"Rapture" Rapture - Repub's, the env., and the 2nd Coming: The origins of a liberal myth

The Daily Standard ^ | 14 February 2005 | John Hinderaker

[Lando Lincoln]

ONE OF LIBERALS' chief motivations these days is fear of the religious right. Ask people on the left to explain their loathing of President Bush or the Republican party, and the answer often comes around to Jerry Falwell, evangelicals, theocracy, and so on. The left's fear of conservative Christians is fed by a steady stream of news stories. Some are accurate: religious conservatives oppose gay marriage. Some are fanciful: Sponge Bob Square Pants has been accused of being a homosexual. And some are simply false.

The left's most recent salvo against the religious right was launched by an obscure online environmentalist journal called Grist. In October of last year, Grist published an article titled "The Godly Must Be Crazy," the thesis of which was that conservative Christians are deliberately bent on despoiling the environment:

Many Christian fundamentalists feel that concern for the future of our planet is irrelevant, because it has no future. They believe we are living in the End Time, when the son of God will return, the righteous will enter heaven, and sinners will be condemned to eternal hellfire. They may also believe, along with millions of other Christian fundamentalists, that environmental destruction is not only to be disregarded but actually welcomed--even hastened--as a sign of the coming Apocalypse.

We are not talking about a handful of fringe lawmakers who hold or are beholden to these beliefs. The 231 legislators (all but five of them Republicans) who received an average 80 percent approval rating or higher from the leading religious-right organizations make up more than 40 percent of the U.S. Congress.

Grist's fevered accusation might have languished in the less-traveled corners of the Internet had it not been taken up by a more respectable voice of the left: Bill Moyers. On December 1, 2004, the Center for Health and the Global Environment gave Moyers its "Global Environment Citizen Award." Moyers's speech on the occasion cribbed liberally from, and at times quoted verbatim, his "favorite online environmental journal," Grist. He characterized the Bush administration's environmental policies as "based on theology" and therefore "delusional." He repeated Grist's claim that Republicans, believing that the end of the world is at hand, are deliberately despoiling the environment.

For evidence, Moyers harkened back to the Reagan administration:

Remember James Watt, President Ronald Reagan's first secretary of the interior? [Grist] reminded us recently of how James Watt told the U.S. Congress that protecting natural resources was unimportant in light of the imminent return of Jesus Christ. In public testimony he said, "after the last tree is felled, Christ will come back."

Beltway elites snickered. The press corps didn't know what he was talking about. But James Watt was serious.

Here, though, it was Moyers, not James Watt, who was trafficking in delusion and fantasy. For Watt said no such thing. The quote that Moyers attributed to Watt is fictitious. It originated in a 1990 book called Setting Free the Captives by an eccentric former circus ringmaster named Austin Miles. Miles didn't claim that Watt made the bogus statement to Congress, however; that embellishment was another layer of fabrication, added by Grist and repeated by Moyers.

As it happens, however, Watt did once mention the Second Coming while testifying before Congress. In February 1981, Watt told the House Interior Committee the precise opposite of what Moyers alleged:

That is the delicate balance the Secretary of the Interior must have, to be steward for the natural resources for this generation as well as future generations.

I do not know how many future generations we can count on before the Lord returns, whatever it is we have to manage with a skill to leave the resources needed for future generations.

Watt's Congressional testimony is consistent with the approach toward environmental policy that he followed throughout his career. In a letter to President Reagan written in October 1983, Watt said:

[B]ecause of our commitment to good conservation practices, we have set a remarkable record of increasing protection for the fragile and ecologically important conservation lands of the Nation. . . . In 1983 alone, we have, through trade, donations and purchase, added more park and wildlife land to the federal estate than any previous Administration added in a single year since Alaska was purchased in 1867.

Our stewardship commitment extends to preserving for future generations those historic sites and structures that pay tribute to America's past and the principles upon which our Nation was founded.

Because of our concern for and commitment to stewardship, we have accelerated the efforts to bring about the recovery of . . . endangered plants and animals. By the end of this year, we will have approved or reviewed nearly three times as many recovery plans as were developed in the four-year period 1977 to 1980.

So Moyers didn't just misquote Watt--he mischaracterized Watt's entire approach to environmental issues.

THE REST of Moyers's evidence for the Republicans' "rapturous" approach to environmental protection was equally flimsy. He cited the popularity of the Left Behind novels, in which the Second Coming is a plot element, but offered no support for the idea--ludicrous on its face--that these works of popular fiction are somehow driving the Bush administration's environmental policies. He referred to a speech in which Zell Miller quoted the Book of Amos:

"The days will come, sayeth the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land." He seemed to be relishing the thought.

But Moyers left out the rest of the quote: "Not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the word of the Lord." And, while Moyers implied that Miller had been talking about the environment, in fact his speech was about Janet Jackson's Super Bowl wardrobe malfunction.

Moyers's own speech had been reproduced only on the Internet until January 30, 2005, when the Minneapolis Star Tribune printed it as an op-ed. After the Star Tribune article appeared, James Watt contacted Power Line, hoping that we could help him counteract Moyers's smear. We did. Our post critiquing Moyers's speech resulted in Moyers apologizing to Watt, and the Star Tribune running a half-hearted correction. The Washington Post, which had repeated the fake James Watt quote, ran a somewhat more gracious correction.

However, while Moyers has admitted propagating a fake quotation, he hasn't backed off his accusation that Republicans in the grip of "rapture" are working to destroy the environment. In his apology, he repeated the substance of the slur and accused Watt of being a bad Christian. Nor have other media outlets stopped perpetuating the slur. Jon Carroll, writing in the San Francisco Chronicle, repeated Moyers's theme while acknowledging that the fictitious Watt quote was "not verifiable":

So read the Rapture Index. Consider its implications: One of George Bush's core constituencies is actively praying for environmental degradation. Its members are in fact praying for the end of the world, because the end of the world is the beginning of the fun part of salvation.

Let's look at the new budget through this lens, which is (I emphasize) neither fanciful nor satirical. Money for clean water: down.

And so on. The Moyers "rapture" speech has been picked up on countless websites, where it is fast becoming a standard liberal critique of the Bush administration.

All of this has happened without a single conservative, inside or outside of government, having ever drawn any connection, express or implied, between the supposed imminence of the Second Coming and any aspect of environmental policy. Which leaves one wondering which side of the political debate has substituted faith for reason.

John Hinderaker is a contributor to the blog Power Line and a contributing writer to The Daily Standard.

[Just mythoughts]

"We do not know how long the tribulation will last because the day of the Lord comes as a thief. (1 Thessalonians 5:2)"

Wouldn't the reason that we are told that the day of the Lord comes as a thief is because almost everybody thinks he has already come. We are told that all but the elect will be deceived by the instead of christ.

[DannyTN]

"But I believe there will be a "new heaven and a new earth" (not as in, get rid of this one a replace it with a new one; more like, a RENEWAL of this one since this earth isn't going anywhere."

A new heaven and a new earth are mentioned, but in Revelations that occurs after the 1000 year reign of Christ.

See Revelation 21:1 whereas the 1000 years begins in chapter 20.

I do not think it will be a RENEWAL. See the following:

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

[unlearner]

If the great tribulation were not shortened, Jesus said that no flesh will be saved. But it will be shortened for the sake of the elect.

You need to distinguish between three things: Daniel's seventieth week, the great tribulation, and the day of the Lord. These are not the same. (Although the latter two take place within the latter half of Daniel's seventieth week.)

You will also find that there are two key parts to Christ's return. 1) He will meet us in the air. During this event, the dead in Christ will rise and those believers who have not yet died will be caught up by angels to meet the Lord in the air. 2) Christ will plant His feet on the Mount of Olives. The mountain will split in two. And the holy angels will gather those who offend and cast them out of His kingdom.

These two aspects are distinguished from each other. They are both part of His return, but are not the same thing. When you see this distinction you will see that His return for the church cannot take place at the end of Daniel's seventieth week, but sometime during the latter half. Further, if His return for the church took place at the very end, we would know the day in advance, and His return would not be "as a thief".

[Just mythoughts]

So you think that Christ is going to remove people before the anti - instead of christ gets tossed out by Michael?

That makes Christ returning two times.

[Just mythoughts]

"Further, if His return for the church took place at the very end, we would know the day in advance, and His return would not be "as a thief"."


The reason why it will be like a thief is that the whole world except for the elect are deceived and think that He has returned. Who do you think the instead of christ is?

[PowerPro]

Here are a number of scriptures that assures us the earth will exist forever:

Isaiah 45:17 But Israel shall be saved in the Lord with an everlasting salvation: ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end.

Ecc 1:4 One generation passes away and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth forever.

Psalm 104:5 Who laid the foundation of the earth, that it should not be removed forever.

Eph 3:21 Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.

[Just mythoughts]

Yep, going to be the ultimate superfund of environmental clean ups this earth has seen since the first earth AGE!

[unlearner]

The second "coming of the Lord" will happen once. But these are two parts of the same coming.

The first coming of Christ encompassed more than one solitary event. He was conceived. He was born. He grew up. He carried out a ministry of preaching and healing and miracles for three years. He was crucified for the sins of mankind. He was buried. He rose again. He was seen of many witnesses. He ascended into heaven.

"Meeting the Lord in the air" is one part of His second coming. His subsequent arrival at the Mount of Olives is another. Whether He and the saints will be visible to the world during the intermittent time period, I am not quite certain, though I think that is what is indicated. "Every eye shall see Him."(Revelation 1:7) "Then shall they see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven with great power and glory." (Matthew 24:31)

This teaching is more difficult to receive when you have been taught something different. It remains, however, the plain teaching of scripture. If you are able to set aside extra-biblical teaching and focus only on what the Bible says, you will be able to receive it.

And I do not mean to be condescending to those who disagree. I have great respect for many people who do not agree. If you are able to receive it though, you will find that this reconciles many conflicts that other teachings cannot overcome.

[DannyTN]

I agree the Great Tribulation, usually refers to the last half of the seven years. But the term "tribulation" often refers to the entire seven years. Clearly the last half is the "Hell on earth".

"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" (Dan. 9:27).

"You will also find that there are two key parts to Christ's return. "

I do not believe those are the same event. The first event the church meeting Jesus in the air is not the "second coming" of Jesus. Jesus doesn't return at that time, we meet him in the air.

When Jesus does return and plants His feet on the Mount of Olives, the Church returns with Him. It doesn't make sense for the Church to meet Jesus in the air and immediately return to earth.

What's more, is that once that agreement is signed the Christians will be expecting and looking for the rapture. But scripture says, it will occur at a time that you think not. Therefore it logically must occur before Israel enters that agreement, otherwise, the entire church will be expecting it.

[Quix]

Francis Schaeffer sp? well discussed the Christian's stewardship of the environment.

That doens't mean we have to be whacko over it.

It also doesn't mean we have to save some silly minow species at the cost of water for children and families on the Rio Grande here in New Mexico.

People come first--certainly to God--and ought to, to other people.

[unlearner]

"The reason why it will be like a thief is that the whole world except for the elect are deceived and think that He has returned. Who do you think the instead of christ is?"

That is true regarding the world. It is not correct regarding the church. Yes, the day of the Lord will not overtake us as a thief. But Jesus also clearly taught that it is not for us to know the day or hour of His return in advance. (Matthew 24:36-37; 25:13)

[unlearner]

Let me preface my comments by saying that some of the Bible teachers I respect the most share your view. It is however incorrect.

Daniel's seventieth week can be divided into four parts. 1) Peace and rise of antichrists. 2) The beginning of sorrows. 3) The great tribulation. 4) The end or "day of the Lord".

The fact that Christ's return for the church occurs at the beginning of the "Day of the Lord" can be clearly seen in scripture. (1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:4, 2 Thessalonians 1:6-2:8)

The fact that the "day of the Lord" follows the great tribulation is also plain. (Matthew 25:29-31, Joel 2:31)

As far as the church expecting His return, we already do. We do not depend on the treaty of Antichrist to anticipate His return. The Lord's return will NOT overtake believers as a thief (1 Thessalonians 5:4). We simply do not know the day and hour.

Nothing about the rise of the Antichrist or his subsequent revealing (at the abomination of desolation) will give away God's game plan, so to speak. In fact, we are warned of antichrists and of the Antichrist. He must be revealed BEFORE the "Day of Christ". (2 Thessalonians 2:3)

[sageb1]

How about abolishing the Dept. of Education, which just loves PBS?

[Red Sea Swimmer]

The only "Rapture" that might be played out in the near future will be a track by Deborah Harry and Blondie.

[DannyTN]

I couldn't make sense of the english in the KJV of Isaiah 45:17, so here is the RSV version. The thrust of the verse is about the everlastingness of Israel's salvation, not the earth's. I'm not sure about the phrase "world without end" being a reference to the earth or a KJV way of saying forever.

Isaiah 45:17 But Israel shall be saved in the Lord with an everlasting salvation: ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end. (KJV)

Isaiah 45:17 But Israel is saved by the LORD with everlasting salvation; you shall not be put to shame or confounded to all eternity. (RSV)

Likewise Ephesian 3:21 "world without end" gets translated differently.

Eph 3:21 to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations, for ever and ever. Amen. (RSV)

Psalms 104 is a statement that God put the earth on it's course and it cannot be shaken from the course God put it on. However Scripture repeatedly says that God will shake the earth and move it at various times. So the verse really must be understood as "nobody but God can shake or move the earth"

Haggai 2:21 - Speak to Zerubbabel, governor of Judah, saying, I will shake the heavens and the earth;

Joel 3:16 - The LORD also shall roar out of Zion, and utter his voice from Jerusalem; and the heavens and the earth shall shake: but the LORD will be the hope of his people, and the strength of the children of Israel.

And finally, while Ecc 1:4 clearly says the earth abideth forever. In light of multiple scriptures that say it will be dissoved and replaced by a new earth. I think that verse is better understood as "there will always be an earth". Besides, the whole emphasis of that passage in Ecclesiastes was on the mortality of man and how short his days were relative to the earth. I'm not sure that verse was meant to say that the earth wouldn't be completely destroyed and then made new.

Nahum 1:5 - The mountains quake at him, and the hills melt, and the earth is burned at his presence, yea, the world, and all that dwell therein.

Isaiah 65:17 - For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

Isaiah 24:18 And it shall come to pass, that he who fleeth from the noise of the fear shall fall into the pit; and he that cometh up out of the midst of the pit shall be taken in the snare: for the windows from on high are open, and the foundations of the earth do shake. 19 The earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, the earth is moved exceedingly. 20 The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed like a cottage; and the transgression thereof shall be heavy upon it; and it shall fall, and not rise again.

Isaiah 51:6 - Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished.

Psalms 18:7 - Then the earth shook and trembled; the foundations also of the hills moved and were shaken, because he was wroth.

Psalms 46:6 - The heathen raged, the kingdoms were moved: he uttered his voice, the earth melted.

psalms 97:5 The hills melted like wax at the presence of the LORD, at the presence of the Lord of the whole earth.

Isaiah 66:22 - For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.

[DannyTN]

I see the way you are reading that, but I'm not sure it's a correct interpretation. The following are from RaptureReady.com

The Day of the Lord Argument

A number people have attempted to refute the pre-trib rapture by trying to associate the "Day of the Lord" with a catching-up of believers at the end of the tribulation. They base their rapture views solely on the idea that the "Day of the Lord" and the rapture are either synonymous or somehow linked together.

The Achilles heel of their argument has to be the notion that the "Day of the Lord" and various other "days" of an end-time context refers to a 24 hour period that occurs at or near the end of the tribulation. Probably the most commonly cited verse is 1 Thessalonians 5:2 where Paul tells us the "Day of the Lord" will come "as a thief in the night."

I've read countless articles that describe the "Day of the Lord" as Christ's advent at Armageddon. These articles go on to say that, because Paul also tells us the Lord will come "as a thief," we have a direct link to the same description that is applied to noted rapture verses.

It's rather obvious that those trying to rely on the "Day of the Lord" never bothered to validate the meaning of this particular day. I've checked a number of commentaries on the "Day of the Lord" and many of them define this as being an all-encompassing period that begins with the Great Tribulation. Let's examine some verses that clearly indicate that the term "day" is used to represent a broader time period.

II Peter 3:10-13
The "Day of the Lord" Peter spoke of in second Peter, cannot be a one day event because it mentions the destruction of the earth by fire and its renovation. Rev 21:11 tells us the earth will not be renewed until after Christ's 1000 year reign.

Joel 2:11-20
The "Day of the Lord" Joel describes, includes the defeat of the northern army. Ezk. 38 and 39 is parallel passage. Most scholars would time the destruction of the Gog army as occurring before in the first half of the tribulation.

John 12:48
In the book of John, Jesus uses the term "last day" to indicate when the lost would be judged. Rev 20 makes it clear that the unsaved will not be judged until after the millennium--yet another 1000 year gap.

Hebrews 10:25
One of the best indications that most of the various “day” references are citing a general time period can be found in Hebrews 10:25: "Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching."

Surely, Paul would not be warning us to watch for a day that would be coming at the end of the tribulation. That type of logic would be like warning children, as they cross the road, to watch out for tail lights.

Confusion over Confusion: 2 Thes 2:1-6

Because Paul, in 2 Thessalonians, said the Antichrist would be revealed before the Day of the Christ, post and pre-wrath adherents frequently try to cite this passage as one that refutes the pre-trib rapture.

To quell the Thessalonian's misunderstanding that they had somehow entered the tribulation, Paul told them the Antichrist must first be revealed. By telling them they had no reason to panic, Paul is clearly disputing the idea that the Thessalonians could someday find themselves facing the tribulation hour.

I'm constantly being irked by Post-trib and pre-wrath folks' consistent, or better yet deliberate, failure to accept the simple fact that the pre-trib doctrine calls for a rapture and a second coming. Because they only glean the prophetic word for one event--the second coming--they're unable to recognize pre-trib rapture passages.

Of course, when you fuse the two advents together, you end up with verses that appear to contradict each other: 1 Thessalonians 5:9, "For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ," and Revelation 13:7, "And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations."

[unlearner]

I am well aware of the ideas that you shared from RaptureReady.com . As I said before, I respectfully disagree. There are those who I greatly respect who believe in a pre-tribulational rapture, but I think if you can set aside the teachings of man and look only at scripture, the arguments for it quickly evaporate. The author you referenced is very confused as to what the "Day of the Lord" is.

He says "The Achilles heel of their argument has to be the notion that the 'Day of the Lord' and various other 'days' of an end-time context refers to a 24 hour period that occurs at or near the end of the tribulation."

If this is the argument's Achilles heel then my point has been missed. I NEVER said the "Day of the Lord" is a twenty-four hour day.

He also said, "It's rather obvious that those trying to rely on the 'Day of the Lord' never bothered to validate the meaning of this particular day. I've checked a number of commentaries on the 'Day of the Lord' and many of them define this as being an all-encompassing period that begins with the Great Tribulation."

This is a very foolish position. I have studied every reference regarding the "Day of the Lord" and similar terms. The reason I call this position foolish is that the author proceeds to cite commentaries after accusing others of not studying. It would be wise to at least begin with scripture. Certainly commentaries are useful, but they do not replace the Word of God.

The reason the commentaries define the "Day of the Lord" this way is because they are pre-tribulational. This is circular reasoning. It is also reading into scripture what the author wants to find.

The "Day of the Lord" is the time period during the end of Daniel's seventieth week in which God pours out His wrath upon the world. For unbelievers it is a "day of wrath" (Romans 2:5). For believers, it is a day of salvation and the "Day of Christ" (2 Thessalonians 2:2). For human government it is the he "Day of God" (2 Peter 3:10-12). In Daniel and Matthew 24, it is called "the end" of the world.

The day of the Lord is a specific time in scripture that is not the same as Daniel's seventieth week or the great tribulation in particular. The day of the Lord follows the great tribulation (Matthew 24:29, Joel 2:31). It comes AFTER the Antichrist is revealed at the abomination of desolation (2 Thessalonians 2:2-4, Matthew 24:15&21, Daniel 9:27).

The author further cites "Confusion over Confusion: 2 Thes 2:1-6". Unfortunately, the confusion is his. By failing to recognize that the day of the Lord comes after the revealing of Antichrist (whose revealing occurs in the middle of Daniel's seventieth week), the author misses the connection to the return of the Lord. By further failing to identify who and what restrains this revealing of Antichrist, the author misses the second clue needed to understand the correct order of events.

He continues " His [the Holy Spirit's] removal at the rapture will only be a reversal or ending of the Pentecostal outpouring."

This contradicts what God said about the outpouring of His Spirit. What happened at Pentecost is the same type of outpouring that will exist DURING the day of the Lord (Joel 2:28-29, Acts 2:16-21). Further, God has restrained the working of Satan and the spirit of Antichrist since before the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (Genesis 11:6). The Thessalonians knew what and who restrained the revealing of Antichrist, but the author you cited does not.

While I appreciate you using scripture references, it would be more profitable if they were your own. I am not interested in debating a third party who is not present. I do not intend to beat you over the head with a teaching you disagree with either. If you are unable to accept it, that is OK. I do not mean to be argumentative, only helpful. If this doesn't help you, then don't worry about it. The Lord will help us be ready and understand what He wants us to do in His own time.

Be patient to the coming of the Lord. (We will need it according to James 5:7.)

[Dahoser]

This is a variation of the NPR hit piece, Ronald Reagan and the Prophecy of Armageddon. I guess the RATS really do believe in recycling because they sure keep reusing that crap.

[Just mythoughts]

"This teaching is more difficult to receive when you have been taught something different. It remains, however, the plain teaching of scripture. If you are able to set aside extra-biblical teaching and focus only on what the Bible says, you will be able to receive it.

And I do not mean to be condescending to those who disagree. I have great respect for many people who do not agree. If you are able to receive it though, you will find that this reconciles many conflicts that other teachings cannot overcome."

Oh it is ok, I have been given the wrath of many who believe in the 'rapture', however, I continue to plant seeds not of "extra-biblical teaching" but from scripture.

Somehow in what the 'rapturites' believe there are many scriptures left out, reshaped or ignored.

One in particular is what Paul tells us about 'flesh' bodies in ICorinthians 15:1-58 Specifically v 51 and 52 these two verses do not fit unless altered with the rapture theory.

Do you have any idea what the 'strong delusion' is IIThessalonians 2:9-17. What is the 'strong delusion' the Heavenly Father sends to those that they should believe a lie.

Pretty strong medicine if you ask me.

[Just mythoughts]

"That is true regarding the world. It is not correct regarding the church. Yes, the day of the Lord will not overtake us as a thief. But Jesus also clearly taught that it is not for us to know the day or hour of His return in advance. (Matthew 24:36-37; 25:13)"

IN ADVANCE,however in advance of what. What are the seal and trumps given to us for, do they not set for specific benchmarks for use to watch for. Now we are told that the first Jesus on the scene is the fake and the real Christ returns at the 7th trump and nowhere are we instructed a coming/return outside of that.

So if you don't know and believe that the first Jesus on the scene is none other than the devil, being allowed to play Jesus, the return of the REAL Christ would catch all but the elect unaware and worshiping the 'beast', the serpent, the accuser, the devil.

DO YOU KNOW WHO THE instead of christ is, Christ said I have foretold you all things?

For the doctrine of rapture to stand one must ignore many other scriptures.