My "Take" on the Current Rapture-of-the-Church Craze

IntellectualConservative.com ^ | December 4, 2002 | J. Grant Swank, Pastor

[CCWoody]

He's baaaaacccccck!

[Frumanchu]

I personally think the current pre-trib rapture attention (NOT necessarily the doctrine) has to do with the mass-marketing of the Christian religion as a feel-good religion where it's all about what God can do for you and how He can make your life less of a burden. You don't hear persecution preached too often, as is evident by a survey I saw indicating that very few Christians (especially American Christians) are aware that Christians are being martyred at an unprecedented rate in the world. I think the doctrine is being fueled by a sense of escapism among the weak-hearted who don't have a proper understanding of how God could allow His children to endure tribulation.

A note to pre-tribbers: I'm not in any way mounting a challenge to this doctrine scripturally, merely attempting to explain what I feel are the reasons for it's explosive spread recently.

[grantswank]

thank heaven!

:-)

makes your day, doesn't it?

[grantswank]

thank heaven!

:-)

makes your day, doesn't it?

[grantswank]

gotcha.

right on!

[Royce to the Right]

The view of most conservative scholors is that many of those so called "symbolic" passages you refer to are not symbolic at all.

It strains logic to understand how Christ can come; 1. "as a thief in the night" and, 2."with power and great glory and every eye will see Him", at the same time.

More often than not, those who hold to the view that there is one coming of Christ, one judgement, and one resurrection event, are equally wrong on the doctrine of the gospel of the Grace of God that Paul preached.

I do not claim to be authoritative on the subject of escatology. However, to dismiss the pre-trib rapture as scripturally unfounded is a weak arguement to say the least. One can make a very good arguement for either pre, post,or mid tribulation, and pre, post, and amillinial using the word of God.

The truth is only one view can be right. And, what ever your view or mine is, the important thing is this. What have you done about the person and work of Christ? One truth that is not up for discussion is that He is the only way to the Father.

[drstevej]

***This is all orchestrated by the demonic powers in order to eventuate in a limp army of believers.***

Maybe Grant Swank and the_doc are the same person... :0) Hmmm.

[Jean Chauvin]

"It strains logic to understand how Christ can come; 1. "as a thief in the night" and, 2."with power and great glory and every eye will see Him", at the same time. "

Your problem with the logic is, I think, based on the assumption that a thief must not be seen.

This is a false assumption.

Have you ever heard of a bank robbery in full daylight while there are customers at the bank? Yes, it happens with regularity.

Have you ever heard of a car jacking in full daylight in the middle of the street? Yes, it happens with regularity.

The fact that only ~some~ thieves use the cloak of darkness to carry out their thefts should not lead you to the conclusion that ~all~ thieves must ~necessarily~ be secretive or out of sight. That concept is actually logically invalid.

No, the only requirement for a theif is that he come by ~suprise~ or that he come ~unexpectedly~.

What good is a theif when one knows that he is coming. No, the theivery will only be successful ~if~ it is unexpected.

Therefore, since Christ has told us that the "day of the Lord" will come as a thief in the night", it would be incorrect (faulty logic) to conclude that this ~must~ be a secret coming. Rather, the point of that passage is such that his coming will be unexpected by the world, but we are told in that very same passage to be "ready".

Jean

[Quester]

Have you ever heard of a bank robbery in full daylight while there are customers at the bank? Yes, it happens with regularity.

Have you ever heard of a car jacking in full daylight in the middle of the street? Yes, it happens with regularity.

The fact that only ~some~ thieves use the cloak of darkness to carry out their thefts should not lead you to the conclusion that ~all~ thieves must ~necessarily~ be secretive or out of sight. That concept is actually logically invalid.

A thief ... in the night ?

[CCWoody]

The truth is only one view can be right. And, what ever your view or mine is, the important thing is this. What have you done about the person and work of Christ? One truth that is not up for discussion is that He is the only way to the Father. ~ RTTR

I consider it rather important (I agree that the Lord Jesus is the only way to the Father) that:


1. The pre-Trib dispy crowd seems to suggest that the OT Jews found another way to the Father besides faith in the Lord Jesus.
2. The pre-Trib dispy crowd claims that the Father has a bride in Israel and the Son has a bride in the Church which makes God into a Polygamist.

Therefore, in light of these 2 concerns (they aren't the only ones) I think that the pre-Trib dispy eschatology is a rather dangerous snake to play with.

Woody.

[Jean Chauvin]

Again, even a theif in the night need not be 'secretive'. He only need to be unexpected.

I'm expectant of a theif in the night at my home, that is why I have a means to protect my family ready for that possibility. Because I expect it, he won't succeed. He need not even be secretive, I will be expecting it.

But, if I didn't expect him, he could come with all the noise in the world -even at night- and I'd be his for the taking!

Your secret rapture still has no basis.

Jean

[Quester]

Again, even a theif in the night need not be 'secretive'. He only need to be unexpected. I'm expectant of a theif in the night at my home, that is why I have a means to protect my family ready for that possibility. Because I expect it, he won't succeed. He need not even be secretive, I will be expecting it.

But, if I didn't expect him, he could come with all the noise in the world -even at night- and I'd be his for the taking!

Your secret rapture still has no basis.

Jean

I didn't claim belief in a 'secret rapture'.

I didn't deny that Christians ought to be ready.

I only posed the question of whether the 'in the night' wording in the given passage could render any more meaning to the passage.

[grantswank]

right on!

[grantswank]

true.

[grantswank]

neither points 1 or 2 are raised in the article.

your post does not relate to the article.

[f.Christian]

1corinthians 14: 33

For God is not the author of confusion but of peace,

[grantswank]

yes, so true.

that's why the article was written--to cut thru the confusion.

thanks.

[grantswank]

irrelevant post.

[drstevej]

***irrelevant post. ***

I think that's a bit harsh, but your wrote and posted the article and I defer to your self assessment.