Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: thatjoeguy
I’m showed the “proof” texts regarding the rapture yet there is nothing in the text that gives timing. Why is that?

First of all, Jesus said that no man knows the day and hour when He will come to get His Church off the scene before the judgment hits; only God knows that. We are not given the exact date, however there is Scripture that lets us know whether those who come to know Christ as Savior during the Church Age will be made to go through the judgments God has for those who reject Him:

If I can clearly show the similarities with the Second Coming which does have the timing indicated and these ‘rapture’ passages (and I can) why are they not the same? What makes them different?

Many people confuse Christ's Second Coming to earth to set up His kingdom with the Rapture. Here are some questions and where to find the answers in Scripture that can help you:

So you see, based on Scripture we can know that the Rapture and the Second Coming are two separate events, and we can know when the Rapture is close, but not the exact date. However, the exact day of the Second Coming can be known.

Yes the Bible does talk about scoffers, but who is the scoffer here?

God said that the scoffers of the last days would deny that Christ is going to return. You will not find anywhere any statement or insinuation that I have made that Christ will not return; in fact its quite the opposite. So it's not me who is "the scoffer here".

245 posted on 02/17/2009 1:47:17 AM PST by GiovannaNicoletta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies ]


To: GiovannaNicoletta

Looks like an excellent post. Will try and get to it later.


248 posted on 02/17/2009 4:28:08 AM PST by Quix (POL BOSSES say fm1900 2 presnt: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies ]

To: GiovannaNicoletta

Well done...


260 posted on 02/17/2009 6:26:23 AM PST by Iscool (I don't understand all that I know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies ]

To: GiovannaNicoletta

The problem with the pre-tribulation rapture doctrine is that the reader of Scripture must have a belief of the doctrine prior to reading the Scripture before he can see it in the Scripture. By that I mean that a simply reading of scripture does not present this doctrine at all and that it must be pulled from various passages while ignoring the surrounding text. Lets take your points as you’ve presented them.

Revelation 19 and Zechariah 14 failing to mention a resurrection proves nothing as they were not meant to present a complete picture of the Second Coming. For example, 1 Thessalonians 4 fails to mention the timing of this event unless you continue reading the next few verses in chapter 5 where it places this event at the Second Coming but without chapter 5 there is no timing. There is nothing that stops this from happening after the tribulation. But, since this doesn’t fit the doctrine (and for no other reason then that) chapter 5 must be talking of another event (the Second Coming). Furthermore 1 Corinthians 15:52-54 doesn’t mention Christ at all and other then the mention of the last trump and the resurrection it has nothing in common with 1 Thessalonians 4, on top of that 1 Thessalonians 4 doesn’t say that its trumpet blast is the last one yet you claim these two passages are the same events. I do agree with that (they are the same) but interestingly enough, Matthew 24:29-31 has more in common with 1 Thessalonians 4 then any other passage in scripture yet you claim they are different (I don’t agree here) and again, for no other reason then because it doesn’t fit your doctrine.

Interesting again is your reason for them being different which is that you claim in 1 Thessalonians 4 Jesus is coming ‘for’ His saints and in Matthew 24 He’s coming ‘with’ His Saints yet in verse 14 of 1 Thessalonians 4 Paul clearly says “ ... them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him” but in Matthew 24 there is no mention of Jesus bringing anyone with Him at all except the angels. Using your logic Matthew 24 should be the rapture, 1 Thessalonians 4 should be the Second Coming and 1 Corinthians 15 a new picture to the puzzle.

Next point, the belief that Revelation 4:1 with John’s call to Heaven is a prophetic example of the Church being caught up is not supported in the text here or anywhere else in scripture and is the result of an assumption based on a false doctrine. Example of this logic, Moses striking the rock to produce water is a prophetic example of the Lord smashing the Temple in Jerusalem (the rock) in 70 A.D. in order to force the spreading of the Word of God (the water) outside of the nation of Israel. I may believe that (I don’t) but this is not supported in the text and can not be proved nor disproved and therefore cannot be given as proof to a new picture of the events following the spread of the gospel. This also applies to your belief regarding the 24 elders having their crowns in Heaven as representing the Church.

Your point regarding the hour of testing noted in Revelation 3:10 reads into the text implications that are not implied nor supported. Your state where some have wrongly believed “keep” means to “keep through” is inaccurate in itself. The underlying Greek word actually does mean to keep through as in “a watch” or more properly “to guard” as in “by keeping the eye upon”. Anyone with a Strong’s concordance can check for themselves the meaning of the word.

Your interpretation regarding Matthew 24:29-31 is also incorrect. In verse 31 Jesus sends forth His angels with the sound of a trumpet to gather together ‘His elect’. The word elect, in any language simply means to choose from between two or more that which is preferred. By your interpretation this would be the wicked which doesn’t fit the definition of the word nor is it supported by the usage of that word throughout the New Testament. You even contradict yourself in your own explanation of Matthew 13:39-41,49 later in this same point when you state that the Angels “will not only gather the elect, but also the wicked” where here, the elect according to you (and correctly) can only be the chosen ones of God.

Your next point beginning with “Both the wicked and the righteous can’t be taken first” forces another contradiction. You agree with Matthew 13 where it says the wicked are taken first followed by the righteous yet you believe in a rapture where the righteous are taken at least seven years prior to the wicked. You claim that this (the Second Coming) is not a resurrection so this should solve the problem but you confuse the issue with what is being taken. During the resurrection/rapture the dead in Christ shall be raised first, this is the resurrection, but immediately following this the living in Christ will be taken also (1 Thessalonians 4 & 1 Corinthians 15). At this point (the rapture), which you claim is prior to the tribulation, you have a problem with the text of Matthew 13 and those that are alive in Christ being taken without the wicked going first. You can’t have it both ways.

Your point beginning with “Jesus returns from the wedding” as a basis for the difference isn’t supported in the surrounding text. Chapter 19 of Revelation follows the destruction of the city of Babylon (chapter 18) as can be found in the first words of 19:1. Yet in 19:7 we have the statement “for the marriage of the Lamb is come” by your definition this must mean that verse 7 is the rapture and that between verse 7 and 11 are at least seven years (the Tribulation). Again there is nothing that supports this gap in the Scripture, not even if you pull the passage out of the context, it doesn’t fit with the language. By this interpretation this would place the destruction of Babylon some time prior to your rapture and also prior to the beginning of the tribulation a belief we know to be false.

A fallacy of the pre-tribulationist is to assume in John 14:2-3 Jesus is talking of Heaven. There is no reference to God’s throne in heaven as “My Father’s house” or “the Father’s house”. A clear example of this can be found in John 2:16 where Jesus drove out the money changers making the statement “make not My Father’s house an house of merchandise”. Whenever the phrase “Father’s house” is used in Scripture in relation to God it pertains to the temple on earth in Jerusalem. Also a historical study of the Temple in Jerusalem will show that surrounding and attached to the Temple were many rooms used for housing the priests. The word room is actually a better translation of the Greek word which the KJV interprets as mansion.

Your point regarding the restrainer again is one of many interpretations yet there is no support for any answer to this question that would satisfy any three Theologians.

With regard to your point dealing with the separation of the sheep and goats, I am under the impression that you believe that there will be no resurrection at the second coming. If this is the case, what is to happen to all those who have died for Christ at the hand of the Antichrist during the tribulation? Are they to remain as spirits with no bodies or is their resurrection to happen later? Also, is their resurrection (if it happens) considered part of the first resurrection, a non-resurrection, or God forbid, the second resurrection? if they are not to be resurrected, or receive resurrected bodies, why not?

As I have mentioned previously in other posts and demonstrated to some extent here, in order to find evidence of a pre-tribulation rapture in Scripture one must assume a pre-tribulation rapture exists. One must also, as you’ve shown here, pull Scripture out of context as you do with Revelation 19. Your doctrine of the pre-tribulation rapture (the first resurrection) leaves those who have died during the tribulation for Christ with no resurrection. You also must pull 1 Corinthians 15: 52-54 out of context with the very next verse as verse 55 is a direct quote of Isaiah in his description of the new Kingdom (following the Second Coming). You also must pull 1 Thessalonians 4:14-18 out of context with Chapter 5 (or at least the first eight verses of chapter 5) as these verses are clearly talking of the Second Coming as well.

Such a doctrine calls for two last trumpet’s, 1 Corinthians 15 and the seventh trumpet of Revelation. This statement by Paul in Corinthians shows that this is the last trumpet of a series. Revelation is the only place in the Bible with a series of Trumpets and the last one ending the Tribulation but somehow they are not the same. If they were this would tie Corinthians 15:52-54 in with the Second Coming and by doing that it would now fit (as it should) with the text in verses 55-58.

And finally, it calls for two first resurrections, at the rapture and the Second Coming (if you believe in the resurrection at the Second Coming). If there are two resurrections prior to the final resurrection for judgment then why not state that? Why does John in Revelation 20:5 call this the “first” and if the first is only the rapture then again, what about those who have died for Christ during the Tribulation?

The belief in a pre-tribulation rapture is a false doctrine that removes the need to watch, why bother watching when your going to be snatched away? Especially if its before any of the really bad things that happen. It gives a false sense of hope for those that are not saved in that if they see their friends or neighbors “disappear” then they know they have 7 years to ‘get right’ with God.

And finally the danger of such a doctrine results in very little “need” for study of the last days, why study when your either going to die or be raptured first?

JB


336 posted on 02/19/2009 2:07:24 PM PST by thatjoeguy (Wind is just air, but pushier.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson