So any crazy idea that any Protestant has can be attributed to trying to stick to the Bible? I don't buy it. Either the Rapture is in the Bible, or it's not. Since it's false, it's not. Therefore, the idea did not originate in Scripture, but in man-made corruption of Scripture. Man-made corruption of Scripture is not a "uniquely Protestant" phenomenon.
That is another argument, and a much longer one at that. Let's stick to the Rapture in particular.
Either the Rapture is in the Bible, or it's not. Since it's false, it's not.
Those who hold to the belief contend that it *is* in the Bible. And in defense of their position, they point to Scripture. This is an observable fact.
Therefore, the idea did not originate in Scripture, but in man-made corruption of Scripture.
That it is a man-made corruption of Scripture I will take as a given. However, in all fairness, it has just as much root in Scripture as does any other Protestant innovation, such as 'Faith Alone'.
Man-made corruption of Scripture is not a "uniquely Protestant" phenomenon.
No, but the Rapture most certainly is. And for the record, I did not say that "man-made corruption of Scripture" was "uniquely Protestant". What I said was that the rapture theology was uniquely Protestant. The belief is only espoused by those in the Premillennial camp. As I pointed out elsewhere (on this very thread), Millennialism (aka Chiliasm) was kicked to the curb in the 4th century. It was picked back up by Protestants. More to the point, it is their rejection of Tradition (Sola Scriptura) that has allowed them do do this. Had Protestants held to the Tradition of the Church, Premillennialism would not be a topic and, by extention, niether would the Rapture.
In short, Sola Scriptura is the root cause of any current Rapture debates.