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.
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.