Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Rapture Theory: It's Surprising Origin
askelm.com ^ | March 30, 2003 | Ernest L. Martin

Posted on 05/31/2004 12:24:47 PM PDT by Destro

The Rapture Theory: It's Surprising Origin

February 1, 1976

Expanded Internet Edition - Posted March 30, 2003

Almost all Christians are interested in prophecy. This is especially so if the prophecies show what will happen to Christians themselves. There is nothing wrong in desiring such personal knowledge. Even our Lord gave a considerable amount of teaching about the circumstances to befall His people at the end of the age (Matthew 24:22-25). All of us share a common concern in wanting to know about the participants, the chronology, and the geography of those prophecies. To comprehend the full knowledge of them it is obvious that all relevant statements of our Lord and His apostles must be properly interpreted and placed into a coherent order. Many Christians have attempted to do this. As a consequence, the doctrine of the Rapture has arisen. So important has it become to many that the teaching is now sanctioned as the prime revelation from God to show what will happen Lo members of His church just before and during the second coming of Christ. Some even look on it as the heart and core of present Christian expectations! Because of this, it will pay us to review what the doctrine is all about.

The word "Rapture" is not found in the Bible. There is also no single word used by the biblical authors to describe the prophetic factors which comprise the doctrine. Its formulation has come about by means of induction. Certain biblical passages concerning the second coming (and the role that Christians will play in that event) have been inductively blended together to establish the teaching. The modern expression "Rapture" was then invented to explain the overall teaching and the term suits the subject well. The basic tenets of the doctrine are uninvolved. Simply put, it purports that Christ will come back to this earth in two phases. He will first return invisibly to rapture His church away from this world so that they might escape (or partially escape the prophetical tribulation to occur near the end of the age, then later Christ will return in a visible advent to dispense His wrath on the world's nations. This is the general teaching.

Many details concerning these prime factors, however, are hotly debated. There is especially much argument over the chronological features associated with it. Some think the time lapse between the two phases will be 3 1/2 years, others say 7 years. Some feel that the Rapture of the church occurs before the Tribulation, others about mid-way through, Many suggest that the church will be taken to heaven for protection, but a few have proposed a geographical area on this earth. There are those who feel that only part of the church will escape, while others say all will he rescued, These variations, along with others, have multiplied the interpretations to such an extent that many diverse secondary opinions exist among those holding the belief. But all are unanimous on one point: the central theme of the Rapture shows that Christ will return to earth in two phases.

The Newness of the Doctrine

It may come as a surprise to many Christians, but the doctrine of the Rapture is not mentioned in any Christian writings, of which we have knowledge, until after the year 1830 A.D. Whether the early writers were Greek or Latin, Armenian or Coptic, Syrian or Ethiopian, English or German, orthodox or heretic, no one mentioned a syllable about it. Of course, those who feel the origin of the teaching is in the Bible would say that it only ceased being taught (for some unknown reason) at the close of the apostolic age only to reappear in 1830 A.D. But if the doctrine were so clearly stated in Scripture, it seems incredible that no one should have referred to it before the 19th century. This does not necessarily show that the teaching is wrong, but it does mean that thousands of eminent scholars who lived over a span of seventeen centuries (including some of the most astute of the "Christian Fathers" and those of the Reformation and post-Reformation periods) must be considered as prophetic dunces for not having understood so fundamental a teaching. We are not denigrating the doctrine in mentioning these historical facts. That is not our intention. But we do feel that the Foundation should show the historical problems associated with the teaching. This lapse of seventeen centuries when no one mentioned anything about it must be a serious obstacle to its reliability.

Its Beginning

The result of a careful investigation into the origin of the Rapture has been recently published. The book is an excellent one which deserves to be read by all people interested in the subject. Its title: "The Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin" by Dave MacPherson. He catalogs a great deal of historical material which answers the doctrine's mysterious derivation. We wish to review the results of his research. In the middle 1820's a religious environment began to be established among a few Christians in London. England which proved to be the catalyst around which the doctrine of the Rapture emerged. Expectations of the soon coming of our Lord were being voiced, This was no new thing, but what, was unusual was the teaching by a Presbyterian minister named Edward Irving that there had to be a restoration of the spiritual gifts mentioned in I Corinthians 12-14 just before Christ's second coming. To Irving, the time had come for those spiritual manifestations to occur. Among the expected gifts was the renewal of speaking in tongues and of spirit-motivated prophetic utterances. Irving began to propagate his beliefs. His oratorical skills and enthusiasm caused his congregation in London to grow. Then a number of people began to experience the "gifts." Once this happened opposition from the organized churches set in. It resulted in Irving's dismissal from the Presbyterian church in 1832. His group then established themselves as the Catholic Apostolic Church and continued the teachings of Irving.

These events were the beginnings of what some call present day Pentecostalism. Indeed Irving has been called by some church historians "the father of modern Pentecostalism." What does all this have to do with the origin of the Rapture doctrine? Very much indeed. Let us look at what happened in the year 1830 -- two years before Irving's dismissal from the Presbyterian church. In that year a revival of the "gifts" began to be manifested among a few people living in the lowlands of Scotland. They experienced what they called the outpouring of the Spirit. It was accompanied with speaking in "tongues" and other charismatic phenomena. Irving had been preaching these things must occur, and now they were.

On one particular evening. the power of the Holy Spirit was said to have rested on a Miss Margaret .Macdonald while she was in a state of illness at home. She was dangerously sick and thought she was dying. In spite of this (or perhaps because she is supposed to have come under "power" of the spirit for several successive hours during which she experienced the manifestations of "mingled prophecy and vision." The message she received during this prophetic vision convinced her that Christ was going to appear in two stages at His second coming -- and not one! The emanation revealed that Christ would first come in glory to them that look for Him and again in a final stage when every eye would see Him. It was this visionary experience of Miss Macdonald which represents the prime source of the modern Rapture doctrine as the historical evidence compiled by Mr. MacPherson abundantly shows.

The Influence of John Darby

Many people have thought that John Darby, the founder of the Plymouth Brethren, was the originator of the Rapture doctrine. This is not the case. Darby was a brilliant theologian with outstanding scholarly abilities. Even those who have disagreed with his teachings admit that he, and many associated with him, helped to cause a revival in biblical learning throughout the evangelical world (which even has been perpetuated down to our own present day). All who love biblical research ought to be thankful for what Darby and especially his associates accomplished for biblical scholarship. They particularly helped pave the way for the renewal of modern lexical studies of the languages of the Bible. The doctrine of "dispensationalism" was also a teaching they brought to the attention of the Protestant world.

It had long been thought by many Christians that the Rapture doctrine originated with ,John Darby. It is now known that this is not true. Darby only popularized it. Scofield and others who took over Darby's mantle later helped to make it respectable, Today, many of those in the evangelical sphere of Christianity are so certain of its veracity that it is accepted as the absolute truth of God. The fact is, however, John Darby received the knowledge of the doctrine from someone else. The source was the Margaret Macdonald mentioned above.

The studies of Mr. MacPherson show that her sickness during which she received her visions and revelations occurred sometime between February 1 and April 14, 1830. And by late spring and early summer of 1830, her belief in the two phases of Christ's coming was being mentioned in praise and prayer meetings in several towns of western Scotland. In these meetings some people were speaking in "tongues" and other charismatic occurrences were in evidence. These extraordinary and strange events in western Scotland so attracted John Darby that he made a trip to the area to witness himself what was going on. Though he did not approve of the ecstatic episodes that he witnessed. it is nonetheless significant that Darby, after returning from Scotland, began to teach that Christ's second coming would occur in two phases. MacPherson shows good evidence that Darby had even visited Miss Macdonald in her home. There can hardly he any doubt that the visions of Miss Macdonald are the source of the modern doctrine.

Visions and Dreams

While it is possible that visionary revelations can come from God, it is always prudent to be cautious in such matters. Near the same time that Miss Macdonald was receiving her visions, Joseph Smith in America was experiencing his apparitions which brought Mormon doctrines to the world. John Wilson also had his dreams which were the spark that started the false teaching of British realism. Not long afterwards Ellen G. White received her visions that resulted in many Seventh Day Adventist teachings. And remarkably, all these individuals received revelations of doctrines which were much at variance with one another. Such incidents bring to mind the warning that God gave to Moses.

"If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or wonder, and the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spoke unto thee, saying, let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the Lord proveth you, to know whether ye love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul" (Deuteronomy 13: 1-3).

The teachings of visionaries also recall to mind what the apostle John tells Christians.

"Beloved. believe not every spirit. but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world" (I John 4:1).

And though some point to the prophecy of Daniel that "knowledge shall be increased" (Daniel 12:4) a proof that the revival of doctrinal truths will occur at the end of the age, this is not what Daniel meant. If one reads the prophet carefully. he will find that Daniel is speaking about the knowledge of his prophecies which will be increased. not the revival of general doctrines. In the original text of Daniel the definite article occurs before the word "knowledge." Daniel actually said "THE knowledge will be increased" and the text shows he means "the knowledge of his prophecies." Daniel is in no way speaking about renewing of doctrines at the time of the end. A further admonition is necessary concerning the origins of teachings which might happen near our own time. It is by the apostle Paul.

"Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils" (I Timothy 4:1 ).

These warnings from God's word are given as a reminder that we ought to exercise caution in accepting the truthfulness of visionary revelations especially those that happen near the end of the age and are contradictory to themselves or the Bible.

Conclusion

While there are many suspicious factors conferred with the origin of the Rapture, it could be admitted that the doctrine may reflect a teaching found in the Bible. At least, many feel so. John Darby no doubt thought there was something to it because after his trip to Scotland he changed his mind from believing in a single stage coming and adopted the two stage doctrine which became known as the Rapture. Darby was certainly not a visionary and his teachings whether right or wrong) are almost always based on scriptural revelation. It was Darby who popularized the Rapture with the scriptural arguments which seem so convincing to some. It could be that the teaching is basically true, but we at the Foundation for Biblical Research in Pasadena have felt incumbent to show our readers the unbiblical source of the doctrine. Too many people have for gotten that it was Miss Macdonald's visions which introduced the doctrine to the world.

In our next Exposition in this series we to show the biblical evidences which tend to support the doctrine. In the one to follow. we'll show those which seemingly speak against it. Our desire to place into your hands the necessary evidence for you to make up your own minds on the In closing, we wish to state one word that no one can gainsay. Whether one believes in the rapture or not, it has nothing to do with the assured salvation that all Christians have in Christ. That is a fact!

Ernest L. Martin


TOPICS: Charismatic Christian; Current Events; Evangelical Christian; General Discusssion; History; Mainline Protestant; Other Christian; Theology
KEYWORDS: scatology; therapture
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 161 next last
To: Destro
IMHO, The Rapture is false doctrine. An error that arises from the fallacy of sola scriptura - i.e. anyone can read into Biblical passages anything they like.

Just to point out the obvious; that this article is against the secret pre-tribulation rapture theory of dispensationalism.

Not all folks who believe accept the general idea of a "rapture" ala 1 Thess 4, accept the Darby/Scofield inventions. The biblical view is that the rapture and second coming are the same event. Different terms are used to highlight different subjects. In the case of teh "second coming" the subject is Christ. In the case of the "rapture" the subject is the saints.

61 posted on 06/01/2004 6:07:28 AM PDT by topcat54
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
But Israel, as promised by God, has been restored.

There is no objective evidence to suggest that the modern, secular state of Israel is a legitimate expression of biblical Israel.

This is a fantasy invented by dispensational prophecy preacher to sell books to the unwashed.

62 posted on 06/01/2004 6:13:15 AM PDT by topcat54
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: topcat54
There is no objective evidence to suggest that the modern, secular state of Israel is a legitimate expression of biblical Israel.

Denial is not just a river in Egypt.

63 posted on 06/01/2004 6:16:04 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (Free the GRPL 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD
Constantinople (2nd Council) - The Teaching upon the Holy Spirit
The work of Nicaea was taken up by the second Ecumenical Council, held at Constantinople in 381. This council expanded and adapted the Nicene Creed, developing in particular the teaching upon the Holy Spirit, whom it affirmed to be God even as the Father and Son are God: 'who proceeds from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and together glorified'. The council also altered the provisions of the Sixth Canon of Nicaea. The position of Constantinople, now the capital of the Empire, could no longer be ignored, and it was assigned the second place, after Rome and above Alexandria. 'The Bishop of Constantinople shall have the prerogatives of honour after the Bishop of Rome, because Constantinople is New Rome' (Canon III).

64 posted on 06/01/2004 6:51:40 AM PDT by FormerLib (It's the 99% of Mohammedans that make the other 1% look bad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Destro

No one denies that the dead in Christ rise first.

Simply one of the points in the premil/amil debate.


65 posted on 06/01/2004 7:04:20 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Conservative til I die

Exactly...the Church existed for 400 years before the "Bible" was put together. Scripture was created for the CHURCH.....not the other way around!


66 posted on 06/01/2004 7:23:38 AM PDT by TexConfederate1861
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: kosta50

Exactly...

The filioque was HERESY in 1054, and it is STILL HERESY!


67 posted on 06/01/2004 7:25:40 AM PDT by TexConfederate1861
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: drstevej

what about SOSA SCRIPTURA?

the gospel according to sammy sosa


68 posted on 06/01/2004 7:33:35 AM PDT by captaindude2 (Soon to be banned again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Destro

http://www.lamblion.com/prophecy/key/Key-06.php

The Rapture of the Church

What is it and when will it take place?

by Dr. David R. Reagan




The Rapture is a glorious event which God has pro­mised to the Church. The promise is that someday very soon, at the blow­ing of a trumpet and the shout of an archangel, Jesus will appear in the sky and take up His Church, living and dead, to Heaven.

The Term
The term, Rapture, comes from a Latin word that means to catch up, to snatch away, or to take out. It is a Biblical word that comes right out of the Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible. The word is found in 1 Thessalonians 4:17. In the New American Standard Ver­sion, the English phrase, “caught up,” is used. The same phrase is used in the King James and New International Versions.

A Promise to the Church
The concept of the Rapture was not revealed to the Old Testament prophets because it is a promise to the New Testament Church and not to the saints of God who lived before the estab­lishment of the Church.

The saints of Old Testament times will be resurrected at the end of the Tribulation and not at the time of the Rapture of the Church. Daniel reveals this fact in Daniel 12:1-2 where he says that the saints of that age will be resurrected at the end of the “time of distress.”

Biblical References
The first clear mention of the Rapture in Scripture is found in the words of Jesus recorded in John 14:1-4. Jesus said, “I will come again, and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also.”

The most detailed revelation of the actual events related to the Rapture is given by Paul in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18. He says that when Jesus appears, the dead in Christ (Church age saints) will be resurrected and caught up first. Then, those of us who are alive in Christ will be translated “to meet the Lord in the air.” Paul then exhorts us to “comfort one another with these words.”

Paul mentions the Rapture again in 1 Corinthians 15 - his famous chapter on the resurrection of the dead:

“Behold, I tell you a mystery; we shall not all sleep, but we shall be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet.” (verses 51 and 52)

Paul’s reference here to being changed is an allusion to the fact that the saints will receive glorified bodies that will be perfected, imperishable and immortal (1 Cor. 15:42-44, and 50-55).

The Timing
The most controversial aspect of the Rapture is its timing. Some place it at the end of the Tribulation, making it one and the same event as the Second Coming. Others place it in the middle of the Tribulation. Still others believe that it will occur at the beginning of the Tribulation.

The reason for these differing viewpoints is that the exact time of the Rapture is not precisely revealed in scripture. It is only inferred. There is, therefore, room for honest differences of opinion, and lines of fellowship should certainly not be drawn over differences regarding this point, even though it is an important point.

Post-Tribulation Rapture
Those who place the timing at the end of the Tribulation usually base their argument on two parables in Mat­thew 13 and on the Lord’s Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24.

In Matthew 24 the Lord portrays His gathering of the saints as an event that will take place “immediately after the tribulation of those days” (Matt. 24:29). This certainly sounds like a post-Tribulation Rapture. But it must be kept in mind that the book of Matthew was written to the Jews, and therefore the recording of Jesus’ speech by Matthew has a distinctively Jewish flavor to it as compared to Luke’s record of the same speech.

Note, for example, Matthew’s references to Judea and to Jewish law regarding travel on the Sabbath (Matt. 24:15-20). These are omitted in Luke’s account. Instead, Luke speaks of the saints looking up for deliverance “to escape all these things” when the end time signs “begin to take place” (Luke 21:28 and 36). The saints in Matthew are instructed to flee from Judea and hide. The saints in Luke are told to look up for deliverance.

It appears, therefore, that Matthew and Luke are speak­ing of two different sets of saints. The saints in Matthew’s account are most likely Jews who receive Jesus as their Messiah during the Tribulation. The saints in Luke are those who receive Christ be­fore the Tribulation begins. Most of those who accept the Lord during the Tribula­tion will be martyred (Rev. 7:9-14). Those who live to the end will be gathered by the angels of the Lord (Matt. 24:31).

The parable of the wheat and tares (Matt. 13:24-30) and the parable of the dragnet (Matt. 13:47-50) can be explained in the same way. They refer to a separation of saints and sinners that will take place at the end of the Tribulation. The saints are those who receive Jesus as their Savior during the Tribulation (Gentile and Jew) and who live to the end of that awful period.

Mid-Tribulation Rapture
There are variations of the mid-Tribulation Rapture concept. The most common is that the Church will be taken out in the exact middle of the Tribulation, at the point in time when the Antichrist is revealed.

This concept is based upon a statement in 1 Corinthians 15:52 which says that the Rapture will occur at the blowing of “the last trumpet.” This trumpet is then identified with the seventh trumpet of the trumpet judgments in the book of Revelation. Since the blowing of the seventh trumpet is recorded in Revelation 11, the mid-point of the Tribulation, the conclusion is that the Rapture must occur in the middle of the Tribulation.

But there are two problems with this interpretation. The first is that the last trumpet of 1 Corinthians 15 is blown for believers whereas the seven trumpets of Revelation 8, 9 and 11 are sounded for unbelievers. The Revelation trumpets have no relevance for the Church. The last trumpet of 1 Corinthians 15 is a trumpet for the righteous. The last trumpet for the unrighteous is the one described in Revelation 11.

Another problem with this interpretation is that the passage in Revelation 11 that portrays the sounding of the seventh trumpet is a “flash forward” to the end of the Tribulation. Flash forwards are very common in the book of Revelation. They occur after something terrible is described in order to assure the reader that everything is going to turn out all right when Jesus returns at the end of the Tribulation.

Thus, the eighth and ninth chapters of Revelation, which describe the horrors of the trumpet judgments, are followed immediately by a flash forward in chapter 10 that pictures the return of Jesus in victory at the end of the Tribulation. The mid-Tribulation action resumes in chapter 11 with a description of the killing of the two great prophets of God by the Antichrist. Then, to offset that terrible event, we are presented with another flash forward, beginning with verse 15. The seventh trum­pet is sounded and we find ourselves pro­pelled forward to the end of the Tribulation when “the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord.”

The point is that the seventh trumpet of Revelation relates to the end of the Tribulation and not the middle. It is therefore no basis for an argument in behalf of a mid-Tribulation Rapture.

Pre-Wrath Rapture
The cornerstone of this concept is that the terrifying events during the first half of the Tribulation are due to the wrath of Man and Satan, and not to God. Since the Church is only promised protection from the wrath of God, the Rapture will not occur until near the end of the Tribulation when God will pour out His wrath on the world.

This concept raises a serious theological problem because it questions the sovereignty of God. It assumes that Man and Satan can act apart from God’s will, when the fact of the matter is that neither can do anything God is not willing to permit. The Bible often portrays God carrying out His will through evil persons or nations. One of the classic examples is when He allowed the evil nation of Babylon to discipline Israel by destroying Jerusalem and the Temple and by carrying the surviving Jews away into captivity. It was an action that prompted the prophet Habakkuk to ask why God would punish those who are evil with those who are more evil (Habakkuk 1:13).

Any carnage wrought by Man or Satan during the Tribulation will still constitute the wrath of God. They will simply be His instruments. The Bible says God sits in the heavens and laughs over the plots and deeds of evil men, not because He does not care, but because He has everything under control (Psalm 2:1-6). The point is that He has the wisdom and power to orchestrate all evil to the triumph of His will in history. That’s why the psalmist wrote that “the wrath of man shall praise You [God]” (Psalm 76:10).

I think it is also important to note that when God pours out His wrath, He does not always do so directly. One of His most common ways is to simply back away from the nation or person and lower the hedge of protection around them. This is clearly spelled out in Romans 1:18-32. That passage says that when people rebel against God to the point that they begin to worship the creation rather than the Creator, God “gives them over” to the evil in their hearts. In other words, He just steps back and lets evil multiply. The passage further states that if they still refuse to repent, He steps back again and “gives them over to degrading passions.” And if they persist in their rebellion and sin, He finally “gives them over to a depraved mind” at which point the society destroys itself. Such destruction could be viewed as the wrath of Man, but it is really the wrath of God working through Man.

There is another serious problem with the pre-wrath Rapture concept. It relates to the fact that all the wrath of Revelation is specifically portrayed as the wrath of God. Where do the seal judgments originate? The answer is from the throne of God as Jesus opens each seal of the scroll that was in the Father’s right hand (Revelation 6:1). And where do the trumpet judgments originate? The same place — from the throne of God (Revelation 8:2). When we arrive at the bowl judgments in Revelation 15:1, we are told that with them, “the wrath of God is finished.”

Another problem with the pre-wrath concept is that it does violence to the chronological order of Revelation. The seal judgments are viewed as the wrath of Man and Satan, occurring during the first half of the Tribulation. The trumpet and bowl judgments are considered to be the wrath of God.

They are lumped together at the end of the Tribulation. There is no justification for putting the trumpet judgments at the end of the Tribulation. They are clearly placed in the first half of the Tribulation in the chronological layout of the book of Revelation.

One final problem with the pre-wrath concept of the Rapture is that it disputes the fact that there is no purpose for the Church being in the Tribulation. The Tribulation is the 70th week of Daniel, a time devoted to God accomplishing His purposes among the Jewish people, not the Church.

The Pre-Tribulation Rapture
I believe the best inference of Scripture is that the Rapture will occur at the beginning of the Tribulation. The most important reason I believe this has to do with the issue of imminence. Over and over in Scripture we are told to watch for the appearing of the Lord. We are told “to be ready” (Matt. 24:44), “to be on the alert” (Matt. 24:42), “to be dressed in readiness” (Luke 12:35), and to “keep your lamps alight” (Luke 12:35). The clear force of these persistent warnings is that Jesus can appear at any moment.

Only the pre-Tribulation concept of the Rapture allows for the imminence of the Lord’s appearing for His Church. When the Rapture is placed at any other point in time, the imminence of the Lord’s appearing is destroyed because other prophetic events must happen first.

For example, if the Rapture is going to occur in mid-Tribulation, then why should I live looking for the Lord’s appear­ing at any moment? I would be looking instead for an Israeli peace treaty, the rebuilding of the Temple, and the revelation of the Antichrist. Then and only then could the Lord appear.

Focus
This raises the issue of what we are to be looking for. Nowhere are believers told to watch for the appearance of the Antichrist. On the contrary, we are told to watch for Jesus Christ. In Titus 2:13 Paul says we are to live “looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus.” Likewise, Peter urges us to “fix our hope completely on the grace to be brought to us at the revelation of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 1:13). John completes the apostolic chorus by similarly urging us to “fix our hope on Him” at His appearing (1 John 3:2-3).

Only Matthew speaks of watching for the Antichrist (Matt. 24:15), but he is speaking to the Jews living in Israel in the middle of the Tribulation when the Antichrist desecrates the rebuilt Temple.

Wrath
Another argument in behalf of a pre-Tribulation Rapture has to do with the promises of God to protect the Church from His wrath. As has already been demonstrated, the book of Revelation shows that the wrath of God will be poured out during the entire period of the Tribulation.

The Word promises over and over that the Church will be delivered from God’s wrath. Romans 5:9 says that “we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him [Jesus].” 1 Thessalonians 1:10 states that we are waiting “for His Son from heaven . . . who will deliver us from the wrath to come.” The promise is repeated in 1 Thessalonians 5:9 - “God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Deliverance
Some argue that God could supernaturally protect the Church during the Tribulation. Yes, He could. In fact, He promises to do just that for the 144,000 Jews who will be sealed as bond-servants at the beginning of the Tribulation (Rev. 7:1-8).

But God’s promise to the Church during the Tribulation is not one of protection but one of deliverance. Jesus said we would “escape” the horrors of the Tribulation (Luke 21:3­6). Paul says Jesus is coming to “deliver” us from God’s wrath (1 Thess. 1:10).

Symbolism
There are several prophetic types that seem to affirm the concept of deliverance from Tribulation. Take Enoch for example. He was a prophet to the Gen­tiles who was raptured out of the world before God poured out His wrath in the great flood of Noah’s time. Enoch ap­pears to be a type of the Gentile Church that will be taken out of the world before God pours out His wrath again. If so, then Noah and his family are a type of the Jewish rem­nant that will be protected through the Tribulation.

Another Old Testament symbolic type which points toward a pre-Tribulation Rapture is the experience of Lot and his family. They were delivered out of Sodom and Gomorrah before those cities were destroyed.

The Apostle Peter alludes to both of these examples in his second epistle. He states that if God spared Noah and Lot, then He surely “knows how to rescue the godly from trial and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment” (2 Peter 4-9).

Another beautiful prophetic type is to be found in the Jewish wedding traditions of Jesus’s time. After the betrothal, the groom would return to his father’s house to prepare a wedding chamber for his bride. He would return for his bride at an unexpected moment, so the bride had to be ready constantly. When he returned, he would take his bride back to his father’s house to the chamber he had prepared. He and his bride would then be sealed in the chamber for seven days. When they emerged, a great wed­ding feast would be celebrated.

Likewise, Jesus has returned to Heaven to prepare a place for His bride, the Church. When He returns for His bride, He will take her to His Father’s heavenly home. There He will remain with His bride for seven years (the duration of the Tribulation). The period will end with “the marriage supper of the Lamb” described in Revela­tion 19. Thus the seven days in the wedding cham­ber point prophetically to the seven years that Jesus and His bride will remain in Heaven during the Tribulation.

Revelation
Speaking of Revelation, the structure of that book also implies a pre-Tribulation Rapture in a sym­bolic sense. The first three chapters focus on the Church. Chapter 4 begins with the door of Heaven opening and John being raptured from the isle of Patmos to the throne of God in Heaven. The Church is not mentioned thereafter until Revelation 19:7-9 when it is portrayed as the “bride of Christ” in Heaven with Jesus celebrating the “marriage supper of the Lamb.” At Revelation 19:11 the door of Heaven opens again, and Jesus emerges riding a white horse on His way to earth, followed by His Church (Rev. 19:14).

The rapture of the Apostle John in Revelation 4 appears to be a symbolic type of the Rapture of the Church. Note that it is initiated by the cry of a voice that sounds like the blowing of a trumpet (Rev. 4:1). Since the Tribulation does not begin until Revelation 6, the rapture of John in Revelation 4 appears to be a symbolic type that points to a pre-Tribulation Rapture of the Church.

Some counter this argument by pointing out that although the Church is not mentioned in Revelation during that book’s description of the Tribulation, there is constant men­tion of “saints” (for ex­ample, Rev. 13:7). But that term is not used in the Bible exclusively to refer to members of the Church. Daniel uses it to refer to Old Testament believers who lived long before the Church was established (Dan. 7:18). The saints referred to in the book of Revelation are most likely those people who will be saved during the Tribulation, after the Church has been taken out of the world.

Paul’s Assurance
An interesting argument in behalf of the pre-Tribulation timing of the Rapture can be found in 2 Thessalonians. The church at Thessalonica was in a turmoil because someone had written them a letter under Paul’s name stating that they had missed the “gathering to the Lord” and were, in fact, living in “the day of the Lord” (2 Thess. 2:1-2).

Paul attempted to calm them down by reminding them of his teaching that the day of the Lord would not come until after the Antichrist is revealed. He then stated that the Antichrist would not be revealed until a restraining force “is taken out of the way” (2 Thess. 2:3-7).

There has been much speculation as to the identify of this restraining force that Paul refers to. Some have identified it as the Holy Spirit. But it cannot be the Holy Spirit because there will be people saved during the Tribulation, and no one can be saved apart from the testimony of the Spirit (John 16:8-11 and 1 John 5:7).

Others have identified the restrainer as human government. It is true that government was ordained by God to restrain evil (Romans 13:1-4). But the governments of the world are in rebellion against God and His Son (Psalm 2), and they are therefore a contributor to the evil that characterizes the world. Furthermore, the Tribulation will not be characterized by a lack of government. Rather, it will feature the first true worldwide government (Rev. 13:7).

In my opinion that leaves only one other candidate for Paul’s restrainer - and that is the Church. It is the Church that serves as the primary restrainer of evil in the world today as it proclaims the Gospel and stands for righteousness. When the Church fails in this mission, evil multiplies, as Paul graphically points out in 2 Timothy 3:1-5. Paul says that society in the end times will be characterized by chaos and despair because “men will hold to a form of religion but will deny its power.” When the Church is removed from the world, all hell will literally break loose.

Escapism?
The pre-Tribulation concept of the Rapture has often been condemned as “escapism.” I think this criticism is unjustified. The Bible itself says that Christians are to “comfort one another” with the thought of the Rapture (1 Thess. 4:18). Is it a comfort to think of the Rapture occurring at the end of the world’s worst period of war instead of at the beginning?

Regardless of when the Rapture actually occurs, we need to keep in mind that the Bible teaches that societal conditions are going to grow increasingly worse the closer we get to the Lord’s return. That means Christians will suffer tribulation whether or not they go into the Great Tribulation. And that means all of us had better be preparing our­selves for unprecedented suffering and spiritual warfare.

If you are a Christian, you can do that on a daily basis by putting on “the full armor of God” (Eph. 6:13), praying at all times in the Spirit that you will be able to stand firm against the attacks of Satan (Eph. 6:14-18).

If you are not a Christian, your only hope is to reach out in faith and receive the free gift of God’s salvation which He has provided through His Son, Jesus (John 3:16).


69 posted on 06/01/2004 7:43:39 AM PDT by fishtank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Quix
"I still believe that it is highly unlikely for an all knowing, almighty God to make an eternal life or death issue out of something He left ambiguous in His Word. Just doesn't fit His nature, His character."

To assert that God is ambiguous, serves to weaken your argument. If, indeed, Scripture is ambiguous, then we need some cryteria to determine which subjects are ambiguous and which are not. Such cryteria should not be ambiguous.

I John 2:27

70 posted on 06/01/2004 7:47:16 AM PDT by Seven_0 (It is the character of theWord of God to leave something to be the reward for diligence-FW Grant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD
Some posted on not accepting certain traditions (like you who posted against indugents and purgatory).

The word is "indulgence." FYI.

In fact as posted on another thread here, the Nicene Creed, something the Eastern Orthodox and the Catholic Church has some contentions about, was passed by a majority vote as early as 350+AD against the wishes of the Eastern Orthodox.

You need to re-read your history. Both East and West approved of the Nicene Creed, even the Nicene-Constantinoplian edition. It is only later that the Filioque becomes an issue.

SD

71 posted on 06/01/2004 8:04:39 AM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
Denial is not just a river in Egypt.

This is about the best response one can expect when the dispensational raw assertions are challenged.

"Oh look, there's a place in the middle east called 'Israel'. This must be some fulfillment of prophecy since the Bible also speak of a place called 'Israel'." How silly. But, where is the priesthood? Where is the temple? Where is the division of the land by tribes? Where are the tribes and the elders for that matter? And who are these secular/atheist/reform/conservative/orthodox Jews that populate the land? Where is the religion of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Jesus, and Paul in this modern state?

And when the "prophecies" don't quite work out according to plan; revise, revise revise. Get another book out, quick. Remember Edgar Whisenant and his rapture predictions, all based on modern "Israel" of course? Remember Hal Lindsey's Terminal Generation? It's now classified as a "Used, Rare, Out-of-Print, Hard-to-Find Book". Or how 'bout John Walvoord's Armageddon, Oil, and the Middle East Crisis: What the Bible Says About the Future of the Middle East and the End of Western Civilization? Well, what did the Bible say, John? If you're still curious you can pick up John's book on amazon.com for 1 penny!!

We saw the same mumbo-jumbo from dispensational quarters when Saddam Hussein was in power making noises about "Babylon". The prophecy preachers were stepping on each other to get yet another book out explaining how "Bible prophecy" was being fulfilled even as the world watched.

The NT makes it clear that all the promises to Abraham were fulfilled in Jesus Christ. "Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, "And to seeds," as referring to many, but rather to one, "And to your seed," that is, Christ." They were not made to "seeds" of Abraham, that is "national Israel" or "Jews". They were made to the true "Seed". In Christ we find the fulfillment of the kingdom promises.

And we know that ultimately Abraham was not looking for a physical inheritence in the middle east:

By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed by going out to a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he lived as an alien in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob, fellow heirs of the same promise; for he was looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God. ... But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God; for He has prepared a city for them. (Heb. 11)

People are so gullible. But "It's obvious" is not a good enough answer.

72 posted on 06/01/2004 8:13:08 AM PDT by topcat54
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
"You need to re-read your history. Both East and West approved of the Nicene Creed, even the Nicene-Constantinoplian edition."

From the article below:

"No clear record exists of the process by which the word Filioque was inserted into the Creed of 381 in the Christian West before the sixth century."

You can find the history of the Nicene Creed at Free Republic.

The Filioque: A Church-Dividing Issue?

73 posted on 06/01/2004 8:17:14 AM PDT by HarleyD (For strong is he who carries out God's word. (Joel 2:11))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD
Your assertion that: ... the Nicene Creed, ... was passed by a majority vote as early as 350+AD against the wishes of the Eastern Orthodox.

Is balderdash. The Nicene Creed was approved by the Entire Church in 325.

But, if you want to continue claiming the Orthodox objected to the Nicene Creed, and it was passed over their objections, please do. It only makes you look foolish.

SD

74 posted on 06/01/2004 8:30:36 AM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

While the Nicene Creed was approved by the entire church in 325 divisions developed when the filoque was added for unknown reasons in 38+AD and the Orthodox withdrew their support. I refer you to the article reference I posted in #73 published by the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation group.

If I appear "foolish" at least I'll have company of the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation group since we both must be in error.


75 posted on 06/01/2004 8:40:12 AM PDT by HarleyD (For strong is he who carries out God's word. (Joel 2:11))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Seven_0; All

My only conclusion is that God was deliberately ambiguous.

Certainly some ambiguity would be highly likely given the human transcribers.

However, God could have overridden that were it a priority for Him.

And, there's no way The Bible Codes would work at all unless God had very precise control over not only the original documents but the most widely held copies used today.

Ambiguity in a list of areas of Scripture would require what God created man for; what Christ died to restore and what Holy Spirit came to facilitate anyway:

1) INTENSE, INTIMATE FELLOWSHIP BETWEEN GOD AND MAN
2) WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THAT GROWING INTIMACY, INCREASING KNOWLEDGE AND CONFORMING TO THE WISDOM, PURPOSES AND WILL OF GOD.
3) THE DIALOGUE REQUIRED FOR THE ABOVE TWO.

It takes spirituality out of the rote, chronically and liberally flawed--human-forced KEEPING THE LETTER OF THE LAW and all the deadliness Christ noted that entailed. And it transforms authentic spirituality into a wonderous, spontaneous, creative, lively, LIFE BREATHED DANCE WITH ALMIGHTY GOD.

Further, there are a list of areas which, as Apostle Paul noted--are right for you but not for me; right for me but not for you; right for both of us but not others. The dialogue and dance alone--facilitated by Holy Spirit--the RELATIONSHIP OF INTIMACY WITH GOD ALONE affords any of us proper navigation of all such choices. The letter of the law will not do it. That will only bring death.

LIFE COMES, IN PROCESS, ONLY FROM THE DANCE . . . WITH HOLY SPIRIT BOTH THE ORCHESTRA LEADER AND THE MUSIC.


76 posted on 06/01/2004 8:44:29 AM PDT by Quix (Choose this day whom U will serve: Shrillery & demonic goons or The King of Kings and Lord of Lords)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: kosta50; All

Great historical insights.

THANKS MUCH.

I would note again . . . it is HUMAN NATURE to pollute, corrupt, twist and mangle EVERY group that exists very long at all--I say about a year and a half--into a more machine like authoritarian

WE ARE RIGHT AND EVERYONE ELSE IS WRONG

sort of authoritarian, proud, exclusive . . . force, organization. I have NEVER observed anything else in 57 years of living. SOME are much worse and some are much better about such issues. But all show serious evidence of such tendencies.

Pretending that is not true is either blind ignorance or terminal idiocy, imho.

WHEN CHRIST CAME, HE SLICED STRAIGHT ACROSS ALL SUCH ISSUES. He didn't cut on any predictable fault lines but cut across all the sensibilities and particularly those of the RELIGIOUS, FOSSILIZED, PHARISAICAL, AUTHORITARIAN, POLITICAL, EXCLUSIVE ETC. ORDER OF THE DAY.

IF ONE WERE TO DRAW UP A LIST OF THE FEATURES CHRIST RAILED AT, AND A LIST OF THE CHARACTERISTICS OF


ALL


RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS OF SIGNIFICANT AGE, SIGNIFICANT ORGANIZATIONAL LAYERS AND STRUCTURES; TRADITIONS AND CUSTOMS . . . THE LIST WOULD BE STARTLINGLY SIMILAR.

This is true of the Romans.
This is true of other traditional denominations.
This is true of older Pentecostal denominations.

It's just true about human nature and particularly the nature of humans in groups.


77 posted on 06/01/2004 8:55:55 AM PDT by Quix (Choose this day whom U will serve: Shrillery & demonic goons or The King of Kings and Lord of Lords)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
Here's another example of those artificial dispensational distinctions:

But it cannot be the Holy Spirit because there will be people saved during the Tribulation, and no one can be saved apart from the testimony of the Spirit (John 16:8-11 and 1 John 5:7). ...

In my opinion that leaves only one other candidate for Paul’s restrainer - and that is the Church.

Dispensationalism teaches that "the Church" is removed during the future 7-year great tribulation. But then they go on to talk about all these converts to Christ during the tribulation. But what is a person who converts to Christ a member of? You guessed it, the Church. All Christians (followers of Christ) are members of Christ's body, the Church.

So they have to invent a new category with new terminology calling them "tribulation saints". Now, according to the Bible a saint is a saint is a saint. Unless you have Roman Catholic tendencies there is no difference between a "tribulation saint" and a non-tribulation saint. They are all part of Christ's church, His chosen people, His "holy nation", His "royal priesthood".

This is not "rightly dividing the Word of God". This is dispensational chopped liver, totally unrecognizable from the original.

78 posted on 06/01/2004 8:56:46 AM PDT by topcat54
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD

EXCELLENT POINT ABOUT CONSENSUS.

I think consensus in spiritual groups is a good reality check.

However, I've seen groups operate in consensus AND

STILL

GO OFF THE DEEP END.

But it at least seems to retard the tendency and decrease the distance of the drop off the cliff.

I wish all such weren't true--but God must have involved His wisdom in leaving things this way. I believe it has to do with preserving a robust amount of

FREE WILL for each individual

AND,

as I've mentioned, insuring that each individual is compelled out of Love for God and God's requirements--to engage in a moment by moment dialogue and Heavenly Dance with God.


79 posted on 06/01/2004 8:59:15 AM PDT by Quix (Choose this day whom U will serve: Shrillery & demonic goons or The King of Kings and Lord of Lords)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Destro
I take back what I said in ignorance - Sola scriptura is not what I attribute this too but the unfortunate creation of doctrine outside of the ecumenical councils where Church fathers can approve of doctrine and correct and refute errors

I would say doctrine outside the word of God, there is a lot of that

80 posted on 06/01/2004 9:01:07 AM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 161 next last

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.

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