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).
Junior can't follow that train of logic.
Now now, friend verga may just have a blind spot there ...
Tell us how you really feel......
:)
It’s mockery, plain and simple.
May?
How gracious of you.
.
The Millennial kingdom is on earth, with biological inhabitants, and incorruptible inhabitants who have returned to the earth with Yeshua, ruling over them.
The “New Jerusalem” is after the earth and heavens have “departed from his face,” and is populated by the bride in their incorruptible bodies.
.
The pre-trib rapture is the error.
Paul’s words to the Thessalonians are unmistakable.
The falling away and the man of sin must come first.
.
Also it must be noted that Yeshua clearly stated that our redemption will come “after the tribulation of those days.”
All scripture points to a first resurrection after Satan’s tribulation of the saints.
.
Thank you for admitting that in your Bible worship you have enshrined your Bibles. Please sit down and examine in your heart and discover how you can avoid this terrible terrible idolatry. I know that it confuses many of you, but truly the Bible is not God, God is not limited to a book.
You partial quote, if you look carefully, is addressed to the Jews during the end of the Great Tribulation. But that’s all I have to say to a student of Michael Rood ... he doesn’t deserve the keystrokes.
Lol
Junior thinks he’s on to something. Instead, it reminds me of a drowning man flailing away in the water.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The Bible is the Word OF God it is not actually God himself.
When John says "the Word was God" It is referring to Jesus who is the Son of God. John does not literally mean the Bible. The Bible in the form we know it was not completed until much later.
I hope that this helps to clear up some of the confusion you are having. Remember the Bible is just a book, a very special book but it is not literally God.
You all have a good evening. If you are still confused I will try to help you clear this up in the morning, but hey if it takes longer than a day, so be it.
And the Catholics wish you would stop it, God will not be mocked.
LOL, go lite a candle to the Catholic Mary and ask her to clear our minds for you.
Pure bombast in contrast to what is abundantly substantiated. In Scripture you will find the word of God being consistently exceedingly loved, praised, longed for, adored as being very pure, perfect, converting the soul, enlightening the eyes, more to be desired than pure gold, sweeter than honey, esteemed above necessary food, the saintly meditation of which is all day long, and the delight and rejoicing of the heart, and in keeping of which there is great reward, and which God has exalted above His very name.
Yet we do not bow down to a statue of it, or pray to the Bible ("O most merciful Bible, hear out prayer.."), offer up sacrifices to it, or whatever else in your "etc." that would be unScriptural veneration. In contrast, Caths engage in what is utterly unseen in Scripture, saying such things as, “sometimes salvation is quicker if we remember Mary’s name then if we invoked the name of the Lord Jesus...[who] does not at once, answer anyone who invokes him, but only does so after just judgment. But if the name of his mother Mary is invoked, her merits intercede so that he is answered even if the merits of him who invoked her do not deserve it.” Thus, “we have recourse, to thee alone, and we beseech thee to prevent thy beloved Son, who is irritated by our sins, from abandoning us to the power of the devil,” “we have but one advocate, and that is thyself, and thou alone art truly loving and solicitous for our salvation ... My Queen and my Advocate with thy Son, whom I dare not approach.” (From Judge Fairly, p. 5).. And indeed, Mary “had to suffer, as He did, all the consequences of sin,” thus “We were condemned through the fault of one woman; we are saved through the merits of another woman.”
For adding to what the word of God says of the virtuous, surrendered, Spirit-filled graced among women, Mary of Scripture and contrary to it, RCs assert of this demonic (yes) demigoddess that “the power thus put into her (Mary’s) hands is all but unlimited,” “surpassing in power all the angels and saints in Heaven,” and is actually “like unto Him.” for “when she acts, it is also He who acts; and that if her intervention be not accepted, neither is His,” and that “ “all in heaven and on earth, even God himself, is subject to the Blessed Virgin,” and that “the greatness of the power which she wields over one who is God cannot be conceived,” for “she seems to have the same power as God. Her prayers and requests are so powerful with him that he accepts them as commands in the sense that he never resists his dear mother’s prayer because it is always humble and conformed to his will...”
Moreover, “Mary has authority over the angels and the blessed in heaven...God gave her the power and the mission of assigning to saints the thrones made vacant by the apostate angels who fell away through pride....all the angels in heaven unceasingly call out to her.” o that “After God, it is impossible to think of anything greater than His Mother,” to her, Jesus owes His Precious Blood...Next to God, she deserves the highest praise....no creature, can ever be compared to her:”
“The Holy Spirit acts only by the Most Blessed Virgin, his Spouse.” “through Whom the Holy Trinity is sanctified.” And “through her alone does He dispense His favours and His gifts,” and “it follows that there is no grace which Mary cannot dispose of as her own, which is not given to her for this purpose.”
You simply have no case unless you can show that your opposition is actually praying to the Bible, and or attributing to it attributes and praise that is not in Scripture, in which case i will concur it is wrong, just as the manner of "veneration" giving to the Mary of Catholicism is.
.
>> “Peter was kind of a safety guy.” <<
Yes, of course he was!
He never pointed a loaded sword at the ear of a centurion.
.
.
Yeshua’s words were to his disciples, who were of his true assembly, not lost Jews.
Lol, good one!
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.