Is the Rapture biblical?

SeventyOne

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
4,675
3,188
✟167,098.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvary Chapel
Marital Status
Married
You can only propose this theory if you do not understand that there is nothing in the graves that God needs and hence no dead person will be coming from the earth at the time of the Lord's coming.

When we look at the firstfruits portion of the resurrection, we find not only did Jesus leave a literal empty grave but so did those raised in Matthew 27:52-53. It would be foolish to attempt to explain away the empty graves from the 2nd part, the part we call the rapture. If a method one follows doesn't have this component, then it's a flawed method.
 
Upvote 0

Non-profit Prophet

Active Member
Dec 30, 2019
163
55
59
Southeastern
✟19,306.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I don't think there IS a verse that says people are waiting for a wedding. What we do have is a lot of people praising God, when it is announced that the time for the marriage has come.

So, this is an assumption that they’re waiting for a wedding... ok, maybe we’ll try to see how many more such verses are assumptions. In any case, how does this play into the pre-trib rapture doctrine?
 
Upvote 0

iamlamad

Lamad
Jun 8, 2013
9,620
744
78
Home in Tulsa
✟101,867.00
Country
United States
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
So, this is an assumption that they’re waiting for a wedding... ok, maybe we’ll try to see how many more such verses are assumptions. In any case, how does this play into the pre-trib rapture doctrine?

I would guess, since the marriage has been written now for nearly 2000 years, that many of those in the early verses of chapter 19 could be EXPECTING the announcement for the marriage; but there is certainly no verse SAYING the announcement is expected.
By the way, I don't think I have said that anyone was waiting on the announcement. I guess you assumed that! ;-)

The timing of the marriage and supper, before Jesus descends proves, at least to me, that a posttrib rapture is not at all the intent of the Author. The Bride would miss her own marriage.
 
Upvote 0

Non-profit Prophet

Active Member
Dec 30, 2019
163
55
59
Southeastern
✟19,306.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
It shows a lot of people already there in heaven READY for the marriage.

Oh, my bad... you didn’t say “waiting,” but “ready.” I did assume that by “ready” for an event means they’re “waiting.” Thanks for clearing that up. It was a nice distraction from the topic, though.

I’m sincerely trying to get you to show any sound evidence that the scripture teaches a pre-trib rapture, but you want to argue semantics and avoid answering any questions directly. Please, are there any verses that state we will be gone before the tribulation?
 
Upvote 0

iamlamad

Lamad
Jun 8, 2013
9,620
744
78
Home in Tulsa
✟101,867.00
Country
United States
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Oh, my bad... you didn’t say “waiting,” but “ready.” I did assume that by “ready” for an event means they’re “waiting.” Thanks for clearing that up. It was a nice distraction from the topic, though.

I’m sincerely trying to get you to show any sound evidence that the scripture teaches a pre-trib rapture, but you want to argue semantics and avoid answering any questions directly. Please, are there any verses that state we will be gone before the tribulation?
I in no way try to avoid answering questions. If you have questions, ask.

First, we don't look for "a verse" that states anything. We compare ALL the end times scriptures and form doctrine from all of these scriptures. (One writer wanted a scripture passage that showed a pretrib rapture, then the 7 years of "tribulation," then Jesus coming. No such passage exists.)

We we need to ascertain, after studying ALL the end times scriptures, is what the Author's intention is in each verse.

For example, Paul's rapture passage in 1 thes. 4 & 5: WHAT was both Paul's and the Holy Spirit's intention in that passage? Did the Holy Spirit expect this passage to fit hand in glove, for example, with the Olivet Discourse? Or was the intention that the rapture come at a different time?

In my years of study I have determined that the intent of Paul was that HIS rapture / gathering comes a moment before wrath and as the trigger for wrath. How do I come to that conclusion?
Paul's event begins suddenly, when without prior warning the dead in Christ fly up out of their graves. I don't know if they will be visible to the lost. This raising from the dead is going to cause a worldwide earthquake, because the dead in Christ were buried around the world.

A moment (probably a very small moment) later two groups of people get two different results:
1. Those alive and in Christ are suddenly caught up - just as they begin to feel the ground shake - and get to "live together with Him." (So shall they ever be with the Lord."
2. Those alive and NOT in Christ are left behind and face the "sudden destruction" earthquake.

Next, Paul wrote that God will not set any appointments for us with His wrath. I take that to mean that the "sudden destruction" earthquake will be the start of God's wrath. AFter all, just three verses after His classic rapture verse (verse 17) Paul mentions the Day of the Lord - just as if that day is somehow connected with the rapture! Well, I think it IS connected: the moment after the rapture it is the Day of the Lord. The church age will end and the Day of the Lord will begin.

Where then do we find the start of God's wrath - or the start of the DAY of His wrath - in Revelation? Of course at the 6th seal. Notice that it comes after the 5th seal? The 5th seal are the martyrs of the church age. They are told that judgment is not coming until the very last church age martyr is killed. In other words, judgment is not coming until the church age ends. In other words, judgment is not coming until after the rapture of the church.

So the very next event after the 5th seal will be the rapture. However, John was not show the rapture so did not write it. It is going to come a split second before the great earthquake at the 6th seal. Further proof of this timing is that John then SAW the raptured church in chapter 7, shortly after the 6th seal events, as that great crowd too large to number. Did you ever wonder how many people will be included in the rapture? It is going to be billions! Perhaps 50 generations of the dead in Christ will be caught up. Add to that all the children of the world under the age of accountability.

I am further convinced that in 2 Thes. 2, the rapture is hidden in the word "apostasia." the first translation into English rendered that word as the (significant) departing. There is proof in the context that is the Author's intent. I am therefore convince that Paul believed the rapture to come before any part of the tribulation or the 70th week,
 
Upvote 0

SeventyOne

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
4,675
3,188
✟167,098.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvary Chapel
Marital Status
Married
Are you positive you know who the “bride” is?!

Paul tells us in Ephesians 5:31-32 that when the Lord stated in Genesis that "a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh", He was actually referencing Jesus and the Church as a husband and wife.

He also tells us straight out in 2 Corinthians 11:2 that we are betrothed to Christ, who is our husband.
 
Upvote 0

Davy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nov 25, 2017
4,861
1,022
USA
✟267,597.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The words used by Jesus in Matthew 24 can be confusing.If we fail to use Luke's account to assist in the understanding of the same we can misunderstand what is meant.

First of all, your reasoning is faulty, because which is the better to follow, two Scripture examples which say the same thing, or follow one example, which really is not the same example, and try to modify the other two? The latter is what you're trying to do, and it defies basic logic.

Christ's Olivet discourse has differences in all 3 examples of Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21. And they do NOT contradict each other. Each one has some different info and cover the same idea of the events leading up to Christ's 2nd coming. It is the same thing with the Four Gospel Books. They all witness Christ's Ministry, death and resurrection, but they each have some different info.
 
Upvote 0

iamlamad

Lamad
Jun 8, 2013
9,620
744
78
Home in Tulsa
✟101,867.00
Country
United States
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
First of all, your reasoning is faulty, because which is the better to follow, two Scripture examples which say the same thing, or follow one example, which really is not the same example, and try to modify the other two? The latter is what you're trying to do, and it defies basic logic.

Christ's Olivet discourse has differences in all 3 examples of Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21. And they do NOT contradict each other. Each one has some different info and cover the same idea of the events leading up to Christ's 2nd coming. It is the same thing with the Four Gospel Books. They all witness Christ's Ministry, death and resurrection, but they each have some different info.
I agree: That is why I like "The Life of Christ in Stereo." It is the best I have seen at putting the 4 gospels into one easy to read story.

It uses a superscript to show which gospel a word or phrase is from.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

safswan

Active Member
Nov 15, 2005
383
131
58
✟30,710.00
Faith
Christian
I disagree: it is Jewish men being addressed that asked about the end of THEIR age - which we know know is the 70th week of Daniel. That week is for HIS people, not the church. The proof of this statement is verse 15 when Jesus mentioned the abomination that we know will divide the week.

The disciples/apostles who are the foundation of the Church are the persons Jesus is addressing and not unbelieving Israel.The following post shows how they are differentiated in the passage:

Is the Rapture biblical?

Question: can you pinpoint any verse in this discourse that you think points directly at the church of today? (I cannot.)

The major portions of the passage refers to the Church in the first century.However those alerting the Church to the events of the second advent would pertain to the Church which would be in existent at that time.

But is there a scripture that pinpoints a day for the rapture? I don't think so; Paul only told us it will come just before wrath. We don't know the day wrath will begin either. Therefore pretrib does not need a verse telling us we can't know.

The pre-trib. teaching is clear.You can know the time of the "second coming",since the rapture was 7 years prior.However,the conundrum is that,the passage cited as pertaining to the "second coming",is described as a date no man can know.This is also an attribute ascribed to the rapture.In addition,this coming occurs, "after tribulation",and so cannot be the rapture but yet still it has a key attribute of the rapture,ie. a date that cannot be known.

You made some good points.

I thank God he is allowing you to see the contradictions.
 
Upvote 0

safswan

Active Member
Nov 15, 2005
383
131
58
✟30,710.00
Faith
Christian
I think "asleep" is the perspective from earth, but they are certainly not sleeping in heaven. Perhaps they are "gathered" in heaven, but my guess is, they all will know it is time and they all come to Jesus at the right time, right when He is ready to descend to get His bride. The power of the Holy Spirit will pull together the bodies of the dead in Christ, and fly them up into the air, where the spirits will join with the bodies, and they will be whole once again: Spirit, soul and Body. Then they and those alive and caught up are gathered to Him in the clouds.

Your whole theory is in tatters because of this fundamental error.It is becoming very difficult to take you seriously if you cannot understand this simple point.I will try to explain again.

The spirits of the saints go to be with Christ when we die.

Ecclesiastes 12:
7Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it."

II Corinthians 5:
6Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:
7(For we walk by faith, not by sight.
8We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord."

The bodies the dead will receive are not coming from the grave but are entirely new as scripture says:

1Corinthians 15:
52In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible,and we shall be changed.

Being raised refers to being raised from the dead not being raised from the earth.

There is no need for the earthly,corruption as the dead are raised in the heavenly,incorruptible body and it is those who are alive that are changed and not the dead.Hence all are not gathered from the earth but from both heaven(dead) and the earth(living).The statement,"The rapture ONLY gathers from earth", is shown to be false and shows a clear lack of understanding of the event being discussed.
 
Upvote 0

safswan

Active Member
Nov 15, 2005
383
131
58
✟30,710.00
Faith
Christian
I think the question we must ask is, are the sheep born again? This brings up another question: Jesus said that to see His kingdom, one must be "born again." Can anyone enter the Millennial Kingdom without being born again? Or did Jesus only mean the heavenly kingdom?

I have never been asked these questions, so I am asking them here. Jesus did not even mention being "born again" of the sheep or the goats. This judgment is only how they treated the Jews while the Beast was trying to kill them all. Therefore I will conclude that the sheep are not born again. Therefore, if the rature (of those born again) took place just before this judgment, I can see how the angels could find "sheep" for this judgment: people not born again but with a good conscience who would give water to the thirsty.

Therefore I can never again give this as a reason why posttrib cannot work. It would seem that this would also answer the question as to how the earth can be repopulated.

Please answer my questions in bold print.

HOWEVER, this still leaves the problem of how posttribers can get to the marriage and supper.


To use the "sheep and goat judgement" parable of Matthew 25:31-46,to determine the sequence of events in the coming of the Lord,is not a good idea,especially for the pre-trib rapture theory,as this and other parables show only one coming and gathering.There is no hint of a pre-trib.rapture.

The parable shows the final fate of two classes of people and does not indicate this occurs at the start of the millennium.This would rather include the results of the white throne judgement.[Rev.20:11-15;22:1;Matthew 25:31.]
 
Upvote 0

safswan

Active Member
Nov 15, 2005
383
131
58
✟30,710.00
Faith
Christian
This is a classic case of someone who thinks they know, when in fact, they don't. It is you who does not understand "resurrection." Stop and think: did Jesus get a new body, or was it his old body resurrected? If it was a new body, how in the world did the nail holes get in it?

I think you will have to agree that it was Jesus OLD body resurrected. His resurrection was a blueprint for our resurrection (if we die before the rapture). This is the very definition of "resurrection: a DEAD body revived. People go to heaven in their SPIRIT form while their body is put into a grave. The only people in heaven today with their physical bodies (changed into resurrection bodies) are the saints that God raised up when Jesus rose from the dead. I suspect they were the elders of the Old Covenant: men like Adam, Abraham, David. All the rest are there only in spirit form, with their souls: (mind, will, emotions, affections). They are awaiting their bodies. Jesus brings the spirits (with the souls) of the dead in Christ. Did you overlook Paul's words? "The dead in Christ RISE first..." They come up out of their graves.

1 Cor. 15:42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.


Paul first compared our resurrection with our Lord's resurrection. His was the first, but the very word "firstborn" means there would be a second and a third... Then Paul wrote the above. He is talking about the physical body. "it is sown" means it is planted on the ground: buried. it is raised means the resurrection: the trumpet will sound and the dead will be raised.


See post #852 it will clear up your misunderstandings.
 
Upvote 0

safswan

Active Member
Nov 15, 2005
383
131
58
✟30,710.00
Faith
Christian
I wonder, when the man of sin enters the temple and declares he is the God of the Jews, will he first surround Jerusalem with armies? I think you know, some think the verses in Luke refer to the 70 AD invasion. It is when the Christians disappears when they saw the armies. I suspect many followed Jesus' words here and fled to the mountains.

In other words, Luke 21:21 could have been said to warn those in 70 AD, while the verses in Matthew were speaking of our future. In both cases the wise will flee according to Jesus' words.

Luke and Matthew are in complete harmony and only differ in the timelines,which is in alignment when both are compared to give the proper chronology.

By the way, all of chapter 11 is not history. Many think from verse 36 on is future. I agree. It flows right into chapter 12 that is future.

Chapter 11 of Daniel is a detailed description of the events already mentioned in Daniel 8 and 9 and has nothing to do with the end times.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

safswan

Active Member
Nov 15, 2005
383
131
58
✟30,710.00
Faith
Christian
When we look at the firstfruits portion of the resurrection, we find not only did Jesus leave a literal empty grave but so did those raised in Matthew 27:52-53. It would be foolish to attempt to explain away the empty graves from the 2nd part, the part we call the rapture. If a method one follows doesn't have this component, then it's a flawed method.

Read the teaching of the resurrection given in I Corinthians 15 and you will see it is foolish to use an example to establish a doctrine to which there is no connection.Note that for Jesus,at least,His body did not see corruption and hence could be raised as is.The type of body received by the others would also be in question and could be similar to what pertained with Lazarus.
 
Upvote 0

safswan

Active Member
Nov 15, 2005
383
131
58
✟30,710.00
Faith
Christian
First of all, your reasoning is faulty, because which is the better to follow, two Scripture examples which say the same thing, or follow one example, which really is not the same example, and try to modify the other two? The latter is what you're trying to do, and it defies basic logic.

Not understanding this.Could you explain futher or cite how I actually accomplish what you say?

Christ's Olivet discourse has differences in all 3 examples of Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21. And they do NOT contradict each other. Each one has some different info and cover the same idea of the events leading up to Christ's 2nd coming. It is the same thing with the Four Gospel Books. They all witness Christ's Ministry, death and resurrection, but they each have some different info.

I am saying nothing different and so why the need to even mention this?
 
Upvote 0

SeventyOne

Well-Known Member
May 2, 2015
4,675
3,188
✟167,098.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvary Chapel
Marital Status
Married
Read the teaching of the resurrection given in I Corinthians 15 and you will see it is foolish to use an example to establish a doctrine to which there is no connection.Note that for Jesus,at least,His body did not see corruption and hence could be raised as is.The type of body received by the others would also be in question and could be similar to what pertained with Lazarus.

Then I guess it's good I didn't use an example which had no connection.
 
Upvote 0

iamlamad

Lamad
Jun 8, 2013
9,620
744
78
Home in Tulsa
✟101,867.00
Country
United States
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Luke and Matthew are in complete harmony and only differ in the timelines,which is in alignment when both are compared to give the proper chronology.



Chapter 11 of Daniel is a detailed description of the events already mentioned in Daniel 8 and 9 and has nothing to do with the end times.
That is true up to verse 36. From there to the end of the book is future to us today.

I believe that the Olivet discourse was one discourse written by Matthew, Mark and Luke. Each wrote as they were led by the Holy Spirit.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

iamlamad

Lamad
Jun 8, 2013
9,620
744
78
Home in Tulsa
✟101,867.00
Country
United States
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Read the teaching of the resurrection given in I Corinthians 15 and you will see it is foolish to use an example to establish a doctrine to which there is no connection.Note that for Jesus,at least,His body did not see corruption and hence could be raised as is.The type of body received by the others would also be in question and could be similar to what pertained with Lazarus.

1 Corinthians 15:52
In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

The general public opinion of this phrase: "the dead shall be raised" is exactly like it sounds: where are dead bodies put? In a grave in the ground. Another verse says "the graves were opened." That has the same meaning: a body that was once IN the grave, left their grave. All dictionaries agree: resurrection means raising up from the dead.

Definition of resurrect
transitive verb
1: to raise from the dead

Definition of resurrection
1a capitalized : the rising of Christ from the dead
often capitalized : the rising again to life of all the human dead before the final judgment
c: the state of one risen from the dead

Martha said, "I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day." This too has the same meaning: a body placed in a grave in the ground will rise again: the SAME body.

What did Job write: "And after my skin has been destroyed, yet in my flesh I will see God..." It has the same meaning: HIS flesh, the very flesh that would be buried would rise again and would be able to see again.
 
Upvote 0