As much as our government has been infiltrated by the enemy, so has the church. Maybe even moreso.
This is a dangerous doctrine. IT IS NOT FROM SCRIPTURE.
I do realize some big lofty names in the bible scholar community are big time rapturists. Moody - for example. But I've been on a quest for a week or so to find anyone of them making solid arguments with actual scriptural foundation to support the dubious claims of the rapture doctrine - and they just simply cannot support it in the scripture.
If you want me to explain further I'll be happy to. But what you should do is go to the bible and find where it makes any claim that Christians will be removed from earth BEFORE or in the middle of the tribulations described in prophecy.
The oft cited verses in Mathew are literally right after Jesus warns you not to be deceived and explains how not to be deceived by knowing the signs of the season of His return. In Luke he even says that "two men will be lying in one bed, one will be taken the other left behind." I don't know why there are two dudes in one bed but I want the rapturist to question why someone sleeping in bed would be raptured (I notice many claiming that you must be alert and watching at the special time).
In Thesolonians 4: Paul clearly teaches that the dead in Christ will be resurrected before the beloved verse about we who are alive at the time going to meet Jesus in the air. I don't have a problem with that - just don't misunderstand that the dead in Christ go "FIRST".
In Rev 20 - Jesus gives us more clarity and explains that in the "First resurrection" people who refused the mark of the beast unto death would rise in that "First resurrection" too.
The rapture doctrine is dangerous for our generation. We appear to be appointed for this time, please do not be deceived.
...Faith in Jesus + 0 = Salvation...
...we can discuss this further in Heaven.....
I agree. But if Jesus made such an effort to warn about false prophets, maybe we should not get complacent during the rise of the beast.
I know I may sound crazy to some Christians but as I read the prophecy and study, it looks to me that we're about to head into the wilderness. And if we remember the recently, miraculously freed Israelites in the wilderness, they were losing their faith quickly when things got tough. Some chose to create idols. We should not be surprised if such things happen again from within the church. Let's face it, the church has adopted pegan rituals and false doctrines which will have to be forgotten before the Kingdom. (See Joel). Actually I think I should have said see Hosea. But both make references to the wilderness time before the Kingdom.
The rise of the beast has been from genesis 3:15 Continuing till now. I remember hearing the evil was so prevalent that God allowed I to flood killing all but 8 people.
Noah warned them as do you. I believe many more made ot to the Ark this time. Room for more still.
Yes Jesus made sure we pay attention to Noah. The rapturists think the ones that are taken are being saved. But the verses where Jesus calls attention to the flood focus on the people who are swept away by the flood as being taken. And for more clarity in Luke, he says "Remember Lot's wife". This is in the same conversation (if we reference Matthew) where he says the whole bit about fleeing to the mountains, those in Judea. Or the man on the roof top who doesn't have time to go pack. He sounds like he's telling us we need to be ready to live in the wilderness and rely on Him totally. Lot's wife thought she could go back an grab her smart phone... Nope.
Ahhh, I like your analogies. Makes sense. 👍🏻
I am already in the wilderness that makes me believe the time is soon,. Oh my.
That's awesome. Truly, people are going to need to learn to live without the spoils of the world's tyranny. We're going to need people like you.
False prophets like the mega church pastors that drive a Bentley and a ferrari?
Yeah those false prophets.
Know them by their fruit.
I would like to point out that we have the 7 Seals and 7 Trumpets, as well as the 2 Witnesses to get through before we will see the Beast, true and proper.
Many a people will be very, very dead well before the Beast.
Well maybe your math is bad.? Or you just have not seen your surroundings.
Faith without works is dead. A heart-felt or intellectual acknowledgement that Jesus is Lord (He is whether you like it or not) doesn't mean squat and it's no indication of salvation.
Despite what people say, the fruit always tells all.
OP is absolutely right and he's speaking up, as I have in the past, about the obscene cracks in nominal Christianity as a whole. Wouldn't it be something to finally stand before God and realize that He had nothing to do with you whatsoever? It's coming for a lot of poor souls snared by a false gospel.
And the subject of the rapture is only the beginning. Not dooming ( God forbid I deviate from the hive mind) here, just giving some food for thought.
Galatians 3:10 KJV For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
Did you kill your Passover lamb yet?
u/Queef_Anon
Do you think observing passover is a work of the law? Was Jesus doing works of the law? Do you think that being law abiding is being discouraged here? I think James makes it clear that faith produces good works. If there are no good works then maybe the faith isn't there.
Hole new meaning to seeing dead people. Augur.
Agreed. What Jesus said, when they asked him, was that after the tribulation of those days, his angels would gather his elect from the four winds. The Greek word for rapture has always been there in the text but it never meant what was invented in the 1830s, the idea that one secret cult claiming the name would escape and then the rest of the world would be destroyed; and that's not what Ephraim the Syrian believed either. We will be "caught up" together with the resurrected dead to meet the Lord in the air. So to be clear it appears you mean the pretrib/midtrib doctrine is the danger.
Jesus also carefully taught about the Wheat and the Tares. Rapturists totally ignore this parable. If anyone goes 'poof' first its the tares.
Pre-trib/mid-trib "secret" rapture doctrine was popularized by Scofield Bible and its voluminous margin notes. This is what some teenagers regaled me with in high school. Then all the "left behinders" will suffer the wrath of Anti-Christ, but if they manage to refuse the "mark of the beast" they get a "second chance" to "get saved." However, the Anti-Christ will chop off their heads. The Second Advent comes 3 1/2 to 7 years later. According to the scheme.
Do you know who the elect are? Do you know the difference between the bride of Christ and the bride of God? Are you aware of the different Gospel that is preached in the Tribulation opposed to the one that has been preached to us? Are you aware that the New Testament does not begin at Matthew chapter 1 but rather at the death of Christ? If you do not know how to "rightly divide the word of truth" then you will incorrectly apply many things to yourself that are not to be applied doctrinally and if you don't apply doctrine correctly then you open yourself up to be attacked by the Devil.
"rightly divide the word of truth" This is a V.P.W teaching..... In his Power for Abundant Living class.
"rightly dividing the word of truth" is straight from 2 TImothy 2:15 bruh that's what the quotations are for.
V.P.W really stressed this in his class, that is something I will always remember. But, that was so long ago I don't remember if he gave the source or not in the class materials.....
I thought you were coming at it like it was some heresy haha. I don't know who that guy is but yeah it's from 2 Timothy 2:15, a great verse for people to memorize. It emphasizes the importance of studying that good book appropriately.
Yea, I agree, he taught very good bible, and how to do word study's, using Hebrew and Greek Lexicons, etc...
The verse.was.taught in the class.
Cool, someone who knows who V.P.W is....That class was in the early 1980's for me..
Are you defending rapture doctrine? If so, can you address the issues that I raised? Tell me, does the rapture happen before the first resurrection?
No, the first resurrection happened nearly 2000 years ago when Christ and other saints arose. And address what issue? The wheat and the tares? He was talking to Jews not gentiles.
Ah. Ok I'm familiar with this angle. Doesn't work. Who is Paul talking about rising first? Who is taking part in the first resurrection in Rev 20? That clearly includes people who are killed for refusing the mark of the beast.
This angle? What do you mean doesn't work? I was just answering your question. And I need references brother. The Rev 20 reference, as you said, clearly includes those who do not take the mark, but I won't be here to not take the mark :)
I think it's Rev 20, 4-6. It calls the resurrection which includes people who refuse the beast in the "first resurrection". This is a problem for your theology.
Why would that be an issue? So you're saying we won't be resurrected until the end of the 1000 year reign? haha
You are conflating separate events. The resurrection in 1 Thessalonians 4 is not the same event as the resurrection in Revelation 20. Read back one chapter. Revelation 19:7 is the marriage feast of the lamb with his bride clothed in fine linen. Then after the marriage feast, the armies of heaven come down with the Lord, once again clothed in fine linen. These are the saints who were raptured. Then, after the Lord's victory, the thousand year reign begins in chapter 20 when the resurrection of the tribulation saints occurs.
Since the saints are married to the Lord Before the "first resurrection" at the start of the millenial kingdom as in Revelation, how then would the dead in Christ "rise first" before the living saints are taken up, as in Thessalonians?
Neither can we who are alive and remain meet Jesus in the air AFTER he defeats the beast and then after which the tribulation saints are resurrected because it clearly says we are with him BEFORE these things at the wedding feast and the second coming.
The resurrection in Revelations 20 and the one in Thessalonians 4, therefore, cannot be the same event.
Thessalonians 4 (resurrection and then rapture) has to happen before the wedding feast. Then the Revelation 19 wedding feast happens. Then the Lord returns with the saints to defeat the beast. Then the Revelation 20 resurrection happens.
people often don't "rightly divide". People conflate the "day of the Lord" the same as "the day of Christ" and the "kingdom of Heaven" as the "kingdom of God" and so many other things. One thing an old preacher once told me when it comes to things apart from Salvation was "ehhh, the Lord will straighten us all out during the 1000 year reign" haha and I absolutely loved that and it meant a lot coming from an old man.
Thank you.
I lost count of first resurrections there. But I think Jesus was pretty simple and clear. Plus he explained the wheat and tares. So, I think we should be putting on the full armor of God and preparing to fully trust in God to comfort us and feed us and protect us while he deals with the beast.
This is very straightforward. This parable is not a rapture reference, this is the great white throne judgment at the end of the thousand years.
So you think there will be people who offend the Kingdom and practice lawlessness in the Kingdom?
That's pretty weird.
You think the great white throne judgment is only for those who live in the thousand year reign?
THAT is pretty weird.
It is for all those whose names are not written in the book of life.
And yes, there will still be sin in the thousand year kingdom.
https://davidjeremiah.blog/what-is-the-millennium-7-answers-to-7-questions/
I don't appreciate the attitude or the fact that you intentionally twisted what I said in order to scoff at me, and even so your argument is wrong.
I guess my tone is flippant but I'm not trying to attack you. I am attacking a doctrine that I realize many have grown up believing or have been impressed by experts to believe. But there are so many plain and simple problems with the doctrine. I wanted to call your attention to the way Jesus is talking about how the tares will be removed BEFORE the gathering of the Wheat "to shine forth ... in the Kingdom".
You say this parable is not about rapture. Well I suppose I agree, but it is definitely about "the end of this age" when the "Son of Man will send out His angels". This matches his language in other places where he is clearly talking about the establishment of His Kingdom.
It's okay, I forgive you. We just need to always try to have love and grace when discussing biblical issues with our brethren.
I was drafting a reply to describe what I believe and why, but it was lost so I have been forced to rewrite my reply (which has now taken most of my day). I will post links to some things that I think should be compelling if you are at all interested.
So far I have only addressed the issues you had brought up and I have yet to make any arguments regarding a pretribulation rapture.
I want to express that I grew up in a church that taught pretribulation rapture and in fact I did not accept this idea and refused say dogmatically when I thought the rapture would occur because I could not find any verses that I believed showed definitively when the rapture was supposed to occur. Therefore I had prepared my heart to suffer through the tribulation.
It wasn't until a couple years ago (I am in mid thirties now) that I came to believe in a pretrib rapture after watching a study on 2 Thessalonians and the meaning of the Greek word ἀποστασία. I am now convinced that "falling away" is incorrectly translated, and that the original meaning for the word ἀποστασία was "departure", which could have been translated as either spiritual departure or physical departure depending on the context in which it is used.
It would appear, in my opinion, that the context in 2 Thessalonians favors a physical departure interpretation, in which case our gathering together to him would have to occur before the man of sin is revealed.
I don't really want to spend any more time discussing these things or going back and forth as I have already spent too much time on this. Although I do not intend to convince you that this is the correct interpretation, if you are interested you can study it for yourself and come to your own conclusions as the Lord leads you.
Here is a link to the study I referenced in case you are interested.
Here is a link to a document on the same topic
He has some other videos on rapture typology that I would suggest watching.
Rapture Proof & The Ancient Jewish Wedding
Rapture Typology Pre-Tribulation Rapture Proof
1 Thessalonians rapture study (starts at 44:00)
Finally here is a link to a document disseminating pretribulation rapture myths.
https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1037&context=symp_grad
If you don't want to watch many long videos I understand. I used to avoid long videos, but now all I do is watch bible studies, prophecy videos and lectures all day every day because I have become very passionate about prophecy.
Anyway, never stop seeking the truth and God bless.
Thank you for putting in the time and effort here. I will get around to checking those things. Understand I've already searched not just for weeks but for years for justification of this doctrine. I cannot find anyone reconciling the problems of placing a resurrection before the first resurrection or inserting a return of Christ before the the second coming that He taught about.
This is Rev 22:18-19 (Something to think about soberly)
I'm sorry. Pastor J.D. seems like a nice guy but this teaching is awful. I'm only recently learning about the rapture theorists confusion about the word apostasy.
I don't think they even get the irony (people teaching this) ... but anyway we STILL use the word "departure" in a spiritual sense. For example - emotional departure. It seems we're now confirming false prophecy based upon our own limited knowledge of our own language - as if departure must only be understood as physical - absurd!
The Catholic church didn't change the meaning of the word, they just lied about who it applies to. That's kind of like people claiming that God's commandments are just for the jews. Or for that matter, that only protestants are spared from tribulations. It's a splinter in the eye situation.
Once again, thank you for sharing. Genuinely, I love this interaction. Every time I watch another rapturist preacher I'm more confident the rapture doctrine is wrong and dangerous and possibly the motivation behind the warnings from Jesus "Do not be Deceived". And I just pray that they start taking their own advice about context, context, context, and letting Jesus and scripture be the authority.
It's pretty obvious we're in tribulation already. Sadly some of us can't discern the hour of our visitation.
Yes salvation is explained quite well in John 3:16. But it's too commonly talked about like a finish line. It's just the beginning.
Some of us are going to become instruments of the Holy Spirit in the times ahead. The world is going to be needing strong spiritual leaders like no time before. But just for a time, times and half a time, if you know what I mean.
Harpazo = rapture (English translation). It's in scripture.
The issue really isn't the individual word. The false doctrine is placing rapture events wherever you feel like in the timeline. Jesus seems to want you to know important signs so that you understand the timeline and recognize his actual return.
Hmmm, I wonder why he thought we might need some strong hints.... Could it be because we didn't know the scripture well enough the first time he came to live with us?
The issue is you haven't done your homework.
The rapture was recognized by the early church fathers. Meaning the writers of the New Testament. The lie is that it was started in the 1800's. There are many great biblical scholars who have dug into the history of this where this false doctrine (no rapture) came from.
If you actually looked into the scriptures, the difference between the second coming and the harpazo are many and significant. The greatest biblical scholars of our age all agree that the rapture doctrine is accurate.
But whatever...you want to stay here for God's wrath and the tribulation (which is not for the church but for Israel) have at it.
The bowls of wrath come after the woes of tribulations.
Maybe I'm a bit jaded by "experts" but I'm not impressed by an assumed consensus of the super smart expert bible-ologists. For some reason they can't wrap their collective heads around the simple words like "First", when they read of the "First resurrection" described in Rev 20:4-6. Here's another word that they get confused by, "After" like "immediately after the tribulations" When Jesus talks about his own second coming. Come to think of it... Why do they call it his "Second" coming and not his third?
I don't think the doctrine is that He comes a third time. I think we go up to meet God in the air. We then come back with Him for the second coming.
Really smart Biblical scholars have been having the pre-trib/post trib debate for many years. I think most Baptists believe we will be taken up before the tribulation. If a bunch of believers disappeared, there will be car accidents, crashing planes, looting, martial law, ushered in mark of the beast, gun confiscation, etc. A real post-apocalyptic scenario. The news will claim "aliens".
I think they are smart bible scholars. But for some reason they can't figure out whether the "rapture" happens before or after the "first resurrection". So I have to question their authority to explain scripture. It's not hard to read.
Revelations 20 4-6 "4: And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5: But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6: Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years."
They like to pretend there is a rapture before this mentioned in Thessalonians where Paul clearly says the dead in Christ are raised first.
So they end up with 2 "first" resurrections and for that matter 2 "second comings" of Jesus.
Who are the ones that are on the thrones and judgement given to them?
"they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw..." I think that colon : is there to help us understand that "they" are the ones described after the colon. and "they" lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. All the same people are 'they' in this verse.
Well first, you have your Scripture wrong. It's not 2 men in a bed, it is 2 men in a field (Matt. 24:40). This makes me question both your Bible knowledge and your motives. Second, the 7 churches in Revelation are prophetic signs (Rev. 1:1, 3). They show the progression of the churches up until the time Christ returns. The prophecy to the church in Philadelphia (the only church approved) is that they would be saved out of the hour of trial which will come on the whole inhabited earth (3:10). The last 4 churches will remain until the Lord comes, but only Philadelphia will be taken. And third, the Lord's return is likened to a harvest. First come the firstfruits, then the main harvest, then the gleanings.
Two men in the bed is in Luke as I said. Some translate it as two people. But I notice you didn't address the issues I pointed to. But since you bring up the churches in revelations, how do modern rapturists know they are not the ones who are told to persevere to the end? That they are the church of Philadelphia... Have they so faithfully kept the commandments? Really? It still doesn't say they are being taken away from the earth, just kept from the trials. Kinda like the woman in the wilderness.
The tribulation and rapture are depicted in the story of the fiery furnace in the book of Daniel. Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego represent three of the four churches from Revelation. The fourth church of Philadelphia is not represented by these three men, but by Daniel. Daniel was spared the wrath of the king, while his friends were to be burned in the 7 times hotter fiery furnace, which is a model of the great tribulation. Daniel is set aside from this judgment and abides in the king's palace, just as the church, the bride of Christ, is removed from the tribulation and lives with Christ in the place prepared for them in heaven for the duration of the tribulation. The ones who remain through the tribulation are kept safe from harm just as the 3 were thrown into the 7 times hotter fiery furnace but not a hair on their heads was singed.
This is interesting insight. I just don't see how you get past the direct teachings from Jesus when telling his disciples about his second coming. He's very clear about the timeline. So yes Jesus will protect us through the fire according to His sovereign will, but ultimately our life here is already due a fleshly death. There's no point, no reason to spare this tiny fraction of humanity from some hard times. You may suffer and you may die in exactly the kind of world that God destroyed with a flood. Actually it's a worse world judging by how powerful the beast is described. I just think people are more likely to lose faith and turn to false gods (like the Israelites did in Exodus) if they were misinformed about a secret magical extraction which serves no actual purpose to the Kingdom.
“Two men in the bed is in Luke [17:34] as I said.” That is just how the KJV translates it, the “men” is added. The Greek dictionary says that the word is indeclinable (can’t tell sex from context), used for all genders. Then it speaks of 2 women, then 2 men (it’s the same word, but the context shows the sex). And I did answer your points. There is support in the Scripture for the rapture. However, this is not the place to make a “solid argument.”
A better point is Jesus’ prayer in John 17, before He went to the cross, that His believers would be one, “even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they may be in Us, that the world may believe that You have sent Me (v. 21).” While we squabble in division over minor points of doctrine, people are dying in unbelief.
When the Lord returns, He won’t congratulate anyone for their “rightness.” Philadelphia was approved because she “kept His word and did not deny His name.” Arminians and Calvinists keep part of the word, and don’t keep the part that doesn’t fit their theology. And all those who have believed in Him are “in His name (v. 12). And those who Christ has received are rejected by those who dispute points of doctrine. There have been whole religious wars fought for minor points of doctrine.
you might find this interesting...
https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/communal-sleeping-history-sharing-bed
Thanks. Interesting. I was just being kinda facetious. I know there are many innocent reason two men might be in the same bed.
That verse is misinterpreted in my opinion. In the Greek it says "ἔσονται δύο ἐπὶ κλίνης μιᾶς," which means literally "there will be two in one bed." The next verse says "ἔσονται δύο ἀλήθουσαι," or, literally, "there will be two grinding." Note that in the first verse it is interpreted to mean two men, and the second it is interpreted to mean two women, but it is using the exact same Greek verbiage for both - ἔσονται δύο - there will be two. The gender of the term δύο therefore should be interpreted to be neutral.
Thank you. I honestly have never put much thought into it because I never saw it as any sort of inference about their relationship to each other.
It's just odd to me how it has been translated.
There are many things in the English Bible that are translated in ways that are arguably incorrect. Studying the original Greek and Hebrew is honestly quite interesting.
17 words per one hebrew symbol times 11 lines per sentence, what we get is astronomical to deciper. But i digress. And yet im still Christian! Why might you ask.. because we saw him . That ended my 40 atheist stance. Anyways God loves you everyday.
That is a dangerous perspective to have I believe. It leaves things open for us to interpret verses based on our own biases and preferences. First point being is, some of the original Greek doesn't even exist anymore. Second point being, WHICH Greek and Hebrew texts? Texts from the Codex Sinaiticus and codex Vaticanus(I hope not) or perhaps from the textus Receptus? Additionally, Greek and Hebrew can have several meanings for the same phrases. Should I be so proud to think I can study and learn more than the combined knowledge of the 40ish translators of the King James Bible, whose life work it was to study those languages well beyond what our current capacity is?
I love the KJV and the NKJV. But I think you can still find certain items that can be debated about. For example I think the word Easter is used instead of Passover in one or both of them.
Well the passage states that "then were the days of unleavened bread" and Passover is what starts those 7 days. The 14th day of the first month is Passover but the feast of unleavened bread begins on the 15th day and the passage says that it was "the days of unleavened bread" meaning it was days 15 through 21 when Herod killed James so it was already AFTER Passover. Then Herod says "intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people." Since it was already the days of unleavened bread it HAD to be after Passover already and Easter would be more specific since Passover was already over. There's also the possibility of a difference between the "Jews Passover" and the "Christian's Passover(Easter)" as the Book of John specifically references the "Jews Passover" indicating a difference between what the Jews celebrated and what the early Christians celebrated. There's also the possibility that neither of those options matter because perhaps Herod had the secular holiday in mind since he was a secular man and Herod was referencing the Easter of the pagans. POINT being in all of this is you need to trust your Bible and believe it. If you can doubt your Bible then the Devil can get at you...after all isn't that the first attack the Devil used on mankind? He asked the woman "yay hath God said?" ...as in "did God really say that", "did God really mean that?". Doubting God's word is one of the first things the Devil did. You don't have to understand everything, we just have to believe it :) cheers brother!
Yea like the fact that the family who wrote the kjv said and says it was the king who made them altar the bible to be fuddle people. Hmmm i know nothing.
I wonder how Jesus feels about all these interpretations and debates. It is just as well that I have brain damage and can't remember all the...words.
haha look I keep saying I don't understand how it conflicts and you continue to not share any verses on how it does conflict, so I have a feeling you do not fully understand the pre-trib rapture perspective.
Let me address your main post. You said verses are often referenced in Matthew, well I will not reference any of those as they are often referring to the Jew anyway and not the bride of Christ, so that eliminates that point of contention.
In terms of the 1 Thessalonians reference.... I'm glad you don't have any problem with that but keep in mind that we are caught up in the clouds WITH them, so I don't see how that is an issue with the pre-trib rapture.
1 Corinthians 15:51-52 (notice it says it is a mystery, hence why some seem not to understand it) says, "Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep(die), but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed." This verse clearly shows that not all saints will be dead at the rapture, however in the Tribulation all saints are killed except for 144,000 Jewish males, in addition to that, those few righteous Jews who make it through the Tribulation are not caught up with Christ in the clouds but rather Christ lands and splits the mount of Olives on the ground to set up his 1000 year reign. And who comes back with him? Us saints who have died for the last 2000 years and were alive for the rapture. This is in stark contrast to the references in Revelation where all the saint's souls who have been killed must remain under the altar until all of them are killed.
Revelation 6:9-11 shows us that the souls of those who are saved and do NOT take the mark of the beast are under the altar of God and must remain until the rest are killed, completely different from those who "are alive and remain" in 1 Thessalonians. Things like this are crystal clear and must not be thrown out over semantics in any capacity.
These next three verses clearly show we are not appointed to God's wrath which is literally what the Tribulation judgements are for.
Romans 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
1 Thessalonians 1:10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.
1 Thessalonians 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ
The Tribulation is SATAN'S wrath, not God's.
Instead of hopping around and picking at individual verses, try reading Matthew 24. Jesus Himself speaking directly about the end. Read it carefully. There's no room for a rapture. Funny Jesus didn't mention it.
Really bruh? These verses are all from Revelation alone. Yes the Devil has wrath but God also uses that in conjunction with other judgements...read these verses and tell me again it's not God's wrath....
"And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:"
"The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:"
"And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast it into the great winepress of the wrath of God."
"And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God."
"And one of the four beasts gave unto the seven angels seven golden vials full of the wrath of God, who liveth for ever and ever."
"And I heard a great voice out of the temple saying to the seven angels, Go your ways, and pour out the vials of the wrath of God upon the earth."
"And the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell: and great Babylon came in remembrance before God, to give unto her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of his wrath."
Oh and bro, Paul's books are the ones written to us Christians today. Learn the difference between books that are written FOR us versus books that are written TO us, it will help a lot in "rightly dividing the word of truth". I will NEVER ever go to Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John to correct doctrine laid out in Paul's books.
The Pauline routine? Westcott and Hort would be proud. Find a rapture theologian from before the 1830s...there aren't any. New truth isn't truth. Spurgeon? Other baptist/non-Catholic thought leaders before Darby, selling pre-trib rapture? There aren't any.
BTW, Matt chapters 24-25 has more direct from Jesus on the end times than almost any subject He discussed at one time. Only the Sermon on the Mount was longer....Paul's LETTERS don't disprove anything Jesus said, and the suggestion that He was talking to someone else---"the Jews" etc is just a load of crap. "Oh He was speaking to the Jews only". Prove it.
Jesus words. Black ink on white paper. Deny it if you want, but its the sloppiest bald assertion imaginable, strung together by cherry-picked pieces of chapters of multiple books in the NT.
btw--Nelson Darby made it popular in the US in the 1830-50s....Where'd HE get it? Scotland. A teen-aged girl. Catholic mystic.
Honestly, why doesn't someone just cut out all the parts that are for "the Jews" already and save us all the unnecessary reading? To try to be fair, I think sometimes there can be more meaning drawn from some scripture by acknowledging the immediate audience. But to suggest that the gospel writers were so narrowly minded (especially after the great commission) is just absurd.
Good job.
Uh oh, you are going to catch hell for this. :)
I believe that the false Rapture doctrine was encouraged by government & secularists because it made Christians PASSIVE. Why do anything, why get involved, why change anything when you're ready to CHECK OUT?!! Always everyone talking about us being in the "last days" and therefore, Christians are literally PACKING their mental bags and not planning for the LONG TERM. This makes Christians impotent.
Another point: Matthew 24:37 "For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man." and 24:40-41: "Then two men will be in the field; one will be taken and one left. Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one left." THINK ABOUT THIS. WHAT happened in the days of Noah? Were the GOOD people taken away?!! NO! The bad people were destroyed in the flood (taken away!), while the good people were kept safe in the boat. So how is this describing a rapture??!!! It sounds more like the one TAKEN away is the bad person. Just read your Bible!
Exactly right. And He says "Remember Lot's wife." In Luke. She went with the others. Both flood and Sodom are clearly acts of judgement and those who were favored are told to get out, get away, and be protected.
Anyway, He also is the greatest communicator ever. Why couldn't He just describe the rapture and place it in the timeline he was talking about? Well because there was not pre-trib rapture ever to describe.
I also believe it is dangerous for our generation. Rapture theology removes the need for strengthening to overcome trials, instead putting a measure of hope in being whisked out of harm's way just in time.
Which was collected first at the end of the age? The wheat, or the tares?
Exactly! I'd rather be gathered into the barn.
Here is a good article defending a pretrib rapture. A HEBRAIC PERSPECTIVE: IS THERE IS A PRE-TRIBULATION RAPTURE OR NOT? By Professor WA Liebenberg. Probably my favorite argument is the typology of a Jewish wedding.
The Rapture and the Second Coming are two seperate events This is something that many people get confused about.
Apostasia - Does it mean a falling away or the departure? The man of sin can not be revealed until the rapture takes place.
I appreciate these and when I have time I will read through them. But I'm not seeking commentary or reaching speculations from people who have not addressed the plain and simple problems with the rapture being contrary to what Jesus plainly says.
I'm saying this before reading their statements. I just want you to understand my position is not that rapture is hard to see in scripture. My position is that scripture directly rejects this pre-trib rapture theory.
Interesting question for the "to the Jews" crew:
Is dismissal of Jesus' plain words with "for the Jews" an admission that Jesus was clearly saying "post trib" if it WASN'T to the Jews? I think they should admit that before running away from the Matt. 24
Also, that day...Jesus had been speaking to "the Jews" ALL DAY. Why wait until he was back with His disciples who already followed Him?
Like any doctrine of demons, this boils down to "Ye shall NOT surely die!"...it denies Gods clearly-spoken words. But doesn't have the balls to frontally attack Jesus words as not true. It deflects by denying the intended audience.
Your take on this is excellent.
looking at this debate I must say, the vast acceptance of this doctrine is scary. There will be mass confusion in the wilderness.
Thank you. Mighty kind words from the guy I've watched carry the ball in this thread. Lifelong Baptist, so I have decades of theological error (re: eschatology) to make up for.
The Holy Spirit can erase whatever you think you lack and lead you to scriptural truth. I'm talking about my own literal answered prayers - and it wasn't about end times, it was about the jab mandates. But through that, I'm just following the path set before me.
I finally got time to watch the first vid. - I can see why many are confused. He reads right over "the dead in Christ shall rise first"... then insists this rapture event is happening before tribulations... before the second (third) coming. You can argue that the resurrection and the rapture are two separate events, but can you really say that Paul had them massively out of order?
At another point he says that they ask Jesus "Where Lord?" in Luke. He ignores most translations that have that "body" meaning a carcass and he assumes it is the Body of Christ, so Eagles fly, that must be the air ... moving on. This is terrible explaining. I still ponder the true meaning here. I think it is saying that this death he just prophesied will encompass the earth, there will be dead bodies everywhere and you'll be able to know from a distance because of the birds. Kind of like what happens after his actual second coming and the birds of earth are invited to feast on the flesh of those carcasses.
The second video hangs on whether you want to believe this guy's definition of apostasy. He suggests the word "departure" like at an airport when you're going on vacation. And then with a crowbar, forces it into rapture theory.
Even in the Greek it does not mean a happy departure - it means an abandonment from what you once professed or claimed to believe.
KJ got it right with "falling away" and maybe the motivation was to put distance from a misunderstanding of the word departure.
Yessir. Jesuit invention along with the "coming of the antichrist" as if its one man in the future we need to worry about. The antichrist is the papacy, every pope, the role of pope itself
Oh great… Since an Anon figured it out. Thank God you enlightened all of us. KEK!
You probably believe that Cove it a snake venom too right?
Building a straw man is a common leftist / low IQ tactic after all. Our side has low IQs too.
https://greatawakening.win/p/142BT34o0w/choose-light--matthew-2237/c/
If you're too smart for the bible why are you responding to this post?
Oh you’re much smarter than me obviously because you’re posting about how you know the rapture is not true. You must be a theologian or something. All hail fat moco
This has nothing to do my my intelligence. Your insecurity is showing though.
I am secure in Christ.
As a christian studies major, Im going to wrap up this up. There is evidence in scripture for the rapture but the word rapture isnt in the Bible and the concept is an interpretation that could end up being true or false.
Harpazo = rapture.
You should know this.
That word means taken away or caught up not specifically rapture as we know the word rapture...again an interpretation
Major vs capt vs general. What we have here is a failure to communicate. Kek. Scholar, professor, minister, lay person or church member. Sounds a but like whisper down the lane to me, how does one rectify the situation. When i cant even access the vaticans online books without being a professor or Scholar? Huh? What say you fren.,?
Just saying theres foundation for believing either...and neither affects your personal salvation through Christ.
The dead are SPIRITUALLY dead. They will be SPIRITUALLY resurrected when the Son of Man arrives.
The 2 people in bed means that one of them will leave to follow Christ's mission just as his apostles left everything behind to follow him. Peter left his wife to follow Christ.
Christ died a physical death and we must be reborn SPIRITUALLY.
God is not into escapism. Like Daniel, there's a way THROUGH, not out.
The "catching away of the saints" is a spiritual event in the life of a believer. You won't be seeing Jesus busting through the clouds anytime soon.
yes. This is why I think this doctrine is so dangerous. We know how the Israelites behaved after a little while in the wilderness. Imagine that, they walked through the sea, they were fed mana from heaven, followed a pillar of smoke and fire and still longed for the comforts of pharoah's tyranny.
The church needs to stop repeating 'fake news' and prepare for a time of walking in faith with plenty of discomfort.
Im living this out now in 30* or less snow Included. But When God speaks to me often in my tabernacle i feel his comfort. And i keep going back to town..., hmmmm
I don't believe in a rapture before any significant testing of Christians. I do believe that, when Christ finally returns, He will then bring His followers up with him as the Earth is renewed by fire.
I do, however, enjoy the "Left Behind: Tribulation Force" computer games.
Revelation is nonsense, and heresy. You can't add prophesy to the bible after the age of the prophets is over.
The "church" has only ever been corrupted.
See the wars (aka killing, violation of god's commandments) between the multiple popes and their armies for more details.