Is the rapture a lie?

[☦Marius☦]

Again you do not read nor understand the difference between , tribulation and a very specific time called the great tribulation
where Jesus said that if he did not cut it short no living beings would be left alive on all of earth - but for the sake of the elect - the Jews who repent and accept Jesus as Lord Jesus cuts the time short - but you have not studied so you do not understand

Again, instead of posting anything to back up your claims, you insult my intelligence.

 

[seventysevens]

Again, instead of posting anything to back up your claims, you insult my intelligence.

View attachment 229568

That is your Christian manner of response ?
Typical of your type
Simply put you show contempt without any facts
you only want people to give you something for you to stomp on ; I don't play those games - if you think you know better - then you prove your case
Of course - you don't have one to present ! lest alone able to prove it !

 

[Hank77]

That is your Christian manner of response ?
Typical of your type
Simply put you show contempt without any facts
you only want people to give you something for you to stomp on ; I don't play those games - if you think you know better - then you prove your case
Of course - you don't have one to present ! lest alone able to prove it !

You have proved your case. ???

Edited with ???

 

[ViaCrucis]

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

Then I suppose we will have to go with the consistent teaching of Scripture concerning the Lord's glorious Parousia. The consistent teaching of Scripture is that Jesus is descending, coming, appearing, in glory, as judge of the living and the dead, to deliver all things to the Father, etc.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[☦Marius☦]

That is your Christian manner of response ?
Typical of your type
Simply put you show contempt without any facts
you only want people to give you something for you to stomp on ; I don't play those games - if you think you know better - then you prove your case
Of course - you don't have one to present ! lest alone able to prove it !

Yes. I try to be humerous when people are rude to me. That is my "Christian response"

"Typical of my type" whatever that means.

If you take yourself so seriously that you can't take a lighthearted jest when you are being rude to every single person in this discussion who disagrees with you, then I am glad I am whatever type you see me as.

All I have asked was for a verse or quote to back up your claims that the early church believed in the rapture. Instead all you can say is "go study", and "clearly you don't read the Bible".

I'm not the one trying to make a point, you are. I'm just asking you to back up your point.

 

[seventysevens]

You have proved your case.

And you have notproven anything other

Yes. I try to be humerous when people are rude to me. That is my "Christian response"

"Typical of my type" whatever that means.

If you take yourself so seriously that you can't take a lighthearted jest when you are being rude to every single person in this discussion who disagrees with you, then I am glad I am whatever type you see me as.

All I have asked was for a verse or quote to back up your claims that the early check believed in the rapture. Instead all you can say is "go study"

I'm not the one trying to make a point, you are. I'm just asking you to back up your point.

Point being that anyone who has truly studied the matter knows that to really understand it requires learning and understanding many scriptures - like learning the alphabet is much more than learning a letter or two

But when someone has the audacity to put down what someone else says - regardless of topic - they should be cognitive enough to expect that they will have to prove their allegations -
Just as in the judicial system - when you accuse - it is Your responsibility to prove what you allege -
ie:
if you accuse a person of stealing then you have the responsibility to prove it

 

[☦Marius☦]

And you have notproven anything other

Point being that anyone who has truly studied the matter knows that to really understand it requires learning and understanding many scriptures - like learning the alphabet is much more than learning a letter or two

But when someone has the audacity to put down what someone else says - regardless of topic - they should be cognitive enough to expect that they will have to prove their allegations -
Just as in the judicial system - when you accuse - it is Your responsibility to prove what you allege -
ie:
if you accuse a person of stealing then you have the responsibility to prove it

I could ask you to prove to me that the early church didn't believe that the anti Christ will be a drag queen. Can you prove that I'm wrong? No! Because there is not evidence to the claim either way.

That is why the person making a claim of truth in a debate, must prove their point, not the person making the nagative claim.

Again. Post a verse or quote proving that the early church believed in the Rapture.

There isn't going to be a quote from them saying they didn't believe in the rapture, because the idea of the rapture didn't even exist for them to quote about.

 

[☦Marius☦]

Point being that anyone who has truly studied the matter knows that to really understand it requires learning and understanding many scriptures - like learning the alphabet is much more than learning a letter or two

Sorry not any of us can be as educated or as wise as you. Which is why I am asking you to give us evidence that the early church believed in the rapture. If you are so well read it shouldn't be a problem.

 

[☦Marius☦]

But when someone has the audacity to put down what someone else says - regardless of topic - they should be cognitive enough to expect that they will have to prove their allegations -
Just as in the judicial system - when you accuse - it is Your responsibility to prove what you allege -

Nobody put down your opinion, we only asked you to back it up.

And as for the judicial system; isn't the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" what we use? Which could be equal to "false until proven true"- You claim your point is true, we are asking for evidence.

Sorry for having the "audacity" to not take your word ex cathedra

 

[Dale]

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.

Micah,

As best I can understand this, you say that there is persecution and there is Persecution. As Christians, we are subject to the former and immune from the latter. I don't find this in the Bible.

What I do find is this:

9 When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained. 10 They called out in a loud voice, “How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?” 11 Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer, until the full number of their fellow servants, their brothers and sisters, were killed just as they had been.
--Revelation 6: 9-11 NIV


According to Revelation 6, Christians are being killed, martyred, as the events of the Apocalypse unfold. There is no doubt about it.

 

[Erik Nelson]

...There isn't going to be a quote from them saying they didn't believe in the rapture, because the idea of the rapture didn't even exist for them to quote about.

well, without taking sides, some are skeptical of "innovations", as if those living closer to the actual events and writings of the Scriptures knew less about them...

yet also the Scriptures are supra-naturally dense with information... further study is always warranted because there is always something else to learn

 

[Hank77]

And you have notproven anything other

I edited my previous post. It should have had a question mark.

I'm not sure why you think that others should have to prove, the only way to do that is with scripture, writings from past church fathers, and historical documents, what they believe but you are not required to do the same.
You are not the OP who asked the question.

 

[Micah888]

According to Revelation 6, Christians are being killed, martyred, as the events of the Apocalypse unfold. There is no doubt about it.

That is a separate issue. The Tribulation is NOT for the Church, and here's the reason why: For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ (1 Thess 5:9).

The Tribulation and the Great Tribulation are both expressions of God's wrath against the unbelieving, ungodly and the wicked. The Church -- the children of God -- are not subject to wrath. There will be Tribulation Saints (subsequent to the Rapture of the Church) who will be persecuted and martyred.

 

[expos4ever]

You are aligned with malignant nonsense and not truth which is why you cannot refute it you just complain

This is, again, a non-response. It is combative and without any actual content.

 

[expos4ever]

21 For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.

At least some Biblical scholars see this as describing events in the first century.

Remember this key statement from the same chapter: Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2 “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”he

And, indeed, the Temple was destroyed in 70 AD.

And this:

Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

The problem should be clear: if the events you describe have yet to actually happen, Jesus appears to have made a 2000 year + error.

 

[mkgal1]

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. ....

I've not read through all the posts...so this is a bit of a blind post.

What causes you to believe the rapture is your "only hope"? There's an alternative view that--IMO--offers MORE hope, because it's formed on the belief that ALL things will be made new (and transformed)...not just a select few plucked out and rescued.

This is not your ordinary book on eschatology. Usually when people hear that term, they think of the events connected to the future return of Jesus Christ and the very end of history. As a result, topics such as the rapture, the tribulation, and the millennium take center stage. Such an approach is often reinforced by systematic theology textbooks, which usually treat eschatology as a separate chapter focusing on these issues. But we believe that this understanding of eschatology is too narrow when it comes to what the Bible teaches. Our English term “eschatology” comes from two Greek words: eschatos (“last”) and logos (“word”). So, eschatology is the study of the “last things.” But as we will try to demonstrate, eschatology is not limited to the events connected to the return of Jesus Christ. According to the NT, the life, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus have ushered in the “latter days,” as promised in the OT. Therefore, the “latter days” encompass the entire time period between the first and second comings of Christ. As a result, eschatology is not limited to the “last chapter” of what God will do in this world but rather frames all that God has done and will do in Jesus Christ. Among biblical scholars and theologians this understanding has come to be known as “inaugurated eschatology.” The word “inaugurated” reflects the observation that while the latter-day new-creational kingdom has begun with the work of Jesus, it has not yet been consummated in all its fullness. Another way of referring to this phenomenon is to use the expression “already–not yet.” God’s kingdom has already found its initial fulfillment in and through Jesus Christ, the outpouring of the Spirit, and the formation of the eschatological people of God. But the kingdom has not yet been realized in all its fullness. Stated differently, God’s promises have found their initial fulfillment while still awaiting their complete and final consummation.~http://cdn.bakerpublishinggroup.com...es/files/Excerpt_9780801049606.pdf?1453997989

https://www.amazon.com/Making-All-Things-New-Inaugurated/dp/0801049601

 

[mkgal1]

....another author/scholar you may want to check out is N.T. Wright:

Farewell to the Rapture

..and Anthony Hoekema on amillennialism

What, in conclusion, are some of the implications of amillennial eschatology for our theological understanding? Let me mention four of them:

1. What binds the Old and New Testaments together is the unity of the covenant of grace. Amillennialists do not believe that sacred history is to be divided into a series of distinct and disparate dispensations but see a single covenant of grace running through all of that history. This covenant of grace is still in effect today and will culminate in the eternal dwelling together of God and his redeemed people on the new earth.

2. The kingdom of God is central in human history. That kingdom was predicted and prepared for in Old Testament times, was established on earth by Jesus Christ, was extended and expanded both in New Testament times and during the subsequent history of the church, and will finally be consummated in the life to come.

3. Jesus Christ is the Lord of history. This means that all of history is under Christ’s control and will ultimately prove to have been subservient to his purpose. We must therefore be concerned not just with enjoying the blessings of our salvation but also with joyfully serving Christ as Lord in every area of our lives.

4. All of history is moving toward a goal: the total redemption of the universe. History is not meaningless but meaningful. Though we are not always able to discern the meaning of each historical event, we know what the ultimate outcome of history will be. We eagerly look forward to the new earth as part of a renewed universe in which God’s good creation will realize finally and totally the purpose for which he called it into existence: the glorification of his name.

All this implies that regarding world history, amillennialists adopt a position of sober or realistic optimism. Belief in the present rule of Christ, in the presence of God’s kingdom and in the movement of history toward its goal is accompanied by a realistic recognition of the presence of sin in this world and of the growing development of the kingdom of evil. Amillennial eschatology looks for a culmination of apostasy and tribulation in the final emergence of a personal Antichrist before Christ comes again. Amillennialists do not expect to see the perfect society realized during this present age.

Yet, since we know that the victory of Christ over evil was decisive and that Christ is now on the throne, the dominant mood of amillennial eschatology is optimism — Christian optimism. This means that we view no world crisis as totally beyond help and no social trend as absolutely irreversible. It means that we live in hope — a hope that is built on faith and that expresses itself in love.

Amillennial eschatology, therefore, gives us a realistic, yet basically optimistic world-and-life view. It is an eschatology which is exciting, exhilarating and challenging. It is an eschatology which gives us an inspiring vision of the lordship of Christ over history and of the ultimate triumph of his kingdom.~"Amillennialism: A Brief Sketch of Amillennial Eschatology" by Anthony Hoekema

 

[Marvin Knox]

Marvin asked: When did this happen.

Isaiah 13:10 (For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light; the sun shall be darkened in its going forth, and the moon shall not cause its light to shine. )

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

Not hardly. I'm talking about this:

"And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory." Matthew 24:30

Again - when did this happen?

Again - Is it natural to say that these things (still future even now) will be "immediately following" the tribulation - when they are at least 1948 years after the events which happened in 70 A.D.?

 

[mkgal1]

Not hardly. I'm talking about this:

"And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory." Matthew 24:30

Again - when did this happen?

The writings of Josephus can help you out with that, I believe.

Chronology of the War According to Josephus: Part 7, The Fall of Jerusalem

Again - Is it natural to say that these things (still future even now) will be "immediately following" the tribulation - when they are at least 1948 years after the events which happened in 70 A.D.?

Hank said nothing about "still future even now" . He wrote "during and immediately after".....meaning "immediately after" (nothing about the future).

 

[Kit Sigmon]

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. ....

Our hope is to be in Christ(Messiah)...He is our Lord and Savior no matter what happens to believers while we be on this earth.

There be those from olden times that had written stuff about "caught up" and or "snatched away" "taken away", translated or "catching away" ...the words "harpazo" and or "rapturo", "rapio"...(translations in either greek and latin)...english use the word rapture.

My old minister would say "caught up" or "catching away" as that's how he'd been taught in college a LONG time ago.

These come to mind... Irenaeus, a disciple of Polycarp(who is a disciple of Apostle John) wrote of it in: Against Heresies.
I believe Irenaeus was around from 130? AD to like 202 AD.

This be saved on my computer...Hippolytus (170AD - 235AD) wrote:
"These things, then, being to come to pass, beloved, and the one week being divided into two parts, and the abomination of desolation being manifested then, and the two prophets and forerunners of the Lord having finished their course, and the whole world finally approaching the consummation, what remains but the coming of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ from heaven, for whom we have looked in hope? who shall bring the conflagration and just judgment upon all who have refused to believe on Him.
For the Lord says, "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh."
"And there shall not a hair of your head perish."
"For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west,
so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together."
Now the fall took place in paradise; for Adam fell there. And He says again,
"Then shall the Son of man send His angels, and they shall gather together His elect from the four winds of heaven."
And David also, in announcing prophetically the judgment and coming of the Lord, says, "His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and His circuit unto the end of the heaven: and there is no one hid from the heat thereof."
By the heat he means the conflagration.
And Esaias speaks thus: "Come, my people, enter thou into thy chamber, (and) shut thy door: hide thyself as it were for a little moment, until the indignation of the Lord be overpast."
And Paul in like manner: "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth of God in unrighteousness." from: Treatise On Christ and Antichrist, 64.