How confident are you about your rapture beliefs?

[Timtofly]

I was only talking about the redemption of our bodies. That has clearly not yet occurred.

Ephesians 4:30

"And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption."


I have asked this before. What day is that? The only singular day of Redemption, was the Cross. Yet we are not sealed until the Cross. That day was over 1991 years ago. I also asked when are we sealed? We are sealed on the Cross of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world in the Lamb's book of life. Also a point in time thousands of years ago.

The moment we are conceived, we have the start of a body, a soul, a spirit (which is with God). The Holy Spirit because God so loved the whole world, not willing that any should perish. And then that unfortunate inheritance from Adam, a sin nature. All these points are facts from conception.

Yet controversy also starts at that point. If the day of Redemption and the day we are sealed happened way before our conception, then the whole time we live, it effects us all the same. It starts at conception, and yes, ends at physical death. Yet the fact remains for all humanity, they have lived through Redemption and being sealed. The issue is then, what did they do with those facts. Those who reject God, are no longer sealed nor redeemed at physical death. The future redemption you are claiming is simply the soul leaving this body, and entering the next. That ended the sealing and redemption of the body, when the soul left. How that effects NOSAS is even more simple. A reprobate soul, has voided the day of Redemption, has been no longer sealed. They no longer have a choice to be able to get back to the prior condition of being sealed or redeemed. The moment they were made reprobate was the day of Redemption, except condemnation is now their eternal state. This is not a flip flop, am I calvanist one day armenian the next, and then back and forth one's whole life. The other thing is, do all have to make a firm choice while alive. I think so. Yet many live and die, not even understanding the basics of salvation. That is why I think those in sheol are still in the Lamb's book of life until the GWT. Then they will have to choose.

Bottom line, though many will object, is that sealing and redemption start and end only in this physical body. There is no need after we shed this body. A reprobate mind does not nor really can care about being sealed or redeemed. They are alive but past the day of redemption. All will find out immediately at the day of their redemption the outcome. Those who think they knew exactly the outcome, hopefully will obtain it, and were not decieving themselves. Many who were not prepared will more than likely be pleasantly surprised. But the majority will have a rude awakening, unfortunately. Those who think this body is redeemed and they are taking it with them will be shocked, they do not have to, nor really wait for the next one either. So being sealed unto the day of redemption is just that. The soul is at the point redemption happens, and a new permanent incorruptible physical body is given to the soul.

 

[eclipsenow]

What about there is no 'rapture' or 'tribulation'?
That life now is the tribulation, and has been for 2000 years.
That when Jesus returns it's all the one big event called the Day of the Lord, the Coming of the Lord, Judgement Day, what have you.
You kind of left out the Amillennial view which might not be that big in America but is HUGE in Australia.

Too many Hollywood OMEN movies have coloured the way Americans read Revelation. Everyone wants to 'crack the code' and figure out when stuff is going to happen - disobeying and disbelieving the Lord when he says NO ONE will know. Instead of a future timetable to take random guesses at, John indicates that Revelation is about the Roman persecution of the church that is about to start. 4 times he indicates it is to his generation:-

1. "to show his servants what must soon take place"
2. " blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it" - how could the early church obey something that was addressed to Christians 2000 years later?
3. "because the time is near."
4. he SHARES in their tribulation! - John was already in jail because of Rome.

Revelation is a symbolic sermon, not a timeline. It's about how to stay faithful in the time between Jesus Ascension and his Return on Judgement Day. John uses powerful biblical symbols to describe (not prescribe) what this time will be like. And it could be a long time before Jesus Returns. The number 1000 is commonly used to mean "a gazillion" - like when the Psalm says God owns all the sheep on "a thousand hills." What about the other million hills - does God not own all those two? So Revelation describes a long time, and traces 4 themes. Let's check out the structure. They're to be read along-side each other - not to be read sequentially like some sort of future timeline.

HUMAN HISTORY: THE 1000 YEARS between Jesus Ascension and his Return on Judgement Day:-
Seven seals depicting TYRANNY (then back to the beginning to describe)...
Seven trumpets depicting CHAOS in nature (then back to the beginning to describe)...
Seven signs depicting PERSECUTION (then back to the beginning to describe)...
Seven plagues depicting DESTRUCTION.
These episodes are *concurrent*, not consecutive.

What does a particular chapter or image mean? The Bible Project is very good.
Revelation 1 to 11

Revelation 12 to 22.

Or it you want to go deeper, try (retired) Bishop Paul Barnett's book. He is not only a theologian, but has a doctorate in Ancient History and taught ancient history for many years, as well as leading tours of the bible lands.
https://www.amazon.com/Apocalypse-Now-Then-Revelation-Commentaries/dp/1875861416

Bottom line - it describes natural disasters, tyrants persecuting the church as 'beast-states', the temptations of trusting in materialism and luxury and even state security, and all manner of other trials and tribulations and temptations of the last 2000 years and counting.

So what is it like to see Revelation through this lens? Let's look at the famous Dragon and the Beast out of Revelation 13. This describes Rome's persecution of the Christians in Asia Minor. Oh no! Not some mysterious end-times figure to guess at? Nope! But to futurist-Christians that suddenly feel Revelation isn't exciting any more because it's not about them, I want to ask one thing. Is 1 Corinthians about you? Or is it written to the early church of Corinth? Or Ephesians, Galatians, Philippians, etc? They're written FOR us today, but TO the churches in those various towns. Why does the bible have to be ABOUT or TO us to be written FOR us?

But - just as reading 1 Corinthians was written to the early church in Corinth - it also applies to us today. So Revelation tells us general principles about beast states that persecute the church. Hitler was one beast state, Stalin another, North Korea yet another. There are many examples - but persecuted Christians have often looked to Revelation as a source of comfort. It's bad - but for the Christians that suffer with patient endurance and hope, Revelation has vivid images of the judgement of the wicked and wonderful promises if we hold fast to our first love. Jesus will return and raise and reward them. Indeed, it's such a powerful theme we see Jesus returning a number of times throughout the book.
Christians reading Revelation this way LAUGH at the futurist idea that John would tell his generation of suffering Christians "You think you've got it bad under the Romans, wait till you see what happens in 2000 years!"
That's the difference between seeing a thematic sermon and a future timeline. A sermon to his generation is relevant for all Christians across all time. A future timetable is only relevant to those Christians willing to play endless guessing games about the last few years of history. To which I ask - what on earth has been the whole point of the book for the last 2000 years? Honestly!?

 

[Bob_1000]

Too many Hollywood OMEN movies have coloured the way Americans read Revelation.

They've been priming people for this since Albert Pike in the 1800's which I believe is when Darby came up with the idea of the "rapture". Project BlueBeam is the elites plan to fake the so called rapture, The Antichrist, 7 year tribulation, the Jews are Gods chosen people and the future second coming of Christ and from what I've read they're gonna throw aliens in that mix too.

None of those things are biblical but it's been promoted so heavily for so many years that it's become the doctrine of most of Christianity at least in the United States.

 

[Clintpauljohnson]

Satan, Antichrist and the false are said to be here after the rapture according to Jack van impe.

 

[Timtofly]

You brought up a lot in that response but I think the most important part is that you said Elijah and Enoch never died but the bible plainly tells us that they did die. I can't easily prove from the bible that Elijah died but I can prove that Enoch died.

Heb 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

People seem to stop reading here where it says Enoch was translated that he should not SEE death because that supports the rapture doctrine. It never says that Enoch didn't die, it only says that Enoch didn't see the death of his body. If you keep reading that chapter you will see that Enoch and all the rest of the people in that did die.

Heb 11:13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.

Verse 6 is an interjection about Abel and Enoch. Verse 12 and 13 are an interjection after Noah, Abraham, and Sarah. Verse 13 may only be describing those in verse 12. The thought then goes back to Abraham. This is like the verse that many use to claim no body is in heaven. Yet Paradise is in heaven, and all are in Paradise. They will be in Paradise until Paradise comes down out of heaven as the New Jerusalem. The Lord is in Paradise, and the Lord will be in the New Jerusalem. We will be forever with the Lord. The Lord of the vineyard comes at the Second Coming and removes the church from the vineyard. The removal was not because the church failed. Satan will be handed the vineyard, if the church fails. The Jews lost the vineyard for two reasons. They failed and it was the time for the Gentile church to take over. The Second Coming is the time for Jesus Christ to rule as Prince for 1000 years.

Elijah was not even named. Does that literally mean he did not have faith, or died, because he is not even listed?

 

[Bob_1000]

Verse 6 is an interjection about Abel and Enoch. Verse 12 and 13 are an interjection after Noah, Abraham, and Sarah. Verse 13 may only be describing those in verse 12. The thought then goes back to Abraham. This is like the verse that many use to claim no body is in heaven. Yet Paradise is in heaven, and all are in Paradise. They will be in Paradise until Paradise comes down out of heaven as the New Jerusalem. The Lord is in Paradise, and the Lord will be in the New Jerusalem. We will be forever with the Lord. The Lord of the vineyard comes at the Second Coming and removes the church from the vineyard. The removal was not because the church failed. Satan will be handed the vineyard, if the church fails. The Jews lost the vineyard for two reasons. They failed and it was the time for the Gentile church to take over. The Second Coming is the time for Jesus Christ to rule as Prince for 1000 years.

Elijah was not even named. Does that literally mean he did not have faith, or died, because he is not even listed?

Where do you get the idea that paradise is in heaven? Jesus died and went to the heart of the earth for three days and three night... Paradise is Abraham's bosom at it's located in the heart of the earth.

 

[Berean Tim]

They've been priming people for this since Albert Pike in the 1800's which I believe is when Darby came up with the idea of the "rapture". Project BlueBeam is the elites plan to fake the so called rapture, The Antichrist, 7 year tribulation, the Jews are Gods chosen people and the future second coming of Christ and from what I've read they're gonna throw aliens in that mix too.

None of those things are biblical but it's been promoted so heavily for so many years that it's become the doctrine of most of Christianity at least in the United States.

Darby "came up" with the Pre-Trib Rapture. Not "catching away" of those who are alive and remain. Until Darby, the church held to Jesus's return for his church during/immediately after the tribulation

 

[Timtofly]

No, it absolutely is not. It says nothing about immortal bodies in that passage. But 1 Cor 15:50-54 does. And it's very clear that it will happen at a point in time in the future for all of us, which Paul refers to as the last trumpet, rather than each person being changed immediately upon death.

Even the rapture will immediately change us. The church in Paradise is not changed at the rapture, because they will not be raptured. They were changed "immediately upon death", as you put it. The rapture is "immediately upon death" as you put it. This current corruptible body cannot enter Paradise. It has to be "left behind" "immediately upon death". Paul says there is a permanent incorruptible physical body waiting for us in heaven.

"when the tent which houses us here on earth is torn down, we have a permanent building from God"

Not: "at the Second Coming we have a permanent building from God"

So Paul is saying "immediately upon death".

Is there really a group of souls walking around without bodies, while Paul and the OT church have bodies? They demanded God to let them experience their theology from when they were on earth, that a soul cannot have a body, and they demanded to be allowed to wait until the Second Coming for their body?

 

[Timtofly]

That's why I say "may have"
the bible is opaque on that issue, so we don't know if they died a second time or were translated alive. Either is possible, the bible just doesn't say so.. we really can't assume one way or the other. Having them die a second time would be going contradictory to Hebrews 9:27, but, it doesn't say they were translated, so we can't say for sure.

I am sure humans can find verses to rule out everything God has done in the past. It is easy to rule things out without proof. It is not easy to convince some of facts, without proof.

Notice the wording:

"Also the graves were opened, and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life; and after Yeshua rose, they came out of the graves and went into the holy city, where many people saw them."

Why do they come out of their graves twice? It is a recorded event, because many people saw them. That record was not seen by the disciples though. Is was a second record separate from those mentioned by Mary, Peter, James, and John. Also only Mary saw Jesus, not Peter James, nor John. Jesus said He had yet to ascend and could not be touched. Later that day He appeared in a different form. So after seeing Mary, Jesus did ascend to heaven. I think that is why it is mentioned as 2 resurrections. One is the ascension that only Mary herself was told about. Mary did not witness that ascension, but explained to Peter, James, and John what Jesus said. Peter then thinks from experience that only Jesus ascended, because he experienced the ascension 40 days later. Peter cannot rule out, nor negate the ascension that morning after Jesus met Mary in the Garden. Mary was given proof of an ascension that day. Jesus was in a different form that day. The OT church would have ascended that day, including Lazarus. The bodily resurrection of the OT church was not witnessed by Mary nor those disciples. They were witnessed by many credible witnesses, enough to be included as fact, that should not be just swept away or ignored, because Peter himself denied God and went back home to go fishing.

 

[Timtofly]

You first need to establish that Jesus is talking about a great tribulation at the end of the age.

If the Olivet Discourse is primarily concerned with the destruction of the Temple that occurred during the First Jewish-Roman War (and it is), and that is the context of this great tribulation (and it is), then it is obviously not talking about a final "end times" tribulation.

-CryptoLutheran

Is this not a theological assumption you are placing on the text? The disciples also asked about the very, very end, and the return of Jesus, known as the Second Coming.

Why would Jusus never answer about the very, very end or the Second Coming?

Claiming Jesus only talked about the temple is ignoring two thirds of the question, and focusing only on the one third part, the temple.

What about connecting all the points and letting the text explain the question instead of using a well known theological presumption?

 

[Timtofly]

70 AD was the wrath of God not the tribulation. The tribulation happened when the sun set at noon and there was a great earthquake strong enough to bring bones of dead men to the surface and three days later the bones grew muscle and tissue and rose to their feet and walked the streets of Jerusalem... that will never happen again.

This never happened, nor will ever happen. What literal event ever recorded are you even referencing that you try to re-enforce with symbolism?

 

[Timtofly]

Where do you get the idea that paradise is in heaven? Jesus died and went to the heart of the earth for three days and three night... Paradise is Abraham's bosom at it's located in the heart of the earth.

Because no one could enter Paradise until the Cross. The thief was the first person after the Cross to enter Paradise. No one was banned from Abraham's bosom, that is where souls waited until the ban from Paradise was physically lifted.

"So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life."

Paradise is the word for Garden. Paradise is not the word for Abraham's bosom. The Lord was in Paradise when the thief entered Paradise, where the tree of life is. The tree of life was not in Abraham's bosom.

Yes, Jesus went to Abraham's bosom and released them. All OT in Abraham's bosom came bodily out of Abraham's bosom. The thief did not go to empty Abraham's bosom, hours after the Cross. The thief entered Paradise and was with the Lord God.

 

[Bob_1000]

This never happened, nor will ever happen. What literal event ever recorded are you even referencing that you try to re-enforce with symbolism?

It's not symbolism it literally happened. The only place that I know that it's been recorded is in the bible.

Mat 27:45 Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.

Mat 27:50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
Mat 27:51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
Mat 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
Mat 27:53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
Mat 27:54 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.

 

[Bob_1000]

Darby "came up" with the Pre-Trib Rapture. Not "catching away" of those who are alive and remain. Until Darby, the church held to Jesus's return for his church during/immediately after the tribulation

This is as far back as I could trace it. Futurism seemed to originate from the Jesuits and the "rapture" came along in the late 1700's and continued to grow in popularity.

At the time of the Reformation, Catholic theologians were looking for a way to deflect the Protestant conclusions that the Papacy historically fulfilled the signs of the Antichrist. One way of doing this was to contend that the Antichrist should be understood not as a historical figure, but as a future one, not yet on earth. “Futurism” was the basic idea the Catholics advanced. It is an idea that eventually caught on among Protestants.

Francisco Ribera (1537-1591) wrote a commentary on Revelation in 1585. It advocated futurism.

Manuel De Lacunza (1731- 1801), a Jesuit from Chile, wrote a treatise (with a Jewish penname in effort to gain wider acceptance among Protestants) that also reflected futurism.

Edward Irving (1792-1834), Scottish clergyman (Pentecostal) translated & added discourse to Lacunza’s work. Margaret McDonald, through visions in early 1830s (at approximate age 15) had the idea of a “secret rapture” of believers prior to appearance of Antichrist. The idea was promoted by her pastor, Edward Irving.

Samuel R. Maitland (1792-1866) used his influence as librarian to Archbishop of Canterbury to promote futurism blended with dispensationalism. John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) visited Margaret McDonald & Edward Irving, accepted both futurism and secret rapture concepts, systematized dispensational thought and brought it to America with some success.

Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843-1921), greatly influenced by writings of Darby, incorporated Futurist notes into his Scofield Reference Bible (first published in 1909). Through this Bible Futurism gained acceptance into many Christian homes and many Protestant Bible schools. Today, major Protestant organizations endorse Futurism & Dispensationalism:

 

[Bob_1000]

Because no one could enter Paradise until the Cross. The thief was the first person after the Cross to enter Paradise. No one was banned from Abraham's bosom, that is where souls waited until the ban from Paradise was physically lifted.

"So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life."

Paradise is the word for Garden. Paradise is not the word for Abraham's bosom. The Lord was in Paradise when the thief entered Paradise, where the tree of life is. The tree of life was not in Abraham's bosom.

Yes, Jesus went to Abraham's bosom and released them. All OT in Abraham's bosom came bodily out of Abraham's bosom. The thief did not go to empty Abraham's bosom, hours after the Cross. The thief entered Paradise and was with the Lord God.

Jesus didn't go to heaven when he died, he went to Abraham's bosom also known as paradise, and the thief on the cross went with him... to paradise/Abraham's bosom.

 

[Berean Tim]

This is as far back as I could trace it. Futurism seemed to originate from the Jesuits and the "rapture" came along in the late 1700's and continued to grow in popularity.

At the time of the Reformation, Catholic theologians were looking for a way to deflect the Protestant conclusions that the Papacy historically fulfilled the signs of the Antichrist. One way of doing this was to contend that the Antichrist should be understood not as a historical figure, but as a future one, not yet on earth. “Futurism” was the basic idea the Catholics advanced. It is an idea that eventually caught on among Protestants.

Francisco Ribera (1537-1591) wrote a commentary on Revelation in 1585. It advocated futurism.

Manuel De Lacunza (1731- 1801), a Jesuit from Chile, wrote a treatise (with a Jewish penname in effort to gain wider acceptance among Protestants) that also reflected futurism.

Edward Irving (1792-1834), Scottish clergyman (Pentecostal) translated & added discourse to Lacunza’s work. Margaret McDonald, through visions in early 1830s (at approximate age 15) had the idea of a “secret rapture” of believers prior to appearance of Antichrist. The idea was promoted by her pastor, Edward Irving.

Samuel R. Maitland (1792-1866) used his influence as librarian to Archbishop of Canterbury to promote futurism blended with dispensationalism. John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) visited Margaret McDonald & Edward Irving, accepted both futurism and secret rapture concepts, systematized dispensational thought and brought it to America with some success.

Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843-1921), greatly influenced by writings of Darby, incorporated Futurist notes into his Scofield Reference Bible (first published in 1909). Through this Bible Futurism gained acceptance into many Christian homes and many Protestant Bible schools. Today, major Protestant organizations endorse Futurism & Dispensationalism:

The "Didache" circa 100AD was the first outside of the Bible to teach the return of Christ. A number of ECF's in the 1st, 2nd & 3rd centuries also taught it. They all look for a future AC & tribulation, then Christ's return

 

[Bob_1000]

The "Didache" circa 100AD was the first outside of the Bible to teach the return of Christ. A number of ECF's in the 1st, 2nd & 3rd centuries also taught it. They all look for a future AC & tribulation, then Christ's return

This is something I'm very interested in do you have any links to the sources?

 

[Berean Tim]

This is something I'm very interested in do you have any links to the sources?

Roberts-Donaldson English Translation It's a very interesting doc. Quotes from Matthew only. Most ECF's quoted it or referred to it. It was eventually lost and found in 1873. You can also go to Wiki for a history

 

[Berean Tim]

Satan, Antichrist and the false are said to be here after the rapture according to Jack van impe.

2nd Thessalonians 21Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers,a 2not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessnessb is revealed, the son of destruction,c4who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God.

The Apostasy and AC come before the Rapture.

Loved brother Jack

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Immortal: adjective

living forever; never dying or decaying

Immortal: noun

an immortal being, especially a god of ancient Greece or Rome.

Immortality: noun

the ability to live forever; eternal life.

For one who puts all the emphasis on everything non physical as spirit and spiritual, why can you not see that Paul is stating one as pertaining to the physical and the other pertaining to the spiritual?

Because there is no indication of such a thing at all. In 1 Cor 15:50-54 he indicates that we will be changed and have incorruptible, immortal bodies at that point. He is simply using two different words that mean the same thing to describe the kind of bodies that we will have at that time, which is when the last trumpet sounds at Christ's return.

Now you just lump the physical and spiritual as being equally the same thing? Satan is a physical created being. Yet you define Satan as only spirit. Now when Paul is making a difference between the physical body and our spirit, you change your mind set?

He was doing no such thing. You are the only one in the world who interprets this the way you do. It is our new spiritual bodies that will be incorruptible and immortal.

Do we put on an adjective or a noun? Paul says we put on our spirit, noun, we put on God if we go with your immortal noun. Paul says we put on the ability to be eternal. Do you understand that eternity is outside of creation? That only God can transcend creation and is outside of creation? Are you saying our body will let us leave creation and reality and transcend like God? Because that is what claiming an immortal body is.

You're making this way more complicated than it is. An immortal body can't die. That's all it means.

As pointed out, is Paul just repeating himself, or is he pointing out what our spirit is compared to the body?

There is no indication whatsoever in the text that he is comparing our spirit to our body there. None. If you read the previous verses before 1 Cor 15:50-54 you can see he is talking only about the body and was contrasting different kinds of bodies. He didn't talk about the spirit at all. You are taking 1 Cor 15:50-54 completely out of context.

Are you going to change your stance and claim a spiritual being also has a physical body?

Why would I do that? Nowhere does scripture indicate that spiritual beings like angels have physical bodies. Can they manifest themselves with physical bodies? Sure. The angels who appeared in Sodom in Lot's day seemed to have done that. But, in their natural state they are spirit beings. That's why demons (fallen angels) can possess people. If they had physical bodies then they could not do that.

Are angels also body, soul, and spirit?

No. There is no indication of that anywhere in scripture.

If not what is a spirit that is different from our body, soul, and spirit?

Can you see spirits (angels, cherubim)? No. We know they're out there, but we can't see them. Can you see people? Yes, because we have bodies. This is not hard, but for some reason you have decided to turn this into rocket science.