Posted on 03/13/2015 7:43:01 AM PDT by amessenger4god
Will there be a rapture? Is it pre-tribulational? I believe the answer is an emphatic 'yes' to both questions. Here are some key points:
1. For starters, I want to address the small, but growing minority of Christians who emphatically state that the rapture isn't even in the Bible. Now I believe it is one thing to hold to various views as to the timing of the rapture event, but no rapture at all? I believe that this belief is thoroughly nonsensical. The argument often takes shape the same way that Jehovah's Witnesses will say that the Bible doesn't teach the doctrine of the "Trinity" since the word "Trinity" is not in the Bible... yet the doctrine of the Trinity is found all throughout the Bible, from Genesis 1:1-3 to Revelation. The word "rapture" is not in the Bible, end-of-story.
This argument doesn't even make sense--of course the English word "rapture" is not in the Bible. So too the Latin word that we derive "rapture" from is also not in the Bible. The New Testament was written in Greek! The Greek word for "rapture" is in the Bible. Even setting aside all other scriptures, parables, patterns, and parallels that may support the rapture, the rapture event is clearly and unequivocally taught in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17. This passage doesn't necessarily answer the question as to the timing of the event, but yes, the rapture is going to happen. A trumpet will sound and the dead in Christ and those who are "alive and remain" will be "caught up" into the clouds. It plainly, unequivocally says believers will meet the Lord in the air.
2. Next, I want to talk about perhaps the most common argument against the pre-tribulational rapture. This argument is now known to be factually incorrect. So if you believe in a mid-trib, pre-wrath, or post-trib rapture, that's fine by me, but don't use this argument. The argument is that the pre-tribulational rapture theory was invented by a girl in 19th century Scotland named Margaret MacDonald. This is patently false. For starters, 18 years prior to MacDonald, a Catholic Jesuit priest espoused his belief in the pre-trib rapture in his book The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty. We now also have clear, extra-Biblical support for the pre-trib rapture as early as 373AD (Ephraem the Syrian who clearly taught the doctrine, even using exact language). See here: http://www.raptureready.com/rr-margaret-mcdonald.html and here: http://www.grantjeffrey.com/article/why_some_reject.htm
3. Thirdly, many Christians will often argue that the pre-tribulational rapture is not foreshadowed in the Bible and that the doctrine is just "easy-escapism". In essence they will say that God doesn't remove us from trials and tribulation, He just protects us in the midst of it.
I actually agree with their point about God protecting us in the midst of tribulation. However, this has nothing to do with the pre-tribulational rapture, which I believe is CLEARLY foreshadowed. The 70th week of Daniel (final 7 years of the age), are the years specifically set aside for God to pour out His OWN wrath. Not just the normal trials and tribulations every generation has faced because of the consequences of sin, but a tribulation God Himself sends on the world, as the Scripture says to test an unbelieving and unrepentant world (Revelation 3:10; see also Luke 21:36). That same passage says clearly says that God will keep believers from facing that coming tribulation. Elsewhere the Bible says "we are not appointed unto wrath" (1 Thessalonians 5:9).
So, yes, it is correct to say God doesn't always remove us from worldy tribulation, but He does ALWAYS remove us from His wrath if we trust in Him. This is foreshadowed:
Now, I don’t think Ephraem is such a big deal myself, as there is something like 20 or more witnesses from the ECF that most emphatically contradict the notion that the early centuries of Christianity support a pretrib rapture. Just the opposite is true, virtually EVERY witness from those early centuries witness for a singular rapture/2nd coming event. Your Ephraem of Syria being the ONLY exception...and a very poor one at that.
It is thus no wonder you and amessenger4god focus so much attention on Ephraem, as also other pretribs.
As I have tried to point out, Ephraem is not all that great a witness for your case, it turns out. See my posts 77 and 82. I quoted from Bob Gundry in post 82 on “true” Ephraem and “false” Ephraem.” I continue where I left off:
“According to true Ephraem, “there is nothing remaining except that the coming of our enemy the Antichrist be revealed (Sermon on Asceticism).
Ephraem warns ‘us’ Christians against the Antichrist BECAUSE THE ANTICHRIST WILL COME BEFORE THE CHRIST (Sermon on the End and the Consummation, the Judgment and the Reward, and on Gog and Magog, and on the False Messiah 433-40)...Ephraem goes on to describe as our hope the coming of Christ AFTER the tribulation (ibid. 94).” [my caps]
Now, be honest Mrs.Z and amessenger4god, and every other pretrib, midtrib, or prewrath rapturist that reads this, and believes Ephraem to be historical evidence for your case, does THIS sound like Ephraem supports your views?
It’s Jesus and that apostles that taught the “catching up” of believers prior to the seven year tribulation. All others either agree with them or don’t.
With all respects, CBear, the “catching up” passage to which refer, 1 Thess. 4:13-18, says nothing at all about the tribulation, seven years or otherwise. It just says there is going to be a rapture. We agree on that.
It is what some expositors refer to as an inference. To someone peering through two stage 2nd coming spectacles, it seems to them to be so.
Truth is, there is no passage anywhere that describes for us a two stage 2nd coming. One before the tribulation, another after it. There are inferences here and there, yes, but we should have more than that.
For such an important issue as this, we would expect a clear statement setting this (a two stage 2nd coming) forth, but there is none.
If there was such a statement, and not just a bunch of subjective inferences, we would not be debating this.
Over the last few years, I have gone between Pre-Trib and Mid-Trib. I still lean towards pre-trib because of the normalcy of Jesus description and the fact that it is the “covenant with death” that starts the tribulation period which I believe are after Psalms 83, Ezekiel 38, and Isaiah 17. Note: Arnold Fructenbaum, arguably one of the greatest living Eschatology scholars believes in a pre-trib. Jacob Prasch, another respected scholar is a strong mid-trib. Will be very interesting in the next few years...months...days...
You are correct. Christ does not come to earth during the rapture. We go up to meet Him. His second coming is after the tribulation when He defeats the armies of Satan.
>>If there was such a statement, and not just a bunch of subjective inferences, we would not be debating this.<<
We are not talking about a "2 stage return". Only you are. The whole word does not see Him when the rapture occurs. They most certainly do when He returns.
Non of those who believe other than pre trib can account for the seven years left that God must deal exclusively with the nation of Israel.
Ok, here goes, hope I don’t get too long and drawn out here:
The line of thought for pretribs goes something like this (I know, because I was once pretrib myself). Jesus said nothing about any other coming except the one after the tribulation in Matt. 24 (vss 29-31). You therefore have to go to Paul, in passages like 1 Thess. 4 and 1 Cor. 15, according to the pretrib line of thought, and have Paul reveal to us what Jesus did not.
Paul is supposed to reveal the mystery of an additional coming, where Jesus leaves heaven, comes down to the atmosphere of earth, catches away the saints, turns around and goes back to heaven… then comes again with those selfsame saints seven years later. This time all the way to the earth.
It would be nice if we actually had Paul describing all this for us. Especially this additional coming before the tribulation that Jesus said nothing about in Matt. 24. Which, since Jesus had only a post-trib coming, and Paul’s is in addition to Jesus’ (even if he does not come all the way down to the earth, it is still additional to the one in Matt. 24), this would be nothing else but “two stage.”
But, if Paul is supposed to reveal this tremendous new mystery to us, he did an awful poor job of it. What he described in the Thessalonian and 1 Cor. Passages, can just as easily be seen as the SAME coming Jesus described in Matt. 24, Howbeit with much more detail. Post-tribs see that additional detail AS the “behold I shew you a mystery” of 1 Cor. 15:51.
No additional coming is revealed in that passage, one has to read it into the text (thus an inference), for the text says no such thing. Both the Thessalonian passage and the 1 Cor. 15 one, describe WHAT will happen at Christ’s Parousia, not WHEN it will happen. We should already know “when” from Matt. 24, i.e., after the tribulation.
Oy vey (lol) !
Pre-mills would be very interested in reading all about what is in the Bible; there’s so much there that they never seem to talk about, as all they seem to talk about is eschatology.
Just curious - can you give me “your” rundown on Song of Solomon, i.e., what it means ? It’s not related to this discussion, and I have my “view”, I just was curious to get where you’re at with that...
I do agree that this is how we should be living. Don't take me wrong--I don't think we should spend all our time trying to determine His coming--we should be living like it'll be this afternoon.
Exactly.
Matthew 24:44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.
Mark 13:32 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
Matthew 24:36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. 37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
No one knows the day or the hour? We are already told what "day" will be mid trib when the anti Christ sets himself up in the temple and we know the exact day Christ will return to earth to defeat the armies of the anti Christ.
Daniel told us that the anti Christ will sign a covenant or peace treaty which is supposed to have a duration of seven years but half way through will break that covenant.
Daniel 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
So 3 1/2 (1260 days) years after that treaty is singed the anti Christ sets himself up in the temple as God. Then we know it's exactly 1290 days to Christ's return.
Daniel 12:11 From the time that the daily sacrifice is abolished and the abomination that causes desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days.
Christ warned of it.
Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)
No one knows the day or the hour? That can't refer to mid trib or post trib could it. We know the exact day of each of those events.
Rather then make this any longer I'll simply not address the passages that address the rapture. You need to explain how Jesus is not lying with the statement "no on knows the day or the hour" if you believe either mid trib or post trib.
This thread is about the rapture. I'll not get involved in highjacking it with another subject.
>>It’s not related to this discussion<<
You are correct so I will simply not follow you down that rabbit trail.
None of them--at the hands of God. The Great Tribulation will be by the Hand of God--not by sinners.
That is soooo lost on the Rapture deniers...Why would and where does it say God will torture and murder his own children, his church???
If you are here during the Tribulation, God is going to do his best to kill you using all kinds of means...
I agree. It’s not God who kills the two witnesses either.
The mystery, 1 Cor. 15:51, “Behold I shew you a mystery,” being the rapture, or “catching up,” the saved rising/resurrected then “caught up together” in the clouds, meeting Jesus in his descent from heaven, 1 Thess. 4:16,17. THIS ADDITIONAL DETAIL NOT DESCRIBED BY JESUS IN HIS PAROUSIA (Matt. 24:29-31), BEING THE "MYSTERY" THAT PAUL REVEALS. Paul’s parousia (coming) not a different Parousia from Jesus’, but the same one..
Were Paul’s parousia additional to Jesus’ post-trib parousia in Matt. 24:29-31, then you would indeed have the “two- stage” I was talking about, which you deny you have. If your pretrib parousia is a separate parousia from Jesus’ post-trib parousia, separated by the seven years of the tribulation, then you have two parousia’s.
If the parousia in 1 Thess. 4 and 1 Cor. 15 is indeed an additional parousia from the post-trib one in Matt. 24:29-31, then where is the language in these passages by Paul to describe such a thing? Are we amiss by expecting Paul to have said something like this:
“Behold I shew you a mystery, I reveal to you a new and separate parousia from the one at the end of the tribulation that Jesus spoke about. There is actually going to be two parousias, one before the seven year tribulation, and another one after it. The one I am revealing is what we will now call the “rapture,” that’s the name it will henceforth be called. This rapture, you must understand is entirely different from the parousia after the tribulation. That one, you must understand is Jesus coming WITH the saints he had previously raptured some seven years before. My rapture is Jesus coming FOR his saints, the one after the tribulation is Jesus coming WITH his saints. My new revelation, you must understand, is two-stage, not just one event as you may have previously thought.”
As important as this is to us who believe, this is our hope, for heavens sake, we would expect SOMETHING LIKE THIS said. But we find no such thing. Where’s the name we are to call this separate and distinct parousia? Does Paul call it the “rapture?” Are we amiss in expecting Paul to designate a special name for this separate event that comes seven years before the other one? No, he doesn’t call it the “rapture,” THAT IS PART OF WHAT HAPPENS, TO BE SURE, BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT HE CALLS IT. He uses the same word that Jesus uses throughout Matt. 24, “parousia,” in the Greek, our English “coming! “
The fact that Paul uses the same word, parousia, Jesus used (NOT calling it “the rapture”), and the fact that he used no “two-stage” or “two parousias” language to describe the mystery he is revealing, should lead us to the conclusion that Jesus and Paul were talking about the SAME event, the same parousia.
And that using the term “rapture” to define this supposedly separate parousia, is but a modern construct, nobody before Darby, in all of church history, ever used such “two stage” language. Prior to Darby, it was just the 2nd coming, the parousia, and one event, not two.
This has gotten long, sorry ‘bout that. And I haven’t even got to your comments about Matt. 24 yet. Actually, I haven’t even finished with what needs to be said about these two passages by Paul.
All that typing and you still have the problem with “no one knows the hour or the day”.
Yep, here’s some more typing. (Your objection is a good point, I’ll get to it, but first this)
Pretribs (and midtribs, prewraths) assume there HAS to be two separate events, one for Jesus to come for his saints, another, and a very separate one seven years later after the tribulation, for Jesus to come with his saints. However, the 1 Thessalonians passage says no such thing.
Jesus is in heaven now at the right hand of God in expectation of his enemies to be made his footstool, Heb. 10:13. He doesn’t make the descent from heaven we see in the 1 Thessalonian passage, “For the Lord himself shall DESCEND from heaven with a shout, etc.,” until his enemies are where he wants them, to be put under foot. This assuredly does NOT happen before the tribulation, but at the end of it.
When he descends from heaven, he is on his way to the earth, therefore. He is descending to defeat his enemies, to put them under foot, and to reign over the earth in the millennial, after he defeats them. He remains in expectation in heaven UNTIL THEN. The resurrection and rapture of the saved takes place as he descends, on his way down, he meets them in the clouds on his way to Armageddon. Thus, he comes (in the one parousia), FOR his saints and WITH his saints, in one descent from heaven, in one event. It does NOT require two separate events, as pretribs tell us.
There is nothing in the Thessalonian passage, or any other passage, that says Jesus is to descend from heaven, then (after meeting the saints) turn around and go back to heaven. The only U-turn made is by the saints, who rise meet the Lord in the clouds, and continue with him in his descent. The Lord makes no U-turn, where he turns around and goes back to heaven, in our modern lingo this would be a traffic violation, an unauthorized U-turn. No scripture anywhere “authorizes” Jesus to do a U-turn. It is the saints who do the U-turn, not Jesus. Descending means descending!
Pretribs (midtribs, prewraths) read into the Thessalonian passage their respective theories of the tribulation. Seven years or whatever, when that is all it is - theory read into the scripture (read into the Thessalonian passage). When the passage is not even dealing with the tribulation. The passage’s intent was not to deal with such things as the antichrist, the abomination of desolation, and all such things, rather Paul was giving assurance, hope, and comfort to those in the Thessalonian church who were sorrowing over their dead loved one, vss 13,14, 18. It’s purpose was to describe the rapture only.
There was no need for Paul to go into a lengthy teaching about what that descent from heaven was, it would have been assumed among them to be the same parousia that Jesus spoke of in the gospels (Matt. 24). Paul called it “the parousia of the Lord,” vss 15, his readers at Thessalonica (since Darby hadn’t come along yet), knowing that Jesus was presently in heaven, would have understood the descent from heaven to be the Matt. 24:29-31 parousia.
You’re wasting your time. Either we know when He is coming or we don’t. The time line after the signing of the treaty is set.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.