Dangerous Doctrins

[GabrielMyAngel]

I live in fundamentalist alley, and the exposure to their doctrins have continued to disturb me to no end.

We have the "rapture gospel", which twists and distorts scripture to make it appear that we get two returns of Christ, that the time and day are predicable, and that we need not prepare for hard times ahead.

We have the "prosperiety gospel", where God has been reduced to a magic lamp that we can rub and all of our earthly desires will be fulfilled, no matter how vile they are, if we believe it will happen, he will grant our requests. This reduces God to becoming our slave and servant, not the ultimate authority. We also are not working with the talents and abilities given to us, and fall into sloth.

We have the "tolerance gospel", where we are told to obey the will of external religions and the world itself, to not only accept them, but to follow their practices. It's clear, people think the sure sign of your faith is your passive nature.

We have the "mystical gospel", which is driven by Satan himself, following dreams and false signs, making predicitons that never come true, taking action in areas where we ought not, and not taking action when we should, all upon a whim and a deception. This places us above the scriptures, and our wisdom, higher then his. Many even find ways to pull tidbits of scripture out of context to support their views, and one dares not correct them in the errors of their teachings.

We have the "designer gospel", which people think they can pick and choose which commandments to follow, which teachings of Christ to embrace, and completely ignore the spirit of what is taught. We don't like how a bible is worded, we change it, we don't like a certain book in it, it gets either ignored, or pulled completely out of the printing itself. Like a child that hides their green beans because they don't want to eat them, it's being done the same with the scriptures. Some take it so far as to write additional "designer gospels", to support their views, JW's, Mormons, etc. are good examples.

We have the "end of times gospel", where people insist that we are at the last stage and that the tribulations are about to begin. Completely ignoring that there still are a great many things that must take place, and the book of revelations is badly mangled in the process. How many end of times has there been in history? I don't even have a number, but it's huge!

We have this great one called the "spectator gospel", where all one has to do is sit in the pew once a week, have some knowledge of scripture, perform some ritual, and salvation is achieved in a cookie cutter style. No mention of works, and at best, there is a "committee", to address any good works aspects. We replace chairity with a check, out of sight out of mind, and as long as you appear to believe during that one hour of the week, it's all good.

We have the "don't rock the boat gospel", where one must put on a smile at all times, never have an opinion outside of the leaders, never buck the system, never question what is being taught, sit in our corner and be good little drones. The very last thing a church leader wants to do is be deemed radical, they want to be conforming to their authorities, who in turn want only higher church attendance, mainly to turn it into a popularity contest, and the sermons never discuss fire and brimstone, judgment, or repentance.

We have the "Add on to the law gospel", where we aren't challenged enough to follow his original laws, we have to make up our own instead. I am being sarcastic on the word challenged, they tend to fall miserably flat with them. As long as you don't smoke cigarettes, nor drink alcohol, nor marry someone not of the clique, and show up when ordered, salvation is assured. One is urged to never associate with outside denominations, less they become polluted from the world, they are to remain tucked away in their communities of false doctrine, and wait for the Lord's return.

We have the "In-crowd gospel", which mandates that anybody that greets you, you don't personally know, you are to look the other way. You are not to mingle with others of the faith, and the people you come in there with, in your small group, it's perfectly acceptable to gab loudly away with, regardless if there are people praying and showing reverence. Partiality is king in this one, and the shabbier your clothing and mode of transportation, the less important you are, because you won't have a big enough tithe, nor do you have wealth enough for them to relate to.

We have the "letter of the law" gospel, which has us thinking we can go back to the OT, follow it's ways in full, and anybody that deviates from it is going to hell. This makes outsiders feel far too inadequate to attempt to join the congregation, they tend to think of some day they will be pure enough to join, for now, they are going to remain outside of it, that day never comes for most of them people....

We have more, far more then what I've listed here, and the stench of these gospels have done more harm to HIS church then any force in history. They are all derivative of the evil one, Pope JP2 stated several times that the devil has been let loose within the church, he wasn't talking about a denominational institution, he was referencing God's church, which has no man made boundaries. Why people are not in an uproar about it is clear, they want to follow the status quo, the world itself, rather then face their own limitations and put their faith and trust fully in God himself. They desire to hear of things that comply with their lifestyle, rather then hear of things that complies with God's, and anybody that speaks up is shunned.

We need to wake up, get back to tradition, stop following these so called "new" ways, they aren't new, they are just a repeat of what has happened before, and we must do this sooner rather then later.

Anybody have any comments on the above, especially with elaborations upon, that would be great, also, feel free to list other dangerous gospels, and how they are misleading so many people.

 

[John S]

The VAST majority of what you say is absolutely correct. However, the VAST majority of the people on this site will disagree with you. This is what happens when ultra-conservatives call themselves "Christians", Far too many of them don't even like the Teachings of Jesus Christ.
For example, far too many people on this site HATE "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" because they would then have to accept males, females, homosexuals, whites, blacks, browns, mixed colors, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, atheists, Catholics, Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, Jehovah's Witnesses, Lutherans, rich, poor, intelligent or less intelligentas their equals - and there is NO way that they are going to accept this many people as their equal. It seems to me that this even includes the fact that they HATE having a black President, so he is repeatedly said to be the antichrist.
They HATE when Jesus said that we need to "Love our enemies".
They HATE it that Jesus said that we are supposed to "turn the other cheek" when we are hit and NOT fight back.
They HATE the fact that Jesus NEVER owned weapons and neither should any of His followers.
Sadly, they LOVE ignoring His Teachings so they "pretend to be one of His followers by following the Old Testament when all Christians are supposed to know that Jesus did away with the Old Testament.
Apparently, Jesus Christ is too wimpy for them.

 

[KerrMetric]

Bloody hell - a sensible thread.

 

[susan.baker]

Interesting.

 

[johnd1987]

Ever heard of the booty gospel?

Booty Gospel Vol.1 Bynum/Weeks EXPOSED!!!! - YouTube

 

[Myshkin99]

Anybody have any comments on the above, especially with elaborations upon, that would be great, also, feel free to list other dangerous gospels, and how they are misleading so many people.

Lemme guess....YOU have the TRUE Gospel, right? Am I right? I'll bet I'm right, aren't I?

There's some whacky stuff out there, no doubt. But, really, it's a pretty whacky story to begin with, so I think people can be forgiven for running with it.

 

[GabrielMyAngel]

Lemme guess....YOU have the TRUE Gospel, right? Am I right? I'll bet I'm right, aren't I?

There's some whacky stuff out there, no doubt. But, really, it's a pretty whacky story to begin with, so I think people can be forgiven for running with it.

Well, I have the gospel the apostles taught, and a correct version of the bible to draw upon.

The so called wacky stuff is killing souls, does it require a remnant or the whole of truth? If it only requires a remnant, which people tend to lead you to believe, which remnant should one observe? When the new wacky gospels are in place, along with the errors, the rest of scripture is pulled into error in order to attempt to fit in with the crazy add on's. I know someone that has literally invited in, and is entertained by demons in a real sense, all due to following some of these. Their fruits stink, and it's the fruit that we must use to gauge. That's ok, go on sinning in ignorance, eventually the covering gets stripped away and one must face the full brunt of ones actions.

 

[Myshkin99]

A remnant. A mustard seed. The rest is useful philosophy and great storytelling.

 

[That Canadian Guy]

Ever heard of the booty gospel?

I have seen it all

 

[Biblewriter]

I live in fundamentalist alley, and the exposure to their doctrins have continued to disturb me to no end.

We have the "rapture gospel", which twists and distorts scripture to make it appear that we get two returns of Christ, that the time and day are predicable, and that we need not prepare for hard times ahead.

We have the "prosperiety gospel", where God has been reduced to a magic lamp that we can rub and all of our earthly desires will be fulfilled, no matter how vile they are, if we believe it will happen, he will grant our requests. This reduces God to becoming our slave and servant, not the ultimate authority. We also are not working with the talents and abilities given to us, and fall into sloth.

We have the "tolerance gospel", where we are told to obey the will of external religions and the world itself, to not only accept them, but to follow their practices. It's clear, people think the sure sign of your faith is your passive nature.

We have the "mystical gospel", which is driven by Satan himself, following dreams and false signs, making predicitons that never come true, taking action in areas where we ought not, and not taking action when we should, all upon a whim and a deception. This places us above the scriptures, and our wisdom, higher then his. Many even find ways to pull tidbits of scripture out of context to support their views, and one dares not correct them in the errors of their teachings.

We have the "designer gospel", which people think they can pick and choose which commandments to follow, which teachings of Christ to embrace, and completely ignore the spirit of what is taught. We don't like how a bible is worded, we change it, we don't like a certain book in it, it gets either ignored, or pulled completely out of the printing itself. Like a child that hides their green beans because they don't want to eat them, it's being done the same with the scriptures. Some take it so far as to write additional "designer gospels", to support their views, JW's, Mormons, etc. are good examples.

We have the "end of times gospel", where people insist that we are at the last stage and that the tribulations are about to begin. Completely ignoring that there still are a great many things that must take place, and the book of revelations is badly mangled in the process. How many end of times has there been in history? I don't even have a number, but it's huge!

We have this great one called the "spectator gospel", where all one has to do is sit in the pew once a week, have some knowledge of scripture, perform some ritual, and salvation is achieved in a cookie cutter style. No mention of works, and at best, there is a "committee", to address any good works aspects. We replace chairity with a check, out of sight out of mind, and as long as you appear to believe during that one hour of the week, it's all good.

We have the "don't rock the boat gospel", where one must put on a smile at all times, never have an opinion outside of the leaders, never buck the system, never question what is being taught, sit in our corner and be good little drones. The very last thing a church leader wants to do is be deemed radical, they want to be conforming to their authorities, who in turn want only higher church attendance, mainly to turn it into a popularity contest, and the sermons never discuss fire and brimstone, judgment, or repentance.

We have the "Add on to the law gospel", where we aren't challenged enough to follow his original laws, we have to make up our own instead. I am being sarcastic on the word challenged, they tend to fall miserably flat with them. As long as you don't smoke cigarettes, nor drink alcohol, nor marry someone not of the clique, and show up when ordered, salvation is assured. One is urged to never associate with outside denominations, less they become polluted from the world, they are to remain tucked away in their communities of false doctrine, and wait for the Lord's return.

We have the "In-crowd gospel", which mandates that anybody that greets you, you don't personally know, you are to look the other way. You are not to mingle with others of the faith, and the people you come in there with, in your small group, it's perfectly acceptable to gab loudly away with, regardless if there are people praying and showing reverence. Partiality is king in this one, and the shabbier your clothing and mode of transportation, the less important you are, because you won't have a big enough tithe, nor do you have wealth enough for them to relate to.

We have the "letter of the law" gospel, which has us thinking we can go back to the OT, follow it's ways in full, and anybody that deviates from it is going to hell. This makes outsiders feel far too inadequate to attempt to join the congregation, they tend to think of some day they will be pure enough to join, for now, they are going to remain outside of it, that day never comes for most of them people....

We have more, far more then what I've listed here, and the stench of these gospels have done more harm to HIS church then any force in history. They are all derivative of the evil one, Pope JP2 stated several times that the devil has been let loose within the church, he wasn't talking about a denominational institution, he was referencing God's church, which has no man made boundaries. Why people are not in an uproar about it is clear, they want to follow the status quo, the world itself, rather then face their own limitations and put their faith and trust fully in God himself. They desire to hear of things that comply with their lifestyle, rather then hear of things that complies with God's, and anybody that speaks up is shunned.

We need to wake up, get back to tradition, stop following these so called "new" ways, they aren't new, they are just a repeat of what has happened before, and we must do this sooner rather then later.

Anybody have any comments on the above, especially with elaborations upon, that would be great, also, feel free to list other dangerous gospels, and how they are misleading so many people.

Most of the doctrines you discuss are indeed both new and dangerous. But the end times gospel and the rapture gospel, as you choose to call them, are very old, and denying them is dangerous.

 

[KerrMetric]

the rapture gospel, as you choose to call them, are very old, and denying them is dangerous.

Not exactly that old.

 

[Biblewriter]

Not exactly that old.

Although there were several others who made small comments about end time prophecy earlier than him, the very oldest Christian commentator who wrote at any significant length about Bible prophecy, and whose works have come down to us, was Irenaeus, who wrote before the year 200. He wrote of the evil of the nations and then said, "And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, 'There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.'For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption'" (Against Heresies, Book V, Chapter XXIX, section 2.)

We need to notice the following elements in this short statement:

First, the church will be "suddenly caught up."

Second, after the church is "Suddenly caught up," "There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be." Lest anyone claim that this is not specifically stated to be after “the church is "suddenly caught up," please note that the grammatical construction (when) -- (one event takes place) -- (another event takes place) has two possible meanings. It either means that the two events will take place at the same time or it means that the second event will take place after the first event. But in this case the first event is clearly instantaneous and the second event will obviously consume a significant period of time. So it is unreasonable to argue that the writer’s intention was anything other than to state that this “tribulation” would take place after the church is “suddenly caught up.”

Third, this period of tribulation is specifically called "the last contest of the righteous." and it explicitly says of these righteous in this particular contest, "in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption."

So this statement clearly teaches that the rapture will occur before the great tribulation.

In addition to this critically important and earliest comment on the timing of the rapture, we have absolute proof that the doctrine of the pre-tribulation rapture was widely circulated significantly before the year 800, that is, more that a thousand years before many claim that it originated.

This proof is found in a document, whose age and author is unknown, but which is known to have been in Church libraries before the year 800. Based on events referred to in this document as impending, various scholars have estimated its date from as early as 373 to as late as 627. One ancient manuscript says this document was written by Isadore of Sevelle, while three others say its author was Ephraem the Syrian. All four of these were written in Latin, but there are also Greek and Syraic manuscripts of this same document. The existence of at least six ancient manuscripts, in at least three languages, is strong evidence that this document was widely circulated. As scholars do not believe the unknown author could have been the famous Ephraem the Syrian, (who is also known as Ephraem of Nisbis) they call this unknown author Pseudo-Ephraem. This document says,

“Why therefore do we not reject every care of earthly actions and prepare ourselves for the meeting of the Lord Christ, so that he may draw us from the confusion, which overwhelms all the world? Believe you me, dearest brother, because the coming (advent) of the Lord is nigh, believe you me, because the end of the world is at hand, believe me, because it is the very last time. Or do you not believe unless you see with your eyes? See to it that this sentence be not fulfilled among you of the prophet who declares: ‘Woe to those who desire to see the day of the Lord!’ For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins.” (“On the Last Times, the Antichrist, and the End of the World,” author unknown but called Pseudo-Ephraem, section 2.)

 

[KerrMetric]

Can you point out where the *poof* Rapture is?

 

[GabrielMyAngel]

Although there were several others who made small comments about end time prophecy earlier than him, the very oldest Christian commentator who wrote at any significant length about Bible prophecy, and whose works have come down to us, was Irenaeus, who wrote before the year 200. He wrote of the evil of the nations and then said, "And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, 'There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.'For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption'" (Against Heresies, Book V, Chapter XXIX, section 2.)

We need to notice the following elements in this short statement:

First, the church will be "suddenly caught up."

Second, after the church is "Suddenly caught up," "There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be." Lest anyone claim that this is not specifically stated to be after “the church is "suddenly caught up," please note that the grammatical construction (when) -- (one event takes place) -- (another event takes place) has two possible meanings. It either means that the two events will take place at the same time or it means that the second event will take place after the first event. But in this case the first event is clearly instantaneous and the second event will obviously consume a significant period of time. So it is unreasonable to argue that the writer’s intention was anything other than to state that this “tribulation” would take place after the church is “suddenly caught up.”

Third, this period of tribulation is specifically called "the last contest of the righteous." and it explicitly says of these righteous in this particular contest, "in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption."

So this statement clearly teaches that the rapture will occur before the great tribulation.

In addition to this critically important and earliest comment on the timing of the rapture, we have absolute proof that the doctrine of the pre-tribulation rapture was widely circulated significantly before the year 800, that is, more that a thousand years before many claim that it originated.

This proof is found in a document, whose age and author is unknown, but which is known to have been in Church libraries before the year 800. Based on events referred to in this document as impending, various scholars have estimated its date from as early as 373 to as late as 627. One ancient manuscript says this document was written by Isadore of Sevelle, while three others say its author was Ephraem the Syrian. All four of these were written in Latin, but there are also Greek and Syraic manuscripts of this same document. The existence of at least six ancient manuscripts, in at least three languages, is strong evidence that this document was widely circulated. As scholars do not believe the unknown author could have been the famous Ephraem the Syrian, (who is also known as Ephraem of Nisbis) they call this unknown author Pseudo-Ephraem. This document says,

“Why therefore do we not reject every care of earthly actions and prepare ourselves for the meeting of the Lord Christ, so that he may draw us from the confusion, which overwhelms all the world? Believe you me, dearest brother, because the coming (advent) of the Lord is nigh, believe you me, because the end of the world is at hand, believe me, because it is the very last time. Or do you not believe unless you see with your eyes? See to it that this sentence be not fulfilled among you of the prophet who declares: ‘Woe to those who desire to see the day of the Lord!’ For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins.” (“On the Last Times, the Antichrist, and the End of the World,” author unknown but called Pseudo-Ephraem, section 2.)

Not that I at all take the word of "author unknown", no matter when the speech was penned. I italicized the points I wanted to make in the reply.

He meant, tribulation, not "the" tribulation, and we have seen it in action with the rise of communism, where the church was snatched away, as in tossed in jail, killed, or deported., We move on from there, he states at the end, not 7 years before the end, and you bet ya, at the battle of Armageddon, we will be snatched up to join the battle., We after all are joining him in the air for a reason.

The war that is wages will be indeed the most terrible ever waged, a tribulation the likes of which, we can only imagine, but being part of the army that is waging this war, of course we are spared from receiving this last wrath from God.

The fact remains, the how we see it, how it's preached, rapture gospel was devised in 1830, became popular throughout small sects and grew, not overwhelmingly, but it grew. Our current generation of folks want something mystical, something that's not the same ol tired gospel, so this new concept appealed to them. Look to the new age movement if you need a gauge on that one.

If we are to be raptured, it's a complete waste of time to prepare for hard times the likes of which we would face in the tribulation. Anyone preparing for it would be shunned and considered a back slider, afterall, we aren't showing enough confidence in our faith enough to trust in God, is the common understanding there.

We then try to fit into it, signs that we can use to be aware of when, and these signs are extrapolated from anywhere and everywhere, we glean over useless facts and try to make scripture into a puzzle, or book of sorcery, literally turning it into a tool of divination. What does God think of divination folks????

Why on earth would God bother to waste his time on a population that does not believe in him, nor ever will, seriously, does he have nothing better to do with his time then to inflict cruelty upon his rebellious creations? It turns him into a [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse], torturing his prey before he kills it.

Why on earth would God write out what is to come, if there are none of his followers left to read it? Why point out to leave his anointed ones alone when the locusts are set free? It means we are going to experience it, but those of the faith are going to endure through his grace, and be spared much, but also not be spared by what the world will do to us. We do NOT want his second coming, for it means we will have to face serious tribulation, pain, suffering, death and torture just before that happens. Those of us that look forward to it, thinking we are getting out of all of this hell, are fooling themselves. The ones looking forward to it, knowing they will be tested, they will be protected "and" exposed, are the ones that are truly hard core and devout.

You see where this gospel leads towards? Do you know how many families have been left in ruin over it? Throwing away their savings, quitting their jobs, thinking of yet another date he is supposed to come. How about the cults that did the mass suicides? All of them, rapture gospel. The fruits of it stink and are rotten and the tree must be chopped down before more people are harmed by it. Here, where I'm at, I make my stand, and I can see with some other posters here, I do not stand alone. In fact, I was ministering to a homeless guy the other weekend, and he too was sickened by the rapture gospel. This is the truth, from the street itself, from the most humble of individuals that carries the Lord in his heart, yet he too is bombarded by this gospel, that he has the discernment to know it's false. He may not have it to find a proper place to live and make a living, but he at least knows this one basic truth.

 

[That Canadian Guy]

Although there were several others who made small comments about end time prophecy earlier than him, the very oldest Christian commentator who wrote at any significant length about Bible prophecy, and whose works have come down to us, was Irenaeus, who wrote before the year 200. He wrote of the evil of the nations and then said, "And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, 'There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.'For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption'" (Against Heresies, Book V, Chapter XXIX, section 2.)

We need to notice the following elements in this short statement:

First, the church will be "suddenly caught up."

Second, after the church is "Suddenly caught up," "There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be." Lest anyone claim that this is not specifically stated to be after “the church is "suddenly caught up," please note that the grammatical construction (when) -- (one event takes place) -- (another event takes place) has two possible meanings. It either means that the two events will take place at the same time or it means that the second event will take place after the first event. But in this case the first event is clearly instantaneous and the second event will obviously consume a significant period of time. So it is unreasonable to argue that the writer’s intention was anything other than to state that this “tribulation” would take place after the church is “suddenly caught up.”

Third, this period of tribulation is specifically called "the last contest of the righteous." and it explicitly says of these righteous in this particular contest, "in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption."

So this statement clearly teaches that the rapture will occur before the great tribulation.

In addition to this critically important and earliest comment on the timing of the rapture, we have absolute proof that the doctrine of the pre-tribulation rapture was widely circulated significantly before the year 800, that is, more that a thousand years before many claim that it originated.

This proof is found in a document, whose age and author is unknown, but which is known to have been in Church libraries before the year 800. Based on events referred to in this document as impending, various scholars have estimated its date from as early as 373 to as late as 627. One ancient manuscript says this document was written by Isadore of Sevelle, while three others say its author was Ephraem the Syrian. All four of these were written in Latin, but there are also Greek and Syraic manuscripts of this same document. The existence of at least six ancient manuscripts, in at least three languages, is strong evidence that this document was widely circulated. As scholars do not believe the unknown author could have been the famous Ephraem the Syrian, (who is also known as Ephraem of Nisbis) they call this unknown author Pseudo-Ephraem. This document says,

“Why therefore do we not reject every care of earthly actions and prepare ourselves for the meeting of the Lord Christ, so that he may draw us from the confusion, which overwhelms all the world? Believe you me, dearest brother, because the coming (advent) of the Lord is nigh, believe you me, because the end of the world is at hand, believe me, because it is the very last time. Or do you not believe unless you see with your eyes? See to it that this sentence be not fulfilled among you of the prophet who declares: ‘Woe to those who desire to see the day of the Lord!’ For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins.” (“On the Last Times, the Antichrist, and the End of the World,” author unknown but called Pseudo-Ephraem, section 2.)

Last time I checked, the Bible is the ultimate authority on such events, not Irenaeus or Pseudo-Ephraem, nor is the age of such doctrines anywhere near compelling proof for their legitimacy. Scriptural proof for a pre-tribulation rapture is simply not to be found anywhere, and the scriptures themselves are clear in pointing to one and only one gathering and second coming. The Bible gives absolutely no room for such a notion as a pre-tribulation rapture event. There is simply no evidence for it

 

[Biblewriter]

Last time I checked, the Bible is the ultimate authority on such events, not Irenaeus or Pseudo-Ephraem, nor is the age of such doctrines anywhere near compelling proof for their legitimacy.

Up to this point, I agree with you completely. I simply point out the true antiquity of this doctrine in answer to those that seek to denigrate it by claiming it is new.

Scriptural proof for a pre-tribulation rapture is simply not to be found anywhere, and the scriptures themselves are clear in pointing to one and only one gathering and second coming. The Bible gives absolutely no room for such a notion as a pre-tribulation rapture event. There is simply no evidence for it

Here. I will have to disagree. There is absolutely not even one scripture that says that there is only one future coming of Christ. It is true that it nowhere distinctly says He will come more than once. But it is also true that not even one Old Testament prophecy said He would come more that once.

But the Old testament prophecies about the coming of messiah contained many details that would be contradictory if He were only coming once. In 1 Peter 1:10-11 Peter comments about how this perplexed some of the Old Testament prophets themselves.

Even so, the prophecies about our Lord's future coming also contain numerous details that would be contradictory if He were only coming one more time. The precedent set in the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah shows us that this apparent contradiction has the same resolution, that is, that our Lord is still coming more than one more time.

 

[Biblewriter]

Not that I at all take the word of "author unknown", no matter when the speech was penned. I italicized the points I wanted to make in the reply.[/qote]

Whether or not you "take" his words is inconsequential. These words were unquestionably written and widely circulated more than a thousand years before you claim this doctrine originated.

He meant, tribulation, not "the" tribulation, and we have seen it in action with the rise of communism, where the church was snatched away, as in tossed in jail, killed, or deported.,

This is simply an attempt to avoid what Irenaeus said. And it wholly fails to explain his words.

We move on from there, he states at the end,

Not so that is the very opposite of what he said.

not 7 years before the end, and you bet ya, at the battle of Armageddon, we will be snatched up to join the battle., We after all are joining him in the air for a reason.

The war that is wages will be indeed the most terrible ever waged, a tribulation the likes of which, we can only imagine, but being part of the army that is waging this war, of course we are spared from receiving this last wrath from God.

This is nothing but imagination on your part. No scripture says that there will be a tremendous war in which we will take part. It says that at this time "And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh." (revelation 19:20-21)

The fact remains, the how we see it, how it's preached, rapture gospel was devised in 1830, became popular throughout small sects and grew, not overwhelmingly, but it grew.

You have just seen the conclusive proof that this is simply untrue. There are also at least three other teachers that mentioned a pre-tribulation rapture before 1800, but I did not bother with them, as the ones I cited are so much older.

Our current generation of folks want something mystical, something that's not the same ol tired gospel, so this new concept appealed to them. Look to the new age movement if you need a gauge on that one.

If we are to be raptured, it's a complete waste of time to prepare for hard times the likes of which we would face in the tribulation. Anyone preparing for it would be shunned and considered a back slider, afterall, we aren't showing enough confidence in our faith enough to trust in God, is the common understanding there.

We then try to fit into it, signs that we can use to be aware of when, and these signs are extrapolated from anywhere and everywhere, we glean over useless facts and try to make scripture into a puzzle, or book of sorcery, literally turning it into a tool of divination. What does God think of divination folks????

Why on earth would God bother to waste his time on a population that does not believe in him, nor ever will, seriously, does he have nothing better to do with his time then to inflict cruelty upon his rebellious creations? It turns him into a [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse], torturing his prey before he kills it.

Why on earth would God write out what is to come, if there are none of his followers left to read it?

In saying this, you simply demonstrate that you do not understand the rapture doctrine at all. After the rapture, God will again turn his attention to the nation of Israel. The prophecies are written for them and about them. These prophecies explicitly tell, not in dark parables but in plainly stated language, how they can tell when it is time to run, where to go when they run, and how many days to stay there. They also tell why they will have to run at this time, and detail the daily progress of the armies advancing upon Jerusalem.

Why point out to leave his anointed ones alone when the locusts are set free? It means we are going to experience it, but those of the faith are going to endure through his grace, and be spared much, but also not be spared by what the world will do to us. We do NOT want his second coming, for it means we will have to face serious tribulation, pain, suffering, death and torture just before that happens. Those of us that look forward to it, thinking we are getting out of all of this hell, are fooling themselves. The ones looking forward to it, knowing they will be tested, they will be protected "and" exposed, are the ones that are truly hard core and devout.

You see where this gospel leads towards? Do you know how many families have been left in ruin over it? Throwing away their savings, quitting their jobs, thinking of yet another date he is supposed to come. How about the cults that did the mass suicides? All of them, rapture gospel. The fruits of it stink and are rotten and the tree must be chopped down before more people are harmed by it. Here, where I'm at, I make my stand, and I can see with some other posters here, I do not stand alone. In fact, I was ministering to a homeless guy the other weekend, and he too was sickened by the rapture gospel. This is the truth, from the street itself, from the most humble of individuals that carries the Lord in his heart, yet he too is bombarded by this gospel, that he has the discernment to know it's false. He may not have it to find a proper place to live and make a living, but he at least knows this one basic truth.

The fact that a doctrine has been perverted and twisted beyond recognition is not even evidence, much less proof, that there is anything wrong with the doctrine.

 

[Super Kal]

youre absolutely right, Canadian Guy...
it is also sad, though, to see people even take ante-nicene writings and take them out of context...

Biblewriter quotes Irenaeus, the student of Polycarp, the disciple of the Apostle John... he did indeed highlight the part where he thinks is important, but loike every othe pre-tribber and Dispensationalist, they take it out of context. Bibliewriter fails to read the next sentence from Irenaeus:

"For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption"

this sentence does not coincide with pre-tribulation. This says that the church mentioned in the previous sentence must overcome " tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be", for it is their last contest.

the only thing pre-tribulation teaches is the inability to properly read

 

[Biblewriter]

youre absolutely right, Canadian Guy...
it is also sad, though, to see people even take ante-nicene writings and take them out of context...

Biblewriter quotes Irenaeus, the student of Polycarp, the disciple of the Apostle John... he did indeed highlight the part where he thinks is important, but loike every othe pre-tribber and Dispensationalist, they take it out of context. Bibliewriter fails to read the next sentence from Irenaeus:

"For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption"

this sentence does not coincide with pre-tribulation. This says that the church mentioned in the previous sentence must overcome " tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be", for it is their last contest.

the only thing pre-tribulation teaches is the inability to properly read

I did not quote this sentence here because it was not significant to the present discussion. But I have quoted it repeatedly in other posts.

You are entirely mistaken that this next sentence is anti-pre-trib. It agrees completely with pre-trib doctrine, and with the many threads I have posted on the history of the tribulation period.

Pre-trib doctrine stresses that after the rapture God will again begin to work on bringing the nation of Israel to repentance. The scriptures repeatedly refer to those individuals among the nation of Israel that desire righteousness as righteous, and stresses that there will be very few of them. Pre-tribbers call these "the righteous remnant."

Scripture clearly teaches that when Messiah finally comes, these righteous individuals will not realize that He is that same Jesus whose name they have so long despised. But when they finally see the wounds in his hands and realize who he is, they will repent with a great mourning.

Pre-trib also recognizes that scripture also clearly teaches that many among the gentiles will also repent after the rapture. It says that this will not include any that had willfully rejected him in the past, but there will still be many righteous gentiles in the world as well.

So, rather that being anti-pre-trib, this sentence is completely pre-trib. In fact, it was the inclusion of this sentence that first made this passage jump out at me the day I found it.

 

[That Canadian Guy]

Up to this point, I agree with you completely. I simply point out the true antiquity of this doctrine in answer to those that seek to denigrate it by claiming it is new.

I see, so the reason for going in depth was to demonstrate how the texts are pre-tribulation in nature. However, both perspectives had been shared since antiquity, so the age of the doctrine isn't indicative of anything.

There is absolutely not even one scripture that says that there is only one future coming of Christ.

Scriptures speak of one elect, and one tribulation period. What is clear is how the elect is consistently placed within this period. Daniel 12:1 - at that time we are delivered, not before. Matthew 24:22, Mark 13:20 - for the sake of elect, the days of the tribulation are shortened. Revelations 6:9-11, the fifth seal single handedly dismantles both pre-tribulation and pre-wrath raptures. Not only are the dead in Christ still dead, but shall remain so until the number of martyrs is complete. Even if it is perceived that Christ will come back more than one time, it will not be in relation to a pre-tribulation rapture. There is also one gathering of the elect - as per Matthew 24:31, Mark 13:27...and Luke 21:27-28
"Then they will see THE SON OF MAN COMING IN A CLOUD with power and great glory. But when these things begin to take place, straighten up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near."

It is inescapable!