, it doesn't mean it supports a certain teaching or doctrine. Arius used the same scriptures to deny Christ's divinity. How come early Christians defined such things as Holy Trinity, divine nature of Christ, and they failed to interpret a rapture? Unless you have a historical backup, or a starting point in Christian history, I recommend that you find one. The Rapture represents a radical misinterpretation of Scripture. I remember watching “Sixty Minutes”a year ago and was appalled to hear the announcer say that “the Rapture is an unmistakenly Christian doctrine”. It is not! It is a serious distortion of Scripture. It is astonishing that a belief so contrary to Scripture and the tradition of the Church could be propagated by so-called “Christians”. According to the Bible and according to the belief not only of Orthodox Christians but also of the Roman Catholic and most Protestant mainline churches, the true Rapture will not be secret; it will be the great and very visible Second Coming of Jesus at the end of the world. That is the one and only “Rapture”. It will not be a separate, secret event but one that every eye shall see (1 Thess. 4:16-17). The word rapture is not found in Scripture but hearkens to 1 Thess. 4:17 where St. Paul says that when the Lord comes again “we who are alive…shall be caught up…in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.” This “being caught up…in the clouds”—arpagisometha in Greek, is translated by some as “raptured”. The word itself is not found in Orthodox theology. The purpose of the “Rapture” is to protect the elect from the tribulations of the end times. Yet Jesus said nothing about sparing anyone from tribulation. In fact, He said, “In the world you have tribulation, but be of good cheer. I have overcome the world.” Nowhere did Jesus ever say that He would return secretly to rapture the elect. Rather, He promised to be with His elect in all tribulations. “Lo, I am with you always. I will never leave you or forsake you.” He even had something good to say about being persecuted: “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5:10).

John Darby taught as dogma that when the Scriptures reveal that the Lord will reign on earth for a thousand years (Rev. 20:4), this figure is to be taken literally, rather than as a symbol for eternity as we believe. The Council of Ephesus in A.D. 431 condemned as heresy this teaching which is called chialiasmos (millenianism or 1000 years). In fact, the Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787 A.D.) in which the essential truths of the Christian faith were defined never mention a rapture. Yet some evangelical Christians and Pentecostals keep using obscure passages of the book of Revelation which purport to give a detailed timetable of what will happen at the end of the world, despite the fact that Jesus Himself warned that no man knows either the day or the hour when the Son of Man shall return.

The Rapture is foreign to the Bible and to the living tradition of the Church. It is what we call a heresy, a false teaching. False teachings, such as this, happen when people—like John Darby—believe that they have the right to interpret the Scriptures individually apart from the Living Body of Christ—the Church—where the Spirit of Truth abides and leads us to all truth.

St. Catherine Greek Orthodox Church
The rapture and the Orthodox Church

 

[Choose Wisely]

Paul did not teach rapture. John Darby taught rapture. Paul said we would escort the rightful King (Christ) into His kingdom not unlike what was done for Roman leaders of their time. Paul never said we're going anywhere for good, or that we're abandoning this world to death and decay. We're staying right here to play our roles in the drama of new creation bursting forth from old creation.

I guess there is no need to mention 1 thes 4, 1 cor 15 etc.........etc......etc.

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

I guess there is no need to mention 1 thes 4, 1 cor 15 etc.........etc......etc.

What about them?

 

[chalkstc]

Wait a second. Let's remember Saint Paul's words here; But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate strife. And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will. (2 Timothy 2:23-26) NOONE has denied that St. Paul's letters are divinely inspired but it seems that you have established an interpretation and a supportive agenda and you are biting others' heads off when they disagree with you. What is it that you are trying to accomplish? You have lived on God's green Earth almost three-quarters of a century and this is your attitude in a discussion with believers? That shame is on you sir!


Again, this is a 30-page discussion where it seems you are squeezing people's throats for not agreeing with your interpretation and where I basically stated A VERY IMPORTANT FACT that this "snatching up" business DID NOT EXIST as a teaching in the early church. This teaching is new. And how can you insult another believer personally and suggest that they tear the Holy Scriptures? I do not agree with your interpretation, because it didn't exist when the church was established. That teaching was not passed down to saints, the champions of faith, the apostles. The Orthodox Church has never promoted the rapture as it is presently stated. In fact, the 2000-year history of the unbroken Church does not contain any reference to such an event. Although, the dating of the rapture is argued by its supporters to predate the 1800’s, they have been extremely hard pressed to prove their case. Nevertheless, it is important for us, Orthodox Christians, clearly understand their own faith so that they might not be carried away by such myths as the rapture... Hence I made my comment. Basic rule of biblical exegesis, if a verse exists, it doesn't mean it supports a certain teaching or doctrine. Arius used the same scriptures to deny Christ's divinity. How come early Christians defined such things as Holy Trinity, divine nature of Christ, and they failed to interpret a rapture? Unless you have a historical backup, or a starting point in Christian history, I recommend that you find one. The Rapture represents a radical misinterpretation of Scripture. I remember watching “Sixty Minutes”a year ago and was appalled to hear the announcer say that “the Rapture is an unmistakenly Christian doctrine”. It is not! It is a serious distortion of Scripture. It is astonishing that a belief so contrary to Scripture and the tradition of the Church could be propagated by so-called “Christians”. According to the Bible and according to the belief not only of Orthodox Christians but also of the Roman Catholic and most Protestant mainline churches, the true Rapture will not be secret; it will be the great and very visible Second Coming of Jesus at the end of the world. That is the one and only “Rapture”. It will not be a separate, secret event but one that every eye shall see (1 Thess. 4:16-17). The word rapture is not found in Scripture but hearkens to 1 Thess. 4:17 where St. Paul says that when the Lord comes again “we who are alive…shall be caught up…in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.” This “being caught up…in the clouds”—arpagisometha in Greek, is translated by some as “raptured”. The word itself is not found in Orthodox theology. The purpose of the “Rapture” is to protect the elect from the tribulations of the end times. Yet Jesus said nothing about sparing anyone from tribulation. In fact, He said, “In the world you have tribulation, but be of good cheer. I have overcome the world.” Nowhere did Jesus ever say that He would return secretly to rapture the elect. Rather, He promised to be with His elect in all tribulations. “Lo, I am with you always. I will never leave you or forsake you.” He even had something good to say about being persecuted: “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5:10).

John Darby taught as dogma that when the Scriptures reveal that the Lord will reign on earth for a thousand years (Rev. 20:4), this figure is to be taken literally, rather than as a symbol for eternity as we believe. The Council of Ephesus in A.D. 431 condemned as heresy this teaching which is called chialiasmos (millenianism or 1000 years). In fact, the Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787 A.D.) in which the essential truths of the Christian faith were defined never mention a rapture. Yet some evangelical Christians and Pentecostals keep using obscure passages of the book of Revelation which purport to give a detailed timetable of what will happen at the end of the world, despite the fact that Jesus Himself warned that no man knows either the day or the hour when the Son of Man shall return.

The Rapture is foreign to the Bible and to the living tradition of the Church. It is what we call a heresy, a false teaching. False teachings, such as this, happen when people—like John Darby—believe that they have the right to interpret the Scriptures individually apart from the Living Body of Christ—the Church—where the Spirit of Truth abides and leads us to all truth.

St. Catherine Greek Orthodox Church
The rapture and the Orthodox Church

1 Cor 1:19​

For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.​

KJV


Rom 1:22​

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,​

​

KJV

Semper fi................always faithful to all that is written!

So you say you give more credence to the ECF than you do to the Word of God? Again....shame...................

 

[son_flower]

Yet some evangelical Christians and Pentecostals keep using obscure passages of the book of Revelation which purport to give a detailed timetable of what will happen at the end of the world, despite the fact that Jesus Himself warned that no man knows either the day or the hour when the Son of Man shall return.

The Rapture is foreign to the Bible and to the living tradition of the Church. It is what we call a heresy, a false teaching. False teachings, such as this, happen when people—like John Darby—believe that they have the right to interpret the Scriptures individually apart from the Living Body of Christ—the Church—where the Spirit of Truth abides and leads us to all truth.

Amen.

The whole doctrine is made using snippets that have to be carefully spliced together and with quite a bit of imagination to avoid noticing the holes.
A 7 year period is stolen from Daniels plea for his own peoples promise of the Messiah then replaced instead by a man incarnated by Satan to bring a secular form of horror to the Church for which it must escape.
When believed it effectively nullifies the fulfillment of the old covenant and the power of the Holy Spirit placement into His new temple and exalts the spirit of antichrist to all an consuming position on earth for which again the only recourse is escape.
It leaves the dying world no hope when it looks towards the Church and creates in it's place a fear of chaos instead of freedom from its bondage.
Quite clever and altogether pathetic.

 

[dcyates]

No he didn't..................He said
Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

the apostles generation did not see all these things fulfilled:

no abomination of desolation standing in the Holy place in temple because Titus and his armies completely destroyed the temple, leaving no holy place within the temple for an abomination of desolation to be placed.

Manasseh, the destruction of the temple IS the "abomination of desolation." The word 'desolation' indicates 'being in a state of ruin or destruction', and the destruction of the temple would have been regarded as an 'abomination' to any 1st-century Jew. Nevertheless, when the Romans surrounded and eventually destroyed the temple, they did place their standards there as a symbol of their conquest and victory.
On top of this, the Greek word used in Matt 24.28 translated "vultures" is aetois (sing. aetos), which is the same word for "eagles," which would have adorned those Roman standards. (Interestingly, it's only in the Western hemisphere where there is a distinction made between the two.)

They did not see the gospel of this kingdom published throughout the world Mat 24:14

To the people of the Roman Empire, the world was the Empire, and by AD 70, the gospel had not only been announced throughout the empire but beyond its borders, as well.

They did not see a "falling away" 2Thess 2 /Matt 24:12 a great apostasy within the body of Christ because it was still in it's infancy during their generation, the apostles themselves along with the prophets were the very foundation upon building this body, Christ being the chief cornerstone. Eph 2:20

There is always a "falling away" during times of great persecution -- and the greater the persecution, the more fall away. The seige of Jerusalem was a truly horrific time of terrible persecution. I encourage anybody to read about it; it was an awful, awful time.

They did not see mankind come to the point of having the technology and ability to completely destroy the human race from the planet, of which during "this generation" if God did not intervene mankind would annihilate the human race from the planet Mat 24:22

Manasseh, this text doesn't entail the entire population of the planet, but rather that of Judea (cf. v. 16). Don't tell me hyperbole is completely lost on you. Describing times of terrible upheaval like this always calls for exaggerative language.

They did not see this prophecy fulfilled..........Psa 110:1..........this is both a promise and prophecy from the Father to the Son, Christ still has enemies here on earth "antichrist" and it will culminate in the beast, false prophet /man of sin and babylon the harlot of which he will destroy at his return when his enemies are brought low as his "footstool"

this example only one of literally dozens of prophecies still yet to be fulfilled.

Ps 110.1 is a promise, but it isn't prophecy. And even if you wanted to read it as such, there's nothing to indicate that it had to be "fulfilled" by AD 70.

And most importantly they did not see their savior return in power and glory to establish his kingdom on earth, because when that kingdom is established then God's will is done here on earth as it is done in heaven. God's will is not being done here on earth, the wicked still do wickedly.

Huh? Now prayer is prophecy?!? Besides, God's will is being done on earth. Whenever his people engage in acts of charity, care, generosity, and compassion, God's will is being done.

only "this generation" will see these things fulfilled, the very end time generation shortly before Christ's return in power and glory and false doctrines such as preterism will also be a thing of the past.

There is no way that Jesus' original audience, his disciples, would have interpreted his use of the term genea to refer to people off in the far-flung future. For goodness sake, his teaching in Matt 24 is begun by his prophesying the destruction of the temple (cf. vv. 1-2); there is no question that this is what this discourse is about. His disciples specifically ask him in the very next verse as to when this will happen! Well, it happened in AD 70! That is, within a generation of the time Jesus would have made this prediction (as you probably already know, in Jewish thought, a 'generation' consisted of about 40 years).

 

[dcyates]

In my Bible, I have literally torn out the writings of Paul. He wrongly taught a rapture, and he wrongly taught hat we are saved entirely by faith and grace, as the Revelation makes clear.

Wow! A reverse-Marcionite.

 

[dcyates]

SF,

When the generation sees "ALL" thes things come to pass". Did the disciples see the completion of the preaching of the Gospel to all nations happen back then? NOT!

And note: Jesus brings us all the way to the end before He comes in vs 14. THEN vs 15 continues with the AOD which also comes at the same end.

Order, order, order
Frankie

Context, context, context. The "end" being referred to in v. 15 is that which was asked by his disciples in v. 3: "Tell us when will this be (i.e. the destruction of the temple), what will be the sign of your coming, and of the closing of the age?"

 

[Super Kal]

John Darby taught as dogma that when the Scriptures reveal that the Lord will reign on earth for a thousand years (Rev. 20:4), this figure is to be taken literally, rather than as a symbol for eternity as we believe. The Council of Ephesus in A.D. 431 condemned as heresy this teaching which is called chialiasmos (millenianism or 1000 years). In fact, the Seven Ecumenical Councils (325-787 A.D.) in which the essential truths of the Christian faith were defined never mention a rapture. Yet some evangelical Christians and Pentecostals keep using obscure passages of the book of Revelation which purport to give a detailed timetable of what will happen at the end of the world, despite the fact that Jesus Himself warned that no man knows either the day or the hour when the Son of Man shall return.

i do want to note simply in this part, bushmaster, that you have only quoted teaching from post-nicene writings. Chiliasm was not considered as a heretical teaching by the ante-Nicene church leaders- in fact, they taught premillennialism as truth when it came to eschatology, and this goes for Hippolytus, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and many others.

i will say on account, though, that even though they taught premillennialism, that does not automatically make them dispensationalists or pre-tribbers. you are right, modern day popular premillennialism, or "dispensational premillennialism" came from Darby & the Plymouth Brethren... historical premillennialism, however, did not.

i can provide links to sources of documents if you'd like

 

[dcyates]

Luke's account states that armies surround Jerusalem and the abomination is not far off from that event, other prophecies show these are armies of a number of nations that came against Jerusalem (Zech 14)

Luk 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

There were no nations or their armies that came against Jerusalem in the generation of the apostles, there was only one power then, The Roman Empire and ITS army that came against Jerusalem and when they entered, once again, they did not set up an abomination of desolation in the temple because they completely destroyed it, (not one stone left upon another )

The Greek word translated "nations" (ethn[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]&#275;[/FONT]) was, to Jews, simply another word for goyim, that is, 'Gentiles'.
As well, in Luke, the Greek term translated "armies" is stratopedon which actually designates "army camps" (its root is stratia or 'units'). Therefore, in these texts Jerusalem is surrounded by army units made up of Gentiles, which perfectly describes the Roman legions (which was itself made up of many different types of Gentiles).

 

[chalkstc]

DC,

You believe the end of the Jewish age was the same end th disciples asked Jesus about? Then Him raising us up at the end of the age is also past? And He came back in AD 70?

Is this correct to your preteristical view? If so, then your heresy will be judged by your own idle words imo.

Your view would have us believe that the "blessed hope" of Titus 2:13 is past also? Then what does a Christian look forward to.................pie in the sky when we die?

Is this text also past....................

Heb 9:28​

So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.​

​

KJV

So, according to you we should not be looking for Him the second time? Gewe, that really spurs me on.............................NADA!

Frankie

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

So you say you give more credence to the ECF than you do to the Word of God? Again....shame...................

This really doesn't have anything to do with the God-breathed divinely inspired Holy Scriptures. I do give Early Church Fathers more credence over YOU and the interpretation you support, not the Word of God... The shame is that you depart from Christian orthodoxy, and expect that everyone be in line with you. Study the Early Church Fathers, they were Christians too, and much better ones.