Is the rapture a lie?

[Marvin Knox]

I will not contend with fellow believers on this issue, as much as I do feel it's an important doctrinal discussion. The resurrection/translation/rapture, whatever you want to call it is inextricably linked to the return of Christ. Regardless of how many ways there are to do the exposition of the requisite texts.

Amen on that brother.

This is why I can't understand for the life of me the overblown hub bub about what some consider a "super dangerous doctrine foisted on us by the heretic Scofield or his henchman Darby".

At this time (not always so) most of my scripture centered friends are of the pre-trib rapture variety. I find almost all of them to be solid Bible believing and born again evangelicals in spite of subscribing strongly to what is supposedly a "dangerous heresy".

Not to pick my eschatological position on this fact --- but when I was an elder in the Presbyterian church and also when I was associated somewhat with Orthodox and R.C. Christians (which denied almost universally the pre-trib rapture and literal millennium doctrines) they were to a great degree NOT born again evangelicals.

In point of fact - I have my doubts that many of them were even "saved" as I understand the concept.

It seems to my experience that the "dangerous" shoe is on the other foot as it were.

But enough on that particular subject for now.

 

[mark kennedy]

How many comings of Christ are we up to now? Three? Four?

Great point, there's one.

 

[Dale]

Problem is with you approach - IF you really wanted to know YOU would study - since you choose not to you have shown you are willing to follow whatever people say that makes it easy for you to not have to study - that is all on you -
It does not matter to me what you believe - since you cannot refute what I have said already - there is no reason to give you anything else -

I have read the entire Bible from beginning to end in three different translations. There is no "rapture" in the Bible. There is no reason to separate the Second Coming into a private or secret coming for Christians and a public coming later.

In my experience, no one ever heard of a rapture separate from the Second Coming until Hal Lindsay published The Late Great Planet Earth. Lindsay, in turn, didn't really present a case for a rapture, he just assumed it was true. He said some churches call it this, and some churches call it that.

Lindsay claimed that the Second Coming will come exactly seven years after the rapture. Here is one reason this can't be true: Jesus said that no one, not even the angels in heaven, can know the time of the Second Coming. Yet, if Hal Lindsay is correct, as soon as the rapture happens, anyone could easily calculate the time of the Second Coming. I have raised this point in the past, and Dispensationalists weasel out by saying that the seven years is only approximate.

 

[marineimaging]

I see it a lot being written and been told it. I want to know why people believe it is false.

I consider it my only hope each day. ....

Tonight my granddaughter graduated and one of the acquaintances of her mom asked her what she was going to do this summer and she said, "Well, first thing is I have a mission trip in June and...,." If I may, tomorrow, rather than worry about the rapture place yourself at the disposal of your church, or the Star of Hope, or some Christian organization the serves in the name of Jesus Christ. Put your energy and your heart into helping someone with living. Take your blessings and focus on what you can do in the name of Jesus Christ. The Rapture is going to happen but we are instructed to not live for it. God made us in His image and we are to emulate His only begotten Son each and every day. Live for Christ and let the Rapture come when it will.

 

[Dale]

See my post #114. No talk of a tribulation. "Let not your heart be troubled" is enough. The Tribulation and Great Tribulation are for the unbelieving, the ungodly, the wicked, and the enemies of God and Christ. They have nothing to do with the saints.

21 “Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. 22 You will be hated by everyone because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. 23 When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. Truly I tell you, you will not finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.
24 “The student is not above the teacher, nor a servant above his master.25 It is enough for students to be like their teachers, and servants like their masters. If the head of the house has been called Beelzebul, how much more the members of his household!
--Matthew 10:21-25 NIV



The servant is not above his master. Jesus was executed, as were most of the Apostles. As Christians today, we are not exempt.

Quick question: Dispensationalists or Rapturists say that God will rapture Christians off the earth before persecution starts. Do you have any idea how stupid that sounds in parts of the world today where persecution of Christians is already an everyday reality?

 

[Dale]

Woa woa woa, slow down mate, you can just refute them,

you don't have to martyr the opposition

RIP debate

I'm glad you think I made some strong points!

God bless.

 

[Micah888]

Dispensationalists or Rapturists say that God will rapture Christians off the earth before persecution starts.

That is totally inaccurate. Not "before persecution starts" (since persecution had already started in Acts chapter 3). But before "the Tribulation period" (which is reserved for the unbelieving and the ungodly). Big difference.

 

[Dale]

The only reason there are "non-denominational" churches is because some men chose to view/interpret the view in their church differently and went out and started their own church teaching their own personal view and you all have fallen into the same pit of false teaching. These men aren't part of denominations because they hate accountability.

Perhaps people founded non-denominational churches because they are tired of being hamstrung by denominational creeds and other prounouncements of denominational bodies.

I have heard of one case where a congregation decided that they didn't agree with the denomination. The Bishop told them to get out of the building.

 

[Dale]

So what if they are - I am not - I never talk about dispensations - you are lost if you believe that - you still have no idea about the truth of it - you have no true knowledge about it

I'm waiting for you to say a kind word about somebody.

There are groups that I don't agree with who do charitable work.
There are groups that I don't agree with who have gotten people interested in reading the Bible.
I'm waiting to hear you say something lilke that.

If you are a Rapturist and not a Dispensationalist, you seem to have invented your own religion.

 

[Erik Nelson]

...Again - when did this happen?

...

Isaiah 13:10

 

[Dale]

It is a red herring of the first order.

It may or may not be true that the rapture concept in question was not published until 1905 by Scofield.

But, either way, has absolutely no bearing on the scriptural validity of the interpretation of the passages in question.

Whether the "strange" teaching about the rapture was first published by Saint Augustine in 404, Martin Luther in 1535, Cyrus Scofield in 1905, Adolf Hitler in 1939, Billy Graham in 1985 or Marvin Knox in 2018 has absolutely nothing to do with a discussion of it's biblical merit.

However, the truth is that the concept was in play in the early church - whether or not it was the dominant view at the time or whether it has ever been the dominant view.

If you can't successfully argue against the concept from scripture - so be it. Let others have at it.

But to introduce this ridiculous red herring to cover your inability is just plain disingenuous to say the least.

Nobody in the early church ever heard of a rapture separate from the Second Coming.

Since you mention Billy Graham, try this. I have seen a pamphlet on the end times put out by the Billy Graham organization in 1950. What does it say about a rapture? NOTHING. Most Baptists had never heard of it then.

I have seen some signs that Billy Graham & Co. have waffled since then, but whatever.

 

[seventysevens]

I'm waiting for you to say a kind word about somebody.

There are groups that I don't agree with who do charitable work.
There are groups that I don't agree with who have gotten people interested in reading the Bible.
I'm waiting to hear you say something lilke that.

If you are a Rapturist and not a Dispensationalist, you seem to have invented your own religion.

There are groups that CHOOSE to be unkind too the brethren for no other reason that they dont agree -
there are groups that CHOOSE to call the Word of God a lie only because they have followed a lie in what they have been taught, or when they have not been taught it they choose not to do a worthy level of research to find the truth

There are groups that Choose not to learn what a dispensation really is and Choose to slam anyone that believes they exist
There are people who teach things that are false as though they be true and attack people when the people do not agree
For many decades there has been a full on attack on God in America - the history books in schools have been rewritten to remove the facts about important people being born-again Christians even in churches the usage of the term born-again has been diminished

Just about everyone who chooses to not believe the Word of God about the harpazo knowingly -willfully attacks people who try to get the brethren to read ans study the rapture so that they can understand what it really is
Many in this thread are those attackers who cannot prove any of what they say but yet they say it -many in the Church are being deceived because they believe whatever comes from the pulpit regardless if it is not true

I am waiting on people who don't agree with the harpazo to show a loving kindness to people who try to help them learn but they CHOOSE to throws stones

 

[seventysevens]

I notice you seem to have deliberately ignored that the question the disciples asked was "When will these things be, and what are the signs of Your coming, and the end of the age?" The "these things" they are talking about are the destruction of the Temple, as Jesus had literally just told them that the Temple would be destroyed. That's what they are asking, they were asking when that would happen. They also include "What will be the signs of your coming, and the end of the age" because, no doubt, they could not conceive the destruction of the Temple as anything other than a massive eschatological moment.

But read, really read the Olivet Discourse. Don't just parrot, don't pull some verses from it out of context. Read the entire thing in the context it is given.

-CryptoLutheran

Are you not capable of speaking about 2 different things in the same sentence ? AFTER Jesus spoke of the temple that would be destroyed he changed the topic to answer the question that are of a different topic - If you live in America and someone asks you "what time do you get off from work at the GM factory and what is the price of eggs ?" will you insist that they intend to mean that the GM factory put the price on eggs ?

Notice that nearly all bibles published in recent years try to help those like you that cannot distinguish that Jesus answered two different things in one respose, seems that to do so in your idea is not possible
.

 

[seventysevens]

Did you happen to notice that in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 it doesn't say anyone is going into heaven? In fact, it says the opposite.

"For the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven"

-CryptoLutheran

Did you notice that it does not speak of Jesus returning to earth?

 

[seventysevens]

I reiterate from the expert;

"The bigger the lie, the greater acceptance," Adolph Hitler.

Seems to be you give credit to whom you believe
Joshu 24:15
As for me and my house we shall serve the Lord

 

[seventysevens]

Gill and Henry both use the word rapture, why wouldn't they it is in the scripture. However, neither of them spoke of a pre-great tribulation 'catching away'. Indeed they both believed that the Matthew 24 great tribulation scripture was describing the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. They held the historical view. Clarke and others did as well.

So you are choosing to follow the opinion of men who choose to interpret as they choose , that is why there is so much confusion there are other commentaries that speak of a pre trib harpazo , same old same old ,
Consider that if the Lord tarries another 1000 years and that generation writes commentaries teaching of people can become gods , and people choose to believe a teaching of men instead of what scripture says , it be the same as today when people choose to follow what men wrote their opinions in commentaries that is not found in scripture

 

[seventysevens]

I have read the entire Bible from beginning to end in three different translations. There is no "rapture" in the Bible. There is no reason to separate the Second Coming into a private or secret coming for Christians and a public coming later.

In my experience, no one ever heard of a rapture separate from the Second Coming until Hal Lindsay published The Late Great Planet Earth. Lindsay, in turn, didn't really present a case for a rapture, he just assumed it was true. He said some churches call it this, and some churches call it that.

Lindsay claimed that the Second Coming will come exactly seven years after the rapture. Here is one reason this can't be true: Jesus said that no one, not even the angels in heaven, can know the time of the Second Coming. Yet, if Hal Lindsay is correct, as soon as the rapture happens, anyone could easily calculate the time of the Second Coming. I have raised this point in the past, and Dispensationalists weasel out by saying that the seven years is only approximate.

If you did as you say but did not find the scriptural teaching of the harpazo - that means you did not understand what you read
typical of people that do not understand as they prefer to look for someone to blame rather than just ask the Lord in prayer to understand what HIS Word means

 

[Randy777]

A poster was asking about location. I gave it. In this context it would be the marriage supper of the Lamb with us in Heaven.

Now I'm not pegging the events in chronological order leading up to that. But we can easily conclude the feast happens after everyone is either raised or translated.

Then again we should note day 6 of creation had a whole lot jammed into it, why should we think differently about the Day of the Lord?

You spoke of two resurrections I was addressing them. I don't believe the mount of olives was split in two in Ad70 to make a way of escape from the surrounding armies. Ref Zech 14

 

[Hank77]

Matthew 24:29-30
When did this happen?

Immediately. It is all part of what happened during and immediately after the fall of Jerusalem.

 

[Hank77]

From a Preterist perspective, all of the Apocalyptic allusions to Isaiah and Joel symbolized the Judgement of Jerusalem in 70 AD, and the Second Parousia references to the ultimate victory of Christianity in the 4th-5th centuries AD.

At that time, all of the various local & regional Christian groups were unified into the Orthodox Catholic Church, "gathered together" into the thousand-year long medieval heyday of Christianity during the Byzantine empire (until the 15th century AD).





I understand that to mean:

1. Crucifixion [c.30AD]
2. Second Parousia [Rev 19 = Constantine in the 4th century AD] & Christian Millennium [Rev 20 = medieval Church + Byzantine empire]
3. Doomsday & Divine Eternity [Rev 20:10+ = future]

The Second Advent has not happened yet, it is still in the future.