Lively Stone
New Member
Go to it, boys! I am praying about it, that God will help you all speak civilly and that peace will reign in this discussion.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Go to it, boys! I am praying about it, that God will help you all speak civilly and that peace will reign in this discussion.
Definition of the “Rapture”:
I believe in the traditional meaning of the word “rapture”, which represents a pre, mid, or post tribulation event (being “caught up”) rather than a timeframe (pre-tribulation rapture) like you guys believe. Thus, I not am able to state that the “rapture” is a false doctrine, are you with me here so far Veteran? For it can’t represent a false doctrine, if the word merely denotes when (pre, mid, post) the event will occur, rather than exclusively representing a fixed pre-tribulation rapture as you guys claim.
If one does a Google search on the Internet on the phrase “post tribulation rapture” 81 pages of webpages comes up. That’s a lot of pages for a nonevent isn’t it Veteran?
Wikipedia even devotes a webpage (http://en.wikipedia....ulation_Rapture) to this topic/event/doctrine. There are tons of books written about the “post tribulation rapture” topic/event/doctrine. Even most of the “pre-tribulation rapture” books mention the “post tribulation rapture” camp in their writings!
How about an online dictionary (see below)? All of the online dictionaries state the “rapture” as a doctrine! Not one of them claim the “rapture” to be a “false doctrine”. And not only that, the example listed below actually states the “rapture” will take place at the time of Christ’s return to earth (the Second Coming)! So excuse me Veteran, if I disagree with 3 or 4 guys (from this forum) definition of what the “rapture” is! What gives you guys the right?
Rapture, Theology . the experience, anticipated by some fundamentalist Christians, of meeting Christ midway in the air upon his return to earth.
I don’t know what else I can say to defend my position here Veteran, I believe that the preponderance of evidence is on my side on what the definition of the “rapture” is. I have cited eschatology books, Wikipedia, 81 website pages and even online dictionaries …what else can I say? I believe that you guys are wrong for trying to change the traditional meaning of the word “rapture” and have no justification for doing such a thing!
And this is my thread, not yours Veteran, and I think I have the right to use the word “rapture” under it’s traditional definition, over some new definition that you guys are trying to establish! If you want to discuss the doctrine of the “caught up” without using the word “rapture” start your own thread! And if I participate in your thread, I will honor your definition of the word over the dictionaries definition of the word, ha, ha (how silly!).
But having said all of that, the “rapture” is a non-Biblical word (as you guys continually point out, ha, ha) so neither side can use scripture to support/prove their stances. So because of that, I still contend that it is silly to even continue the debate over the meaning of the word “rapture”. And besides all of that, it is even a moot issue, since I have repeatedly stated to you Veteran, that I am willing to stop using the term “rapture” (under one condition) in this thread for the phrase “caught up” or the word “gathering” if that will make you happy Veteran. I want you to be happy Veteran, ha, ha. Don’t you want to be happy? Why don’t we all agree to disagree on this one Veteran and move on? Fair enough?
“False Accusations” and “Presumptions”:
Thekingdomkeys: On the subject of “false accusations”, “presumptions” and …. let me start off by giving you kudos and credit for an excellent (civil discourse in Christ’s love) first posting in this thread, when discussing the meaning of the phrases “Day of Christ” and “Day of the Lord” (directly below):
....
Thekingdomkeys:
Your first post (directly above) was excellent Veteran!!! You proved you could debate in Christ’s love under civil discourse! You stated your position on the first 2 terms (“Day of Christ” and “Day of the Lord”), that you believed that both days represented the same “day” and the same “event” …the time of Jesus’ Second Coming. If your posts would have remained civil like your first one, we would not be having this discussion right now! But unfortunately, things changed after your first posting.
OK Veteran let me cite some of your “false accusations”, “presumptions” and …. and let’s let the folks of this forum be our judges. Fair enough? Additionally look at your “tone” of delivery and the disparaging verbiage …was it delivered in love? Where’s the love Veteran, where’s the love?
“False Accusations”:
Veteran: “Where have I called you names, or made false accusations?”
Thekingdomkeys: I’m glad that you have asked, shall we begin?
Thekingdomkeys: “what I would like to do in this thread at this time, is to throw out some terms ...some Bible phrases to see if we all agree or disagree that these terms coincide with the "rapture". And if we agree, then I will add some more terms and so forth and so on, until we have a list of terms related to the timing of the rapture.” (quotation from my first posting in this thread)
“OK, I'm going to throw out the first two terms …the Day of Christ and the Day of the Lord” (quotation from my first posting in this thread)
“Let's see if we can begin to paint a picture of the timing of the "rapture" through these “Day of Christ” / “Day of the Lord” verses. Most of the pre-trib rapture folks believe there are 2 “Days”, the first for the ‘rapture’ and the second for ‘Christ’s Second Coming’. Many of these people claim that the rapture is the “Day of Christ” and the Second Coming (after the tribulation) is the “Day of the Lord”. It is our job as Bible students, to determine if this is true or false.”
Veteran: “Wait just a minute. No one can be just in pulling out a couple of phrases from God's Word and try to isolate them from the rest”
Thekingdomkeys: Hello Veteran, I am not trying to "pull out a couple of phrases from God's Word and try to isolate them from the rest" as you have stated.
Veteran: “Sure you did. No sense in denying in now, everyone seeing this thread has seen you already try to do just that.”
Thekingdomkeys:
Below you seem to be implying (accusing me) that I am a “false prophet” and a “deceiver” based on your definition of the word “rapture” and your presumption of what you believe my stance is on the doctrine of the “rapture”. This name calling has got to stop!
Veteran: “That Matt.24 example is never going to be enough for the false prophets who intend to falsify His Word in order to deceive.”
Thekingdomkeys: “I would be careful on who you are calling "false prophets" Veteran. If other Christians in this forum (or elsewhere) differ from your understanding of this doctrine and believe the opposite viewpoint that does not make them a "false prophet".”
Veteran: “That I am... very careful of. I don't throw it out unless I really... mean it, just so you know. Those behind the Pre-trib doctrines are indeed... false prophets. Want me to say that again for you?”
Thekingdomkeys:
“At this point in time I don't even want to tell anyone my stance on when I believe the "rapture" will take place. I don't want to muddy up those waters at this time.” (quotation from my very first posting in this thread)
Veteran: “And there's one Scripture you forgot... Rev 16:12-17”
Thekingdomkeys: Again you were being presumptuous, since I never stated that I was giving you and all inclusive list of the word “thief”. In fact I stated just the opposite, that I have added the next phrase and you guys can now begin to introduce other “thief” passages to the mix:
Thekingdomkeys:
“I have also added the next phrase (“thief”) to our painted picture as well. At this time, we can now introduce other "thief" passages to the mix, as long as they are referring to the time of the "Day" of His Coming.”
Thekingdomkeys:
Below you are presuming that you know what Biblical stance I take on the doctrine of the “rapture”. You believe that I believe in a “pre-tribulation rapture” and you might be correct, but you are being presumptuous, since I have yet to state my stance on this particular doctrine!
Veteran: “All those Scriptures agree on the same one-time event of Christ's return, and the gathering of His saints. It's like I said in my first post here. Christ coming "as a thief" is the same time as "the day of the Lord" events.”
“Why does our Lord Jesus given that warning of His coming "as a thief" again in between those 6th and 7th vials? Simple. Because His coming and gathering of His Church still on earth at that 6th vial timing has not happened yet! In other words, no rapture yet, not even by the time of the 6th vial.”
Thekingdomkeys:
More presumptions below Veteran. Where have I stated one way or another that I thought that Matthew 24:29-31 isn’t enough to determine the “Biblical order of His coming”? Again, this is my thread Veteran (not yours) and I should be given the liberty to decide how I want to attack the study of this doctrine!
Veteran: “But just HOW MANY Scriptures proofs does one need to grasp the true Biblical order of His coming and our gathering? Why wouldn't the Matthew 24:29-31 verses be enough for a believer on Christ Jesus, since they are direct statements by our Lord Jesus Himself?”
Thekingdomkeys:
More presumptions below without any evidence to back them up:
Veteran: “You're slowly revealing to us just what persuasion your are of, and it does not appear to be Christ's coming and our gathering after the tribulation He directly stated in Matt.24:29-31!”
Veteran: “Who cares if folks call it the Rapture?" "Those who stand in God's Holy Writ care, which should include yourself if you claim to have believed on Jesus Christ as your Saviour. Do you claim Christ Jesus as The Saviour, and your Saviour? If so, then why wouldn't you want to heed what He said in Matt.24:29-31 about the order of His coming and our gathering to Him instead of trying to play off of some fake semantics idea?”
My Rebuttal:
There's a difference between the argument of the origin of the word rapture per linguistics vs. how that word has been used to represent various theological positions about the time of our gathering to Christ at His coming. The word rapture itself originates from the Latin 'rapere'. The actual manuscript Greek word is 'harpazo' (to sieze). The Latin Vulgate used a form of the word 'rapere' for it's Latin translation of Greek 'harpazo'. Quite a few English Bible translations chose to not use the Latin derived word from rapere (like rapture), but tried to make a more direct translation from Greek 'harpazo' instead, like "caught up" (which still is only a fair English translation of Greek harpazo at best).
It is true that the Latin usage of 'rapere' for Greek 'harpazo' is a fairly accurate translation into Latin. But English is not Latin. So a derived word like 'rapture' from Latin 'rapere' does not represent an accurate translation into English for Greek 'harpazo'. If it had, then English Bible translators would have used the word rapture instead of the phrase "caught up". Thus the KJV, RSV, ASV, TLB, and even NIV, etc., use the phrase "caught up" for Greek 'harpazo'.
Since the word 'rapture' was only sparingly introduced into the English language by the 14th century, it had not been a commonly understood word in English (another reason for the English Bible translators of the Tyndale, Bishop's Bible, KJV, etc., to stay away from it. Even the later NIV translators must have still agreed on this point, since they also stayed away from using 'rapture' to translate Greek 'harpazo' into English).
Then later, in the 1800's, enters the popular theological usage of the word 'rapture' with Edward Irving, John Nelson Darby, and the Plymouth Brethren movements. Tregelles' study of the origins of a Secret Rapture idea traced Darby's idea of a secret rapture back to Edward Irving.
That's actually when the word 'rapture' became populary used to define a theological position of being 'secretly' raptured by Christ prior to the tribulation. That's when a specific 'timeframe'... was first popularly linked to its usage by John Darby, and then later by Blackstone and in the Scofield Reference Bible, etc.
Thus it is OK, and very desireable, to interpret the usage of the word 'rapture' as intending the idea of John Darby's theory of a secret rapture prior to the tribulation, for that's really the main theological idea the term 'rapture' became used for. Those like Tregelles in the late 1820's distinguished Darby's secret rapture idea as a pre-tribulational secret gathering, which became known as a 'pre-tribulation rapture' position.
Some suggest the word 'rapture' was used earlier than Irving, like John Gill, to represent a pre-millennial rapture of the saints, when what Gill was describing was Paul's description of the one 'caught up' to the 'third heaven' per 2 Cor.12, which definitely was not about the event of Christ gathering His Church. Thus the position that made the word 'rapture' popular falls back to Irving and Darby's early 1800's usage of it with a pre-tribulational secret rapture idea. Since the Pre-trib School's attempt to distance itself from Darby's secret idea for a pre-trib rapture, they have been using the sole word Rapture by itself.
So the common sense point remains, one must be careful to distinguish just what timeframe of the Church's gathering at Christ's coming they are speaking of if they're going to use that word 'rapture'. One cannot solely rely on that 'rapture' word standing alone by itself and be accurate with what context 'harpazo' is meant in the Scripture about the gathering of the Church by Christ at His coming. One will even be more... successful in defining the timeframe by not... using that word 'rapture' at all, since it was first popularly used for the pre-tribulation secret rapture position. This is why those who disagree with the pre-trib idea often use the term 'post-tribulational rapture', but that has caused much confusion because of how that word rapture had been popularly used in the past by Darby, Scofield, etc.
I don't pretend to support Biblical positions with how many web pages come up based on term searches. That's an irrelevant argument.
You're free to disagree all you want. But it won't change how that word 'rapture' never was popularly used to define the timeframe of our gathering and Christ's coming until Irving and Darby's usage of it in the 1800's. And by them it was used to point to a secret coming by Christ to gather His Church prior to the tribulation. The false popular historical usage of the term 'rapture' and false timeframe of our gathering and Christ's coming it was popularly used for, gives us the right and duty in Christ... to be more specific, JUST AS HIS WORD is more specific on the timeframe (after the tribulation).
I omitted your pasted rapture definition, since it does nothing in helping to understand how it has been popularly used in theological circles. Others can look it up as they see fit.
You're throwing out unrelated ideas here, so I'm having to separate your multiple arguments. What have you actually proven with that evidence you propose? Not really much. All it suggests one do is to go out on the Internet and search through 81 or more pages of God knows what just to try and define the meaning of the word 'rapture', which would only cause more confusion upon those not Biblically learned about this matter.
Once again, the 'traditional meaning' of the word 'rapture' was set... by it's popular usage, and that was by Edward Irving and John Darby with their pre-tribulational secret rapture theory in the 1800's. The many English Bible translators didn't use the term, which should reveal something to you of how they understood it as a confusing term, and not one that really defines our gathering to Christ at His coming. Even with Greek 'harpazo' which is... written in the New Testament manuscripts, it must have help to properly understand it in the proper Bible context of that singular event, especially because of its usage in 2 Cor.12 and Acts 8:39.
If you haven't noticed yet, not I, nor anyone else here has tried to re-define the 'traditional usage' of that term 'rapture'. Our flags we've thrown up is how others intend to re-define its traditonal usage away... from how Darby made it a popular term in the 1800's for a pre-tribulational secret gathering.
It's not silly to point out how it came into popular usage by Darby. And because of how it's still used by those of Darby's doctrine today, and has many believers confused, that's enough to warrant investigation to clear away the confusion. I have no problem NOT using it, and rarely do.
The day of the lord and the day does not always mean the end of the world.
The day of the lord and the day does not always mean the end of the world.
Uh, yes it does. It's an event that coincides with Christ's coming and the gathering of His saints after the tribulation that remain on earth til His second coming. There's a whole lot... of Old Testament Scripture detail about that "day of the Lord", so it would help us to be mindful of it, like Apostle Peter admonished us (2 Pet.3:1-2).
It is the same timeline meaning as the "day of Christ" phrase.
It is called a 'day' because of 2 Peter 3:8, which defines the thousand years of Rev.20 that begins with Christ's second coming.
Even Rev.1:10 where John said he was in The Spirit on "the Lord's day" with hearing a "great voice, as of a trumpet" is about that "day of the Lord" event. That's when the last trumpet will sound with Christ's second coming and our gathering.
It is when God will melt the 'elements' (man's order on earth) with a fervent heat of His consuming fire, per 2 Peter 3:10. It's events will occur very quickly, as Apostle Paul explained those on earth being changed as "a twinkling of an eye" (1 Cor.15).
It is when the armies out of the northern quarters to surround Jerusalem on the last day will be defeated, most of them destroyed (Ezekiel 38-39; Rev.16 & 19)
It is when God will bring His wrath upon the earth like turning a bottle upside down, and its contents emptied at an instant (Isaiah 24 per Hebrew).
This is really terrible, but it is also funny.....
Every time I see thekingdomkeys......I see The King Donkey. I am really sorry for misreading your name for so long TKK. I enjoy reading your posts.
blessings
Uh, yes it does. It's an event that coincides with Christ's coming and the gathering of His saints after the tribulation that remain on earth til His second coming. There's a whole lot... of Old Testament Scripture detail about that "day of the Lord", so it would help us to be mindful of it, like Apostle Peter admonished us (2 Pet.3:1-2).
It is the same timeline meaning as the "day of Christ" phrase.
It is called a 'day' because of 2 Peter 3:8, which defines the thousand years of Rev.20 that begins with Christ's second coming.
Even Rev.1:10 where John said he was in The Spirit on "the Lord's day" with hearing a "great voice, as of a trumpet" is about that "day of the Lord" event. That's when the last trumpet will sound with Christ's second coming and our gathering.
It is when God will melt the 'elements' (man's order on earth) with a fervent heat of His consuming fire, per 2 Peter 3:10. It's events will occur very quickly, as Apostle Paul explained those on earth being changed as "a twinkling of an eye" (1 Cor.15).
It is when the armies out of the northern quarters to surround Jerusalem on the last day will be defeated, most of them destroyed (Ezekiel 38-39; Rev.16 & 19)
It is when God will bring His wrath upon the earth like turning a bottle upside down, and its contents emptied at an instant (Isaiah 24 per Hebrew).
The day of the lord and the day does not always mean the end of the world.