Posted on 05/21/2016 8:38:01 AM PDT by Salvation
Q. Many of our Protestant brethren say that, before Jesus comes, there will be a rapture wherein all the faithful will be taken up, I guess, to meet Him in the sky. When I tell them that the Bible says we will “see the Son of Man coming upon the clouds of heaven” (Mt 24:30) and “he will send his angels ... and they will gather his elect from the four winds” (Mt 24:31), and then ask them who will be left to “gather” if everyone has previously been “raptured,” they say it will be the Jews. What is the Church’s teaching on this? Will there even be such a thing as the rapture? I’m confused! Any light you can shed on the subject will be greatly appreciated!
Rich Willette, Springfield, Vt.
A. The notion of rapture (a Latin word that means to be snatched away) is a very novel concept among certain (not all) evangelicals. It is a notion less than 150 years old and finds no real support in the biblical text as you point out. Fundamentally, the theory asserts that before the final tribulations of the last times, faithful Christians will be snatched away. Rapture theorists disagree about the exact moment of the snatching. Some say it will be pre-tribulation, others midway through the tribulations, and some even say post-tribulation.
The root text for evangelicals who hold rapture theory is a text from the First Letter to the Thessalonians: “Indeed. we tell you this, on the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will surely not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself, with a word of command, with the voice of an archangel and with the trumpet of God, will come down from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. Thus we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore, console one another with these words” (4:15-18).
The context is the second coming of Christ. There are not two second comings taught in Scripture, but rapture theory posits two — the one described in First Thessalonians and another one, some 1,000 years later. Note, too, that in First Thessalonians there is no mention of some people being left behind. There is no mention of a 1,000-year reign. Nor does St. Paul indicate that what he is describing here is a different coming of Christ, distinct from other texts in the Gospel wherein Christ describes His own second coming.
Thus we are left with a text that simply does not support what rapture theorists say. They further strive to unnaturally stitch this account with other texts in the Book of Revelation. The result is a highly debatable account of the last days that even rapture theorists hotly debate in terms of the details. The whole enterprise amounts to an attempt to shoehorn biblical passages into rapture theory that more clearly call it into question. To say the “elect” are merely the Jews is speculative at best and fanciful and contrived at worst.
As for Catholic teaching on these matters, the Catechism of the Catholic Church summarizes it as follows: “Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers [see Lk 18:8; Mt 24:12]. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the ‘mystery of iniquity’ in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh. [see 2 Thes 2:4-12; 1 Thes 5:2-3; 2 Jn 7; 1 Jn 2:18-22]” (No. 675).
Careful, verga, that is making it VERY personal ...
Once again your argument is spurious, as it is not about what you claim to see, but what you perceive it as being. Ealgeone says that by reading the Bible one can know about God (or one says God is in the Bible) but in your absurd perception that means he believes the Bible is literally God. Another Prot. prays while clutching the word of God and in that your absurd perception this means he is praying to the Bible(!). Did you know that I can find verga in freerepublic.com. Go look; he is in there! Which must mean freerepublic.com is literally verga!
And i am sure metmom will be interested in seeing where and how she says the Bible is literally God, and prays to it. The more you double down on your absurdity then more you become absurd.
Which is simply a continuation of your fallacious analogy, for unlike you, my argument is not about what i perceive, but how the words and actions of the "hyper veneration" of Mary, as described and substantiated, compares with Scripture, and thus is worship or blasphemous, while constant abundant praise, adulation and devotion to the wholly inspired word of God is Scriptural. Which leaves you resorting to argue that in your perception saying that by reading the Bible one can know about God (or if one says God is in the Bible) then that means he believes the Bible is literally God, and that praying while clutching the word of God and in that your absurd perception this means he is praying to the Bible(!).
You can attempt to argue that worship can only be defined is one knows the heart of the one engaging in such words and actions that Scripture describes as worship, but that does not refute what i said that said Marian devotion would be considered worship in Scripture, while restricting the definition to the heart means that one could even take the mark of the beast and then claim they were not engaging in worship.
If i argued that saying Christ is found in Mary meant that she is God, or that praying while clutching a statue of her necessarily means one is praying to her, or that merely praying while kneeling before a a statue of her necessarily meant one was worshiping her (though that itself is not Scriptural), then your attempted analogy would have merit, but instead your argument by perception remains absurd.
Thank you; my error duly noted.
.
So, you believe that we will be resurrected into corruptible bodies that can die?
That is not what Yeshua nor Paul have told us.
Yeshua told Nicodemus in John 3 that we will be able to be present but invisible like the wind.
Perhaps we should consider the nature of the being who wrote on palace party central wall in Daniel 5. And note that 1 John tells us that when He appears we shall see Him as He really is because we will be like Him so we can sense the fullness in ways we cannot in our present condition.
The problem is that Catholics constantly focus on the claim of *worshiping* Mary and saying they don’t do it.
What they clearly choose to ignore is that God’s command is to not make images of created things and bow down before them.
Now, while the display of worship to Mary is clearly seen, if the Catholics say they aren’t worshiping her, we can give them the benefit of the doubt and accept that they really think that’s not what they are doing, even though it’s patently obvious to anyone watching what is going on.
However, what is clearly happening is that Catholics do make images of Mary. They do bow down before them and pray to them and light candles to them. IOW, they do the actions that God has commanded men to NOT do to images.
Now verga’s absurd and pathetic attempt to equate what he claims non-Catholics do with the Bible to what Catholics do with Mary indeed falls flat as we do NOT make images of it, we do not bow down to it, we do not pray to it, we do not light candles to it, or consecrate our lives to it.
So the mockery only serves to make verga look more like a fool with every attempt as everyone can see what he’s doing.
We don’t have many details about the resurrecrtion but it is possible that we will have physical and spiritual attributes just as Christ does.
.
I know you do not believe that we will be resurrected into mortal bodies, that is totally contrary to scripture.
.
Yeshua had physical attributes when he needed them. He also walked through stone walls.
Resurrected to mortal bodies makes no sense at all.
.
You see incongruities, yet say there is no hint of division?
What would be a hint to you?
I see incongruities between the text and your interpretation, and no division within the two sections of the text itself.
Not so,FRiend. We will indeed have physical bodies! We will be like HIM, and remember what He did with His body!
The dead will be resurrected into bodies that are alive, and then they and we will be transformed, in a moment, int he twinkling of an eye and caught up into the clouds to meet The Lord in the air. Put 1 Cor 15:51-53 together with 1 Thess 4:13-17 ... Rapture is what happens to living beings.
Then you are blind too.
There can be no mortality in Yehova’s New Jerusalem.
However, what is clearly happening is that Catholics do make images of Mary. They do bow down before them and pray to them and light candles to them. IOW, they do the actions that God has commanded men to NOT do to images.
And this silly opinion and a $1.25 will buy you a soda.
Each of these statements is verifiable and has been previously shown in these discussions. Whereas your statements.....well, the pigeons keep winning.
That alone does not suffice to describe what Caths do re Mary as being contrary to the word of God. Men were on rare occasions bowed down to, though that was forbidden by Peter, and nowhere is seen by believers to the same, for "all ye are brethren." And God twice commanded the Israelites to make a graven image, but only at His command (and in the latter case the ended up worshiping it: 2Ki. 18:4), versus them making for themselves graven images of their own accord, as Caths do.
But it is in the overall totality of Catholic hyper veneration of their fictitious Mary that we see what would be seen as idolatry, or at least blasphemy in Scripture, rendering to her such adulation, supplication, and attributes that only are given to God in Scripture.
we do NOT make images of it, we do not bow down to it, we do not pray to it, we do not light candles to it, or consecrate our lives to it.
Caths can only wish that Mary received in Scripture the manner of constant attention, exaltation, devotion, superlatives, recourse, and effects and qualities that are given to the wholly inspired word of God. (Ps. 19; 119; etc.
I have witnessed these actions with my own eyes and can assure you that non-Catholics have done this on a regular basis. And seeing as you don't know the protestants I know, and I have not seen the things I have seen. You can not say otherwise. (Sound familiar)
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.