Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Rapture
ligonier.org ^ | Ligonier Ministries

Posted on 01/15/2011 10:44:22 AM PST by topcat54

In the past one-hundred and fifty years or so, some Christians have argued that there will actually be two comings of Christ. Believers from the dispensational tradition have said that there will be a “secret rapture” of Christ a few years before His visible return. While even those who confess a secret rapture disagree about its timing, the idea basically says that at some point, the church will be removed from the world by Jesus in order that it might escape an ensuing tribulation. Jesus will then make His physical return some time later, usually three and one-half to seven years after the rapture.

The problem with this idea is that there are no passages of Scripture that clearly teach this view. In fact, the idea that believers are guaranteed a safe haven is hard to find in the pages of Scripture. From the faithful remnant that went into exile with the nation of Israel to Jesus’ promise that the days of suffering will be shortened for the sake of the elect (Matt. 24:22), Scripture makes it clear that believers can and will face tribulation.

(Excerpt) Read more at ligonier.org ...


TOPICS: Theology
KEYWORDS: eschatology
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081 next last
To: one Lord one faith one baptism

Some claim the Spanish Jesuit Luis De Alcazar (1554-1613) is the first to promote preterist ideas. If so, then Protestants who buy into it are part of the Roman Catholic system. I find no trace of it prior to Alcazar.


41 posted on 01/15/2011 5:48:52 PM PST by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: sasportas

i read your posts, i’m sorry, i thought you were supporting the “pre-trib” rapture, two second comings by Christ theory.


42 posted on 01/15/2011 6:23:53 PM PST by one Lord one faith one baptism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sasportas

Some claim the Spanish Jesuit Francisco Ribera (1537-1591) is the first to promote futurist ideas. If so, then Protestants who buy into it are part of the Roman Catholic system.


43 posted on 01/15/2011 6:50:24 PM PST by topcat54 ("Dispensationalism -- like crack for the eschatologically naive.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sasportas
Re: my statememt, So called “partial” preterist is about as credible as being partial pregnant.

This from a so-called futurist premil who can find any statements of futurist premillennialism among the early church fathers in spite of his claims.

I actually have more respect for the “fulls” than the partial pregnant types like Sproul and topcat. Like I said, at least they are consistent.

I'd be more concerned about your false claims regarding the ECF.

44 posted on 01/15/2011 6:54:31 PM PST by topcat54 ("Dispensationalism -- like crack for the eschatologically naive.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: righttackle44

I’m not in the business of “predicting” anything. I just tell people what the Bible says, that’s all. Don’t blame the messenger.


45 posted on 01/15/2011 7:08:43 PM PST by ducttape45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: sasportas; one Lord one faith one baptism
Manuel De Lacunza (1731–1801), a Jesuit from Chile, wrote a manuscript in Spanish titled La Venida del Mesías en Gloria y Magestad ("The Coming of the Messiah in Glory and Majesty"), under the pen name of Juan Josafa [Rabbi] Ben-Ezra about 1791. Lacunza wrote under an assumed Jewish name to obscure the fact that he was a Catholic, in order to give his book better acceptance in Protestantism, his intended audience. Also an advocate of Futurism, Lacunza was deliberately attempting to take the pressure off the papacy by proposing that the Antichrist was still off in the future. His manuscript was published in London, Spain, Mexico and Paris between 1811 and 1826. (Cited here)
46 posted on 01/15/2011 7:14:12 PM PST by topcat54 ("Dispensationalism -- like crack for the eschatologically naive.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sasportas

Correction: “who can’t find any statements”


47 posted on 01/15/2011 7:17:42 PM PST by topcat54 ("Dispensationalism -- like crack for the eschatologically naive.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

You can’t discern the differences between the Church and the Nation Israel in Scripture? That’s not my problem. And, by the way, you don’t seem to be all that loving in your differences with a fellow Christian. I don’t really think I want to fellowship with you.


48 posted on 01/15/2011 7:26:35 PM PST by righttackle44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: righttackle44
You can’t discern the differences between the Church and the Nation Israel in Scripture?

Of course, but you were suggesting that certain words were only written to Israel without any shred of support. I was just wondering whether you had some magic peep stones to show the distinction.

49 posted on 01/15/2011 8:26:50 PM PST by topcat54 ("Dispensationalism -- like crack for the eschatologically naive.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

should be: “The Westminster Catechism minus the Bible “ equals preterism, tradition, straw man arguments, mischaracterizations and falsehoods.

P.S. I feel for your confused current location... You are very similar to my two pastors and many ofthe elders in my church...I’ll be praying for you and for them...


50 posted on 01/15/2011 8:30:17 PM PST by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

The WC represents the traditions of men, in other words.

I was writing earlier from the middle of a noisy swim meet auditorium and I got my sentence mixed up.


51 posted on 01/15/2011 8:33:13 PM PST by fishtank (The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Ramonne
Why does it matter when He comes or how many times?

If you take a “who cares” attitude towards the Word of God, then I guess it doesn't matter.

52 posted on 01/15/2011 8:34:44 PM PST by topcat54 ("Dispensationalism -- like crack for the eschatologically naive.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: fishtank
The WC represents the traditions of men, in other words.

Don't confuse creeds and confessions with the traditions of men. They are not the same. Everyone has a creed, even the “no creed but Christ” crowd. The question is, how close does your creed match the Word of God?

53 posted on 01/15/2011 8:37:50 PM PST by topcat54 ("Dispensationalism -- like crack for the eschatologically naive.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: one Lord one faith one baptism

That’s an old falsehood that dies hard. For a good history of rapture teaching see:

http://www.midnightcall.com/articles/prophetic/A-Brief-History-of-the-Rapture.html


54 posted on 01/16/2011 5:57:58 AM PST by Library Lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Library Lady

sorry, what is called the “pre-trib rapture” was unknown before the 19th century. the Catholic Church ( Latin and Greek ) has always taught Jesus will return once at the end of the world and then it will be Judgement Day. No seven year tribulation period, the article you linked to doesn’t cite any. the tribulation period will be the great falling away or apostasy hitting the Church, look around, evidence abounds!!


55 posted on 01/16/2011 6:45:42 AM PST by one Lord one faith one baptism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: one Lord one faith one baptism

Then we must agree to disagree.


56 posted on 01/16/2011 6:52:45 AM PST by Library Lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: one Lord one faith one baptism

Todd Strandberg gives the following reference on http://www.raptureready.com/:

Epharaem the Syrian said, in 373 AD, “For all the saints and Elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins.”

Whether you agree with the idea or not, it is still not a new one.


57 posted on 01/16/2011 11:31:27 AM PST by Library Lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Library Lady

we must disagree on this non-essential doctrine. the historical and orthodox teaching has always been one coming of the Lord and then Judgement Day. the tribulation is a spiritual one, not physical.


58 posted on 01/16/2011 12:15:06 PM PST by one Lord one faith one baptism
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: topcat54

I went to bed early last night, checked this thread this morning, I can see I should have stayed up, I see the old shark is on the prowl.

Topcat:
You know you’re talking to yourself? And not saying anything?

Me:
You ARE a partial preterist aren’t you? You ARE a postmillennialist aren’t you? What I said applied primarily to preterism, Sproul may not be postmill, I don’t know, but you are both.

Topcat:
Some claim the Spanish Jesuit Francisco Ribera (1537-1591) is the first to promote futurist ideas. If so, then Protestants who buy into it are part of the Roman Catholic system.

Me:
Apples and Oranges, Ribera did not begin futurism, evidence is abundant in the ECF for futurism. He merely reached back to the futurist beliefs of the ECF to bolster his case against the Protestants. The papacy, of which he was a part of, were Amillennialist, he had to go back to the ECF which predated RCC Amillennialism, to make his case. Alcazar, on the other hand, since we have no evidence for preterism before him in the ECF or otherwise, apparently is the first to advance preterist ideas.

Topcat:
This from a so-called futurist premil who can find any statements of futurist premillennialism among the early church fathers in spite of his claims. I’d be more concerned about your false claims regarding the ECF.

Me:
The ECF writings abound with statements about their belief in a future antichrist/beast/man of sin as the main feature of a future great tribulation, a future post-tribulational, and singular, second coming of Jesus Christ closing out this age (no pretrib rapture), and a future millennial.

As to what you said about Lacunza, I agree that he is the real origin of pretribism. I have read Lacunza’s “The Coming of the Messiah, in Glory and Majesty,” he made prewrath rapture like statements in it, which the Irvingites and Darby modified to pretrib rapture-ism. Yeah, Lacunza was a futurist, but so what? Like I said, neither he nor Ribera started it.


59 posted on 01/16/2011 1:13:31 PM PST by sasportas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: sasportas
The ECF writings abound with statements about their belief in a future antichrist/beast/man of sin as the main feature of a future great tribulation, a future post-tribulational, and singular, second coming of Jesus Christ closing out this age (no pretrib rapture), and a future millennial.

That's the claim, Waiting for the substance to back it up.

60 posted on 01/16/2011 1:47:01 PM PST by topcat54 ("Dispensationalism -- like crack for the eschatologically naive.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081 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