Jesus Christ's White Hair Isn't A Fashion Statement

Status
Not open for further replies.

greenguzzi

Post-Evangelical, Social Anarchist, One of The Way
Aug 25, 2015
1,147
733
Sydney Australia
✟33,863.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
Then why did Paul write that the rapture will happen after the return of Christ and the resurrection of the dead?
Well ok, you got me there. Sorry, I was imprecise.
I meant that there will be no rapture in the way that the event is popularly understood.
 
Upvote 0

ewq1938

I love you three.
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Site Supporter
Nov 5, 2011
44,418
6,800
✟916,399.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Well ok, you got me there. Sorry, I was imprecise.
I meant that there will be no rapture in the way that the event is popularly understood.


That would be "no pre-trib rapture".
 
Upvote 0

greenguzzi

Post-Evangelical, Social Anarchist, One of The Way
Aug 25, 2015
1,147
733
Sydney Australia
✟33,863.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
That would be "no pre-trib rapture".
I'm an amillennialist. So no-trib and no-rapture.
(Once again I'm being imprecise. But hopefully you get what I mean.)

As you alluded to, "rapture" comes from "caught up" in 1 Thessalonians 4. So yes, technically the word is in the Bible. But I don't believe it's the thing that is usually meant by that word.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,218
5,563
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,985.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You're confusing "literal" with face value. Obviously, when Jesus said he was the "door of the sheep" he should not be taken at face-value as if he were a piece of wood with hinges.

To take a passage "literally" means that we interpret the passage in teh light the author has in view. So when we read that God is a rock, we use the metaphor for what it is intended to mean by the author, thus we look for the literal meaning the metaphor points us to.

Nothing in what John described about Jesus was metaphorical. He did see Jesus in His glory. You can't just assign figurative devices to the text when they are not warranted. In this case, John is not using a metaphor to describe Jesus. He is simply describing what he saw.
The author wasn't a Greek, he was a Hebrew and would have used Hebraic terms, phrases and other nuances to describe what he sees. You have done a fine job of convincing me of your point >>IF<< John was a western man, he was not. He would use tools and terms consistent with his time and heritage. Thanks for the lesson though....
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.