When to look for the rapture of the church

_Dave_ said:

Not to indict anyone here personally, because I'm speaking of the Christian population as a whole, if you Google the statements of faith for the major denominations you'll discover that many of them outright state that they don't hold to a rapture, a millennial reign of Christ, a seven-year tribulation, the antichrist, etc. These are mainline Protestant denominations I'm talking about.

Now imagine your average Christian sitting in a pew for decades being deprived of good, accurate biblical exposition. As far as they are concerned, the important eschatological doctrines simply do not exist in their Bibles. So they become easy prey to false teaching.

Personally, that's why I believe the preterist, no-rapture or post-trib folks are in the majority these days. The early church was unquestionably pre-trib, but that fell by the wayside when church "fathers" began teaching against that biblical truth, and Christian faith entered a period of dark ages. Thankfully there is still a remnant holding to the truth.

Click to expand...

Personally, that's why I believe the preterist, no-rapture or post-trib folks are in the majority these days. The early church was unquestionably pre-trib, but that fell by the wayside when church "fathers" began teaching against that biblical truth, and Christian faith entered a period of dark ages. Thankfully there is still a remnant holding to the truth.

Click to expand...

Do you have stats on the numbers/percentage of Preterists to those of the false doctrine of "pre trib"

Now imagine your average Christian sitting in a pew for decades being deprived of good, accurate biblical exposition. As far as they are concerned, the important eschatological doctrines simply do not exist in their Bibles. So they become easy prey to false teaching.

Click to expand...

Fortunately for Christians today, there are extensive sources of online Greek and Hebrew resources, and the more Christian utilize them, the more of them will come to realized fulfillment of the Bible.

Hos 4:6
My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.
Because you have rejected knowledge, I also will reject you from being priest for Me;
Because you have forgotten the law of your God, I also will forget your children.

Daniel tells the Jews their knowledge shall increase. But it seems as if it has increased for the Gentile non-Jews.

Dan 12:4
“But thou Daniel, shut up the words! and seal the book! until the time of the end.
many shall run to and fro, and the knowledge shall increase.”

Luke 11:52
“Woe to ye the Lawyers! For ye have taken away the key of the knowledge.
Ye did not enter in yourselves, and those who were entering in you hindered.”

Revelation 1:3
Blessed/happy the one reading and the ones hearing the words of the Prophecy and keepings in it having been written/gegrammena <1125> (5772),
for the Time Is-Near<1451>.

Revelation 22:10
And he is saying to me "no thou should be sealing the Words of the Prophecy of the Scroll, this. That the Time/Season is nigh<1451nigh>

BABerean2 said:

Genesis of Dispensational Theology

PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418


Lacunza, Manuel, “Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty“
PDF Files


Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Doctrine
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.4windsfellowships.net/articles/rapture_23.pdf


Pretribulationist Revisionism
(Grant Jeffrey’s revision of early Church Posttrib viewpoints)
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.4windsfellowships.net/articles/rapture_22.pdf

.

Click to expand...

Or ...

There's always Scripture:

1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

1Th 4:18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

1Th 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,

God said it, Paul preached it, the early church believed it.

_Dave_ said:

Or ...

There's always Scripture:

1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

1Th 4:18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

1Th 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,

God said it, Paul preached it, the early church believed it.

Click to expand...

Who in the early church believed in a pretrib rapture?

Quotes, please.

jgr said:

Who in the early church believed in a pretrib rapture?

Quotes, please.

Click to expand...

Paul and all the members of the church in Thessalonica, and by inference every other church that Paul preached in and that was taught by those who Paul taught. IOW, the Acts churches.

Beyond that, in following centuries God's word became corrupted by extra-biblical writers and pagan influence. And churches took on a wholly different flavor that has lasted until today (except for a remnant).

_Dave_ said:

Paul and all the members of the church in Thessalonica, and by inference every other church that Paul preached in and that was taught by those who Paul taught. IOW, the Acts churches.

Click to expand...

I requested quotes, not your inference.

_Dave_ said:

Beyond that, in following centuries God's word became corrupted by extra-biblical writers and pagan influence. And churches took on a wholly different flavor that has lasted until today (except for a remnant).

Click to expand...

Quotes, please.

jgr said:

I requested quotes, not your inference.
Quotes, please.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you are getting at, but you are coming close to the point of badgering.

All of 1st and 2nd Thessalonians is about the rapture and Christ's second coming. Paul preached it, they believed it. Romans and 1Corinthians also have references.

Perhaps you are conflating "early church" to mean beyond the Acts churches of the day. I don't consider third century churches to be the early church. That's when things started to go south doctrine-wise.

_Dave_ said:

I don't consider third century churches to be the early church.

Click to expand...

When exactly in the third century did the Church disappear? Evidence?

_Dave_ said:

That's when things started to go south doctrine-wise.

Click to expand...

Evidence?

jgr said:

When exactly in the third century did the Church disappear? Evidence?
Evidence?

Click to expand...

I never said the church disappeared. Those are your words. The church as the Body of Christ has always existed.

I'll answer your other question with a question. When did the first writings appear that contradicted God's message about the rapture? Your answer will be when the church began to become corrupted.

_Dave_ said:

I never said the church disappeared. Those are your words. The church as the Body of Christ has always existed.

Click to expand...

True. So if a pretrib rapture teaching has always been part of its orthodox doctrine, then there should be evidence of it as recognized and accepted doctrine, up to the end of the 18th century of true Church history.

You will find no such evidence.

jgr said:

True. So if a pretrib rapture teaching has always been part of its orthodox doctrine, then there should be evidence of it as recognized and accepted doctrine, up to the end of the 18th century of true Church history.
You will find no such evidence.

Click to expand...

Once again you have put words in my mouth. Did I say that a pre-trib rapture has always been part of the church's orthodox doctrine? No. You did. There were whole centuries, actually a millennium and a half, where a corrupt church forewent sound doctrine.

My statement is that the early (Acts) church believed in the pre-trib rapture. God said it, Paul preached it, the church believed it. My statement was only to refute the nonsense that Darby "invented" the pre-trib rapture.

No. God invented it. Paul preached it. The church believed it. Then the church went into disbelief when their itching ears got scratched by men they let deceive them. And it's still going on today, apparently.

_Dave_ said:

God said it, Paul preached it, the early church believed it.

Click to expand...

The verse below proves that the event is described in chapter 4 and the timing is found in chapter 5.
No trip back to heaven is found in the passage.

1Th 5:10 Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.

.

_Dave_ said:

Once again you have put words in my mouth. Did I say that a pre-trib rapture has always been part of the church's orthodox doctrine? No. You did. There were whole centuries, actually a millennium and a half, where a corrupt church forewent sound doctrine.

My statement is that the early (Acts) church believed in the pre-trib rapture. God said it, Paul preached it, the church believed it. My statement was only to refute the nonsense that Darby "invented" the pre-trib rapture.

No. God invented it. Paul preached it. The church believed it. Then the church went into disbelief when their itching ears got scratched by men they let deceive them. And it's still going on today, apparently.

Click to expand...

You said "The church as the Body of Christ has always existed." That is correct. And the Body of Christ is the true Church, not the corrupt church. It is the Church against which Christ said the gates of hell would not prevail.

You will find no evidence of a pretrib rapture doctrine in the doctrine of the historical true Church Body of Christ.

The pretrib rapture doctrine is a modernist doctrine.

jgr said:

You said "The church as the Body of Christ has always existed." That is correct. And the Body of Christ is the true Church, not the corrupt church.

Click to expand...

Your point is valid. In looking back over my posts I can see where there might be confusion when the word "church" is used interchangeably to mean a denomination, congregation, or building, or rather generically as the true Body of Christ.

So, to clarify. The Body of Christ as the "church" has existed since Pentecost (I think anyway, don't quote me on that, but somewhere along there) even before there were church buildings. It has never ended, even in the dark ages when the church of Rome was the supreme law of the land but entirely outside the true Body. The Acts "churches" were truly within the Body of Christ. They were taught the pre-trib rapture, and believed it.

There is also church as denominations and such in regard to those outside of the true Body of Christ. Like I said, the ruling church for more than a millennium, and even today many churches are those that Jesus will say He never knew them. A diligent understanding of Revelation 2 and 3 lays all that out as to who is who.

jgr said:

You will find no evidence of a pretrib rapture doctrine in the Body of Christ, the true Church.

Click to expand...

Well, obviously, you do. The Acts churches were the true Body of Christ church, and they did believe the pre-trib rapture. Even today, there are churches, mostly the non-denominational ones that are faithful as the Body of Christ, that have statements of faith that come directly from Scripture -- the rapture, the millennial reign of Christ, all that.

But, sadly, you would be right to say that there is no pre-trib rapture doctrine in evidence in most of the denominational churches of today, among many other heresies; which, sadly, means that they will be going through the great tribulation, as Jesus stated for the church of Thyatira.

As a side note: Isn't it interesting that everybody claims that Darby invented the pre-trib rapture, but nobody claims that Martin Luther invented salvation by grace, by Christ and Christ alone, and that salvation doctrine didn't exist before that? Should be the same logic, yes?

_Dave_ said:

As a side note: Isn't it interesting that everybody claims that Darby invented the pre-trib rapture, but nobody claims that Martin Luther invented salvation by grace, by Christ and Christ alone, and that salvation doctrine didn't exist before that? Should be the same logic, yes?

Click to expand...

I never claimed that Darby invented the pretrib doctrine, even though he did bring the doctrine to America.

Darby got if from the followers of Edward Irving.

After Irving died in 1834, Darby adopted the doctrine and became its greatest salesman during that century.


PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418


Lacunza, Manuel, “Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty“
PDF Files


Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Doctrine
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.4windsfellowships.net/articles/rapture_23.pdf


Pretribulationist Revisionism
(Grant Jeffrey’s revision of early Church Posttrib viewpoints)
Pastor Tim Warner
http://www.4windsfellowships.net/articles/rapture_22.pdf



.

_Dave_ said:

Your point is valid. In looking back over my posts I can see where there might be confusion when the word "church" is used interchangeably to mean a denomination, congregation, or building, or rather generically as the true Body of Christ.

So, to clarify. The Body of Christ as the "church" has existed since Pentecost (I think anyway, don't quote me on that, but somewhere along there) even before there were church buildings. It has never ended, even in the dark ages when the church of Rome was the supreme law of the land but entirely outside the true Body. The Acts "churches" were truly within the Body of Christ. They were taught the pre-trib rapture, and believed it.

There is also church as denominations and such in regard to those outside of the true Body of Christ. Like I said, the ruling church for more than a millennium, and even today many churches are those that Jesus will say He never knew them. A diligent understanding of Revelation 2 and 3 lays all that out as to who is who.



Well, obviously, you do. The Acts churches were the true Body of Christ church, and they did believe the pre-trib rapture. Even today, there are churches, mostly the non-denominational ones that are faithful as the Body of Christ, that have statements of faith that come directly from Scripture -- the rapture, the millennial reign of Christ, all that.

But, sadly, you would be right to say that there is no pre-trib rapture doctrine in evidence in most of the denominational churches of today, among many other heresies; which, sadly, means that they will be going through the great tribulation, as Jesus stated for the church of Thyatira.

As a side note: Isn't it interesting that everybody claims that Darby invented the pre-trib rapture, but nobody claims that Martin Luther invented salvation by grace, by Christ and Christ alone, and that salvation doctrine didn't exist before that? Should be the same logic, yes?

Click to expand...

Orthodox doctrine does not suddenly disappear without a trace from the ecclesiological landscape. If the pretrib rapture were orthodox doctrine, there would have been at least a modicum of evidence of its presence, for at least some period, however brief, in the early post-apostolic New Testament true Church; before its disappearance through the corruption which you allege. Such evidence would have been seen in the writing of at least some number, however small, of the true Church Fathers of that era.

Such evidence cannot be found.

_Dave_ said:

LOL. It feels like I've got my own personal stalker.

Click to expand...

You can't be serious,as the emoji shows.However you should expect nothing less on a public forum like this.The only way to avoid what you see is to stick to your word as you said:

"That's about all I have to say about this topic on this thread"

_Dave_ said:

But, yeah. I'm pretty selective in how many times I want to repeat myself to the same person. If someone doesn't get it, then there is no point in dragging something on.

Click to expand...

You never repeated yourself to me once.You declined to continue debating the issue,after one response from me,apparently because you thought I was not "respectful" enough to your position.You should not continue to make up excuses to avoid addressing the points I make,as it doesn't put you in a good light.

Copperhead said:

Ah... but how are they made blameless... are they justified by their own righteousness or the righteousness of Yeshua?

Click to expand...

How is that relevant?We are not discussing justification.The scripture as quoted below was cited to show that Christians were being prepared for the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

"Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ."(I Corinthians 1:8)

Copperhead said:

Nice thought. But that would mean no one is ever saved. Without offense, would include even the smallest sin.

Click to expand...

Again I don't understand why you gone off on a tangent.The scripture as quoted below was cited to show that Christians were being prepared for the day of Christ.

"That ye may approve things that are excellent; that ye may be sincere and without offence till the day of Christ;"(Philippians 1:10)

Copperhead said:

1 Thessalonians 4:16-18 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 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. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.

We all go at the same time. The dead just get a advance start because they have 6 more feet to go. That is not canon, I just use that to make the point.

Click to expand...

And what does,"rise first", mean?The same time?And what do you think will be coming up from the grave?

Copperhead said:

And where do the resurrected righteous dead and living go at that point?
....Isaiah 26:19-21 Your dead shall live;
Together with my dead body they shall arise.
Awake and sing, you who dwell in dust;
For your dew is like the dew of herbs,
And the earth shall cast out the dead.
20 Come, my people, enter your chambers,
And shut your doors behind you;
Hide yourself, as it were, for a little moment,
Until the indignation is past.
21 For behold, the Lord comes out of His place
To punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity;
The earth will also disclose her blood,
And will no more cover her slain.

Click to expand...

They will be where the Lord will be.It is He who will protect them.(See,Psalm 27:5;91:1-4)If you continue to read in Isaiah,and not stop at the verses you quote, you will see where that subsequent place is.

Copperhead said:

It would be redundant if it was worded the way you are putting it. but....

Click to expand...

That is what results when YOU do not properly interpret the passages in question.As I have shown:

"I believe if we look at the words of Paul from I Thessalonians 4,through I Thessalonians 5,we will see him telling the Church to be comforted by the fact that the Lord will return with the saints who are dead and that those who are alive and they will be gathered to meet the Lord in the air.And that they should not be as others who are in the dark and are caught unawares by the coming of the Lord.He calls the event the day of the Lord and that day.Some claim this is a different event from what is described in I Thessalonians 4:16-18,but if we look at the passages as they were written,without the chapter break,we see that Paul is describing the event of I Thessalonians 4,further in I Thessalonians 5 and calls the event "the day of the Lord",and "that day"."

This you cannot and have not refuted.And so if Paul is already saying "that day" ie. the day of the Lord's return for the saints,will not come until two other events,the falling away/departure and the revealing of the man of sin,then how can "that day" be the falling away/departure?It is your erroneous interpretation which would make Paul's statement redundant.

Copperhead said:

The context of 2 Thessalonians 2 is our gathering to the Lord. Not our rebelling against the Lord, or our falling away from the Lord. I have stated the details of this in a previous post. It is a spatial, physical departure, not a spiritual or doctrinal departure that is in view. This passage is Pre-Trib.... game, set, match.

Click to expand...

It is a shame that you,in trying to support your point,would ignore an important part of the passage in question.While Paul does speak of the coming of the Lord,he does so in the context of correcting an error which the early Christians had fallen into.It is this same error which afflicts those who believe in a secret rapture.The coming man of sin and the iniquity at work and the falling away that would result is a major part of the discourse of that passage.As I said in another post:

"Paul says the event which comes as a thief in the night and which should not overtake us,not because of a rapture but because we are prepared,is called "the day of the Lord".(I Thessalonians 5:1-9.)
Hence Paul was not telling the Thessalonians about a day of vengeance,but was assuring them that the time of the Lord's coming was not yet.He identifies two things which must happen before the coming occurs,the falling away(apostasia)and the man of sin will be revealed.Before the coming of the Lord will be the apostasia and the man of sin be revealed.
The apostasia is clearly linked to the coming man of sin.The mystery of iniquity or mystery of lawlessness had begun in Paul's time which is the turning away from God's truth ie.apostasia and the end result will be that which Paul spoke of in II Thessalonians 2:3,after which the man of sin is revealed.The mystery of iniquity and its development will precede the revealing of the man of sin,(II Thess.2:7,8),just as the apostasia comes first and then the man of sin is revealed.(II Thess.2:3)
The removal of the hinderer is linked to the mystery of iniquity and the revealing of the man of sin.For Paul to say:
"...the mystery of iniquity doth already work:"(II Thess.2:7);this must be a reference to something mentioned at its completion or maturity,which he is now saying has started. Apostasia being interpreted as apostasy would fit this context completely ie. the apostasy would come first then the man of sin,but it had already started and when completed and the hinderer removed, then will the man of sin be revealed.It is only after this that the Lord will come for His people.This is the progression of thought in the passage.(II Thess.2:3-8.)"


Also:

"Paul is correcting the very error which today is the popular teaching about the coming of the Lord ie. the Lord may come at any time.He clearly refutes this teaching but many today are shaken and troubled and have led many astray with this false teaching.It is only because of the failure to heed the words of Paul why many could have believed in the predictions,about the Lord's coming,by William Miller and others.Others today do not set dates but cause many to be continuously agitated as they expound the false teaching.
John confirms we will see antichrist(the man of sin) before the Lord's coming, as he says we have been warned that antichrist will come.Why warn if Christians would not see the advent of antichrist?(I John 2:18-24)
Apostasia,therefore, in this context cannot refer to the rapture but to apostasy from God's truth which will precede the revealing of the man of sin.It is only after this ,that Christians can say the Lord's coming is imminent."

safswan said:

You can't be serious,as the emoji shows.However you should expect nothing less on a public forum like this.The only way to avoid what you see is to stick to your word as you said: "That's about all I have to say about this topic on this thread"

You never repeated yourself to me once.You declined to continue debating the issue,after one response from me,apparently because you thought I was not "respectful" enough to your position.You should not continue to make up excuses to avoid addressing the points I make,as it doesn't put you in a good light.

Click to expand...

This is getting downright silly, and why I saw no fruit coming from continuing with you.

I mean, really? You seriously think you are going to badger me into continuing to debate with you when I don't want to. I made my case with you and several others here about why Paul preached pre-trib. You made your case in rebuttal to mine. You aren't going to change my mind. I'm not going to change your mind.

So, move on brother.