Posted on 09/22/2014 7:11:55 AM PDT by Eccl 10:2
Is this God's version of an October Surprise?
translated as harpazo - a sudden snatching away - in the Septuagint. Harpazo is translated raptus in Latin. Thus, the English word “rapture”.
to seize, carry off by force
to seize on, claim for one’s self eagerly
to snatch out or away
It could just as easily mean to steal.
But I will admit I do not know, I just don`t believe it.
I was like you until I really studied it for myself. God has promised that those who are faithful believers will not be subjected to His wrath. During the tribulation there will be no one who was is not affected by His wrath. In addition consider this. The believers are the bride of Christ. When you study the traditional Hebrew marriage ceremony the bride and groom are seperate together privately for one week out of society. The tribulation period is the last week of years of Daniel’s prophecy during which Christ and His bride will be together out of the world.
Jesus was cut off in the middle of the week, Stephen was killed about three and one half years later which caused the Christians to flee into the nations and preach the word of God.
Also I do not believe the tribulation has any thing to do with Gods wrath which is to come in the last days.
But that is like almost every thing else, if we get one thing figured out to fit we find something that does not match.
So I guess it is better to just wait and see, if we have a rapture fine, I naturally would like to be in it but really doubt if I would be.
The wrath of God occurs during the Tribulation.
I used to call myself “mid-trib” but apparently it’s really called “post-trib, pre-wrath”.
So I guess it is better to just wait and see, if we have a rapture fine, I naturally would like to be in it but really doubt if I would be.
immmm if you are going to reply to a post you ought to at least reply to the person who posted it. I did not post the comment you are upset by
Here is what I posted to you
“Why do you link to an article that has an ENTIRELY different title???
Why not just post the title used by the article???
Since you made up the title for some so called political point the answer is not only no but NO”
Re-read my post. It was to you. I replied exactly who I intended to.
Then you have a screw loose
The guideline here is to discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
That said, Eccl 10:2, Nifster is correct - the rule on Free Republic is that you must include the actual title of the article linked in the title of your post. This is so the moderators can check for copyright restrictions.
Since your article was merely a question in relation to two links later mentioned in your initial post, I removed the article link and added the word "vanity."
My apologies... I crossed the line and am properly chastened
But you forget that this same Jesus said, “talke up your cross to follow me.” Just as Jesus had to suffer, so will those who follow Him. That is also in the Bible.
Or as the old saying goes, “no cross, no crown of glory.”
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.