A Systematic Study of the Rapture through the use of Bible Scriptures

thekingdomkeys · Jan 21, 2012

avoice said:
The problem is there is no such thing as doing "Rapture" done in a little bit different fashion". Its a contradiction to begin with There is no Rapture ..as in Christ taking anyone anywhere..Pre post or mid ..Christ descends to earth at his second coming not before.

it always gets to personal attacks because Rapture Supporters always think us Non Rapture people just need to be educated the right way and we will see the light and become Rapture believers.

The pity is just by claiming to believe Rapture you have proved you do not know scripture at all before you even start.. so nothing you say matters at that point ..
To those who know it isnt written and is simply a teaching of men we know its not a matter of how we understand a thing that doesnt exist in the first place

Its a little like trying to tell us why little green men are really red ... No they arent they are little green men ..
Yet you insist it's our misunderstanding not yours ...

I watched a religious special on T.V. a few weeks ago ..What totally shocked me was the number of Theolgians and scholars who admitted and discussed the fact Rapture wasnt written in scripture anywhere ...
Yet in the next min defend it and teach it anyway..they teach a doctrine not written deceive men and call themselves men of God ..Im reminded of James 3:1 ...

Hello Avoice, so the judgment continues huh? I am beginning to feel like Job!!! Let God be my judge, I have done nothing of the sort on anything that you wrote in your posting.

Please answer my questions Avoice. No matter where one puts the "rapture" (pre, mid, post) there still will be a "rapture" ...that is undeniable. "it always gets to personal attacks because Rapture Supporters always think us Non Rapture people just need to be educated the right way and we will see the light and become Rapture believers" Are personal attacks justified by the scriptures Avoice? Am I personally attacking you guys? You say that I need to "see the light", but are you walking in "the light" by condoning personal attacks against me? You falsely claim that I am calling "little green men" little red men, when I have done nothing of the sort. I haven't stated my position on the "rapture", nor have I even had a chance to begin my in depth study on the "rapture". Instead, I have had to spend the entire time (thus far) in this thread trying to defend my name!

"I watched a religious special on T.V. a few weeks ago ..What totally shocked me was the number of Theolgians and scholars who admitted and discussed the fact Rapture wasnt written in scripture anywhere ... Yet in the next min defend it and teach it anyway" This is an old argument that you guys continue to bring up which holds no water. The phrase "Second Coming" isn't in the Bible either, yet most everyone uses that phrase. Both events are real and will happen, it's just a question of the timing on when the events will occur. Just because the word "rapture" isn't in the scriptures (everyone knows this guys - you aren't "educating" me by telling me this, ha, ha), doesn't mean that it is not an event. If you claim to be a "non rapture" person, then I guess that means that you don't expect to be "caught up" by the Lord.

Maybe I made a mistake in this forum by starting my first thread on the doctrine of the "rapture" prior to starting my first thread on what is more important - walking in God's love (the Love Walk).
thekingdomkeys

PropphecyStudent said:
Hi thekindgomkeys,

The perspective to your delimma is found in Matt. 16:6, and as I attempted to address in my first Topic in this Forum: http://www.christian...eligious-forum/ .

And where there are those who sow tares, if these are bypassed by the gatherers for the burning, I am willing to work along side you in harvesting the wheat.

What "dilemma" ProphecyStudent? Tell me how you can know that I have a "dilemma" on my stand on the doctrine of the "rapture" when I have yet to tell anyone what my stand is? I challenge you to find anywhere in this thread where I have claimed to be "pre, mid or post"?
thekingdomkeys

PropphecyStudent said:
Hi thekingdomkeys,

I appreciate your attempt to perform an objective analysis of this ~rapture~ concept. As characterized in my previous post, it appears you are more interested in studying the nuances of the various analogies, metaphores, similies, inferences, shadows, and types. Would this be correct?

Thank you ProphecyStudent for acknowledging that you appreciate my attempting to have an objective analysis on the rapture concept. Am I more interested in studying the nuances of the "various analogies, metaphores, similies, inferences, shadows, and types"? No I'm not, these are all important individually, but I want to analyze the entire picture and was hoping that I would get a few of you guys that would be interested in doing it with me.
thekingdomkeys

thekingdomkeys · Jan 21, 2012

tomwebster said:
Your word "rapture" has taken on more meaning than just "caught up." It now carries with it a doctrine that is very dangerous and totally false. "Caught up" is not even the best translation for "ἁρπάζω" (harpazō).

You seem to think you are the first to come to this forum to promote your "rapture doctrine." We have gone over this "stuff" time and time again. We have gone over all the words used, we have explained and studied them. The doctrine is still false. "

Hello Tomwebster, the term "rapture" might "carry with it a doctrine that is very dangerous and totally false" to you, but it doesn't to me, nor does it to the most of the people who wrote books on the subject, since they used the "rapture" within their books. When going to the bookstore to find and purchase a book on being "caught up", it is nearly impossible to find one that does not contain the word "rapture" in the book's title. I have read books by pre and post tribulation rapture folks that weren't offended by the word "rapture". Answer this question before me and before your God. What is more "dangerous", trying to discus a doctrine in Christ's love that you consider to be "a doctrine that is very dangerous and totally false", or having a nonChristian visit this forum and read these threads that contain all of the bickering and infighting by people just to try to prove that they are correct on the doctrine ...attacks and false accusations by people who seemingly esteem themselves to be mature Christians?

"You seem to think you are the first to come to this forum to promote your "rapture doctrine." We have gone over this "stuff" time and time again. We have gone over all the words used, we have explained and studied them. The doctrine is still false." Tell me where I have stated or seem to think that I am the first one to come to this forum to promote my "rapture doctrine" Tomwebster? In fact I have stated just the opposite of what you are accusing me of:
"I am a new member of this forum and I know that you guys have created quite a few threads on the subject of the "Rapture" (being "caught up" to God), but I would like to start a new thread on the "Rapture" done in a little bit different fashion". There can only be one right answer on the doctrine (the rapture), but that doesn't mean that "The doctrine is still false", it simply means that some folks understanding of the doctrine is false.
thekingdomkeys

Lively Stone · Jan 21, 2012

thekingdomkeys said:
Hello Tomwebster, the term "rapture" might "carry with it a doctrine that is very dangerous and totally false" to you, but it doesn't to me, nor does it to the most of the people who wrote books on the subject, since they used the "rapture" within their books. When going to the bookstore to find and purchase a book on being "caught up", it is nearly impossible to find one that does not contain the word "rapture" in the book's title. I have read books by pre and post tribulation rapture folks that weren't offended by the word "rapture". Answer this question before me and before your God. What is more "dangerous", trying to discus a doctrine in Christ's love that you consider to be "a doctrine that is very dangerous and totally false", or having a nonChristian visit this forum and read these threads that contain all of the bickering and infighting by people just to try to prove that they are correct on the doctrine ...attacks and false accusations by people who seemingly esteem themselves to be mature Christians?

"You seem to think you are the first to come to this forum to promote your "rapture doctrine." We have gone over this "stuff" time and time again. We have gone over all the words used, we have explained and studied them. The doctrine is still false." Tell me where I have stated or seem to think that I am the first one to come to this forum to promote my "rapture doctrine" Tomwebster? In fact I have stated just the opposite of what you are accusing me of:
"I am a new member of this forum and I know that you guys have created quite a few threads on the subject of the "Rapture" (being "caught up" to God), but I would like to start a new thread on the "Rapture" done in a little bit different fashion". There can only be one right answer on the doctrine (the rapture), but that doesn't mean that "The doctrine is still false", it simply means that some folks understanding of the doctrine is false.
thekingdomkeys

Phillip · Jan 21, 2012

tomwebster said:
Your word "rapture" has taken on more meaning than just "caught up." It now carries with it a doctrine that is very dangerous and totally false. "Caught up" is not even the best translation for "ἁρπάζω" (harpazō).

You seem to think you are the first to come to this forum to promote your "rapture doctrine." We have gone over this "stuff" time and time again. We have gone over all the words used, we have explained and studied them. The doctrine is still false.

That is right.

It came out of a Bible class in Glasgow Scotland from a vision of one 'Margaret mcDonald. Those in the Bible class were associated with the Campbellites, who then influenced this "rapture" doctrine into modern christianity.

The doctrine is a tool of the devil, a stumbling block for those blind leaders of the blind, for those standing around with their heads looking up into heaven for some kind of "second coming" they call it. It has no scriptural basis, which is evident of the true followers of Christ who are led by the Spirit and the Word. The "rapture" came from a "vision" and weak attempts to wrest scripture in Thessalonians. The unwary and unlearned are quite easily swallowed up in this death trap of a doctrine.

How sad

Lively Stone · Jan 22, 2012

Phillip said:
That is right.

It came out of a Bible class in Glasgow Scotland from a vision of one 'Margaret mcDonald. Those in the Bible class were associated with the Campbellites, who then influenced this "rapture" doctrine into modern christianity.

The doctrine is a tool of the devil, a stumbling block for those blind leaders of the blind, for those standing around with their heads looking up into heaven for some kind of "second coming" they call it. It has no scriptural basis, which is evident of the true followers of Christ who are led by the Spirit and the Word. The "rapture" came from a "vision" and weak attempts to wrest scripture in Thessalonians. The unwary and unlearned are quite easily swallowed up in this death trap of a doctrine.

How sad

Hilarious!

Why those who hold a different view of eschatology are so blazingly accusatory is beyond me. There is no view that affects one's standing with God if one is saved. There is no view amonf the three basic views that is demonic. It is an interpretation---not a doctrine!

Phillip · Jan 22, 2012

Lively Stone said:
Hilarious!

Why those who hold a different view of eschatology are so blazingly accusatory is beyond me. There is no view that affects one's standing with God if one is saved. There is no view amonf the three basic views that is demonic. It is an interpretation---not a doctrine!

It is a doctrine that robs men of salvation. That is the exact point. Quit being contradictory, it is quite childish. We are talking serious consequences for men following after the killing doctrine of dispensationalism.

Those blind folk who trapse off after blind leaders and their damnable lies, die because of lack of knowledge. "my children perish for lack of knowledge" says God. Or is that something you care nothing of Lively? I see nothing worthwhile in your posts and call a spade a spade. You love to argue against scripture for some reason.
Where ever you get your explanations, you best burn that handbook. You speak only lies so far, and I've only been here a few days and it is obvious that you get your religion out of a secular handbook, with no regard for the Word of God. Only insults.

I have nothing but Love for truth. I rebuke wickedness and I rebuke false doctrine. It is because I have a heart of Love for truth and I look for a heart of readiness within others. I suggest you repent of your "orthodoxy" and enter a relationship with Christ while it is NOW TO DAY and cease leading others astray.

veteran · Jan 22, 2012

thekingdomkeys said:
Tomwebster and Veteran, everyone, no matter which side of the fence one resides on, on this topic knows that the term "rapture" is not mentioned in the Bible ...why do you guys insist on always bringing that up? It is a given, that when one says "rapture" they are talking about being "caught up" ...everyone knows that ...that is a given.

Certain usage of the term 'rapture' automatically makes a false assumption from the start, simply because of its popular usage used by the Pre-trib School and doctrinists. As a matter of fact, they try to correct others who label their Pre-trib theory as the 'secret rapture', claiming that phrase was never used to describe it originally. Yet that secret idea is exactly one of the ideas first associated with the Pre-trib doctrine by John Darby in 1830's Great Britain. Today's Pre-trib school has tried to distance themselves from that 'secret' idea which Darby used, dropping it off and using only the term Rapture. So when the word Rapture is used today, in the majority of cases, most people understand it to mean a Pre-trib coming and gathering to Christ, when per Scripture, Christ's coming and gathering of His Church is after... the tribulation per Matt.24.

It's not a word written in The Bible, so it's better to preach what Scripture states, which is a gathering to Christ Jesus after the tribulation. Even a lot of folks I know that believe in a rapture don't really know the difference between pre-trib and post-trib. A gathering after the tribulation is definite, just as the Scripture is. We are to speak plainly per God's Word, not in philosophical speech or advertising labels which clouds the Truth.

The phrase "Second Coming" isn't in the Bible either, but do both of you guys have a problem when someone uses the phrase "Second Coming" when discussing Christ's return? Have you guys ever written the phrase "Second Coming" in your threads when discussing Christ's return, even though it isn't listed in the Bible??? Don't you see that all of this nonsense is just nitpicking?

The idea of the 'coming' of Christ is specific to Scripture, as the word "second" associated with it is also...

Heb 9:28
28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for Him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.
(KJV)

So if we're straining at gnats you think, then find us that word 'rapture' you're intent upon using.

And with Veteran's comment "And there's one Scripture you forgot" when referring to the new phrase (thief) that I had introduced, I didn't forget anything Veteran. I wasn't trying to make an all inclusive list of the phrases concerning the word "thief" in the Bible, when referring to the doctrine of the "caught up" (ha, ha), I was simply starting to list a few (there are others). You must not have read what I wrote concerning the new phrase "thief" did you Veteran? This is what I said: "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." Why would I say that we can begin to introduce other "thief" passages to the mix, if I thought that I had listed them all? Do those 2 sentences that I quoted from my last posting sound like I was saying that I had listed all of the "thief" passages Veteran?

Oh, there's many Scriptures involving the timing order of Christ's second coming and our gathering to Him; it's better to simply read all of God's Word instead of trying to see who can list them all here. 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? That Matt.24 example is never going to be enough for the false prophets who intend to falsify His Word in order to deceive.

Veteran, when speaking to me, please speak for yourself and not for others: "Sure you did. No sense in denying in now, everyone seeing this thread has seen you already try to do just that." And how presumptuous of you Veteran to presume that I am a pretribulation rapturist (I might be, but maybe I'm not) since I have yet to state which way I believe the scriptures point on the topic: ....

I still don't know at this point for sure. But it's not likely that one who understands that the day of Christ and day of the Lord phrases mean the same event would try to isolate them apart like you've tried to do. What would be the purpose? None. But, for one on the Pre-trib ideas, they like to separate different Bible phrases that all point to the same event of Christ's return and our gathering. Their dependence upon the Rapture word itself speaks volumes on that.

Tomwebster, before we say that PropphecyStudent is wrong about his viewpoint on the "caught up" (rapture - ha, ha) doctrine, we need to prove him to be wrong or possibly prove him to be right for that matter, and that is what I hope to do with all of you (if you have the patience to give me a chance?) in this Word study. In this thread we will systematically step through, phrase by phrase ("Day", "Thief" and so forth) until we are eventually able to paint a picture of the rapture. What's the hurry? Give me a chance guys, OK? That is all that I ask.

There you go with that "Word study" idea again, when so far what you've been throwing out involves Topic study, not word study. Remember what I said about that difference, and I know you read what I wrote on that point. Like I just said, those on the Pre-trib idea like to separate ideas in Scripture where no separation actually exists.

Where is the spirit of love, the Spirit of Christ in these debates? Right or wrong, on your position of the rapture, are you right on the spirit of your delivery? Let's try to avoid the spirit of being judgmental and attempt to have some "civil discourse". Is that too much to ask for? What type of spirit would Christ's first generation disciples discuss doctrine with others in? Is it more important for us (you and I) to prove our points at any expense, rather than to prove our faith? Right or wrong, where's the love?

I can about gurantee, if Apostle Paul himself were around today and came upon one pushing the Pre-trib rapture idea, he'd be very irrate with them, just as he was with other brethren that had fallen away from the Truth. Love has more than just the form you infer, which even Apostle Paul revealed with rebuking some brethren.

Phillip said:
That is right.

It came out of a Bible class in Glasgow Scotland from a vision of one 'Margaret mcDonald. Those in the Bible class were associated with the Campbellites, who then influenced this "rapture" doctrine into modern christianity.

The doctrine is a tool of the devil, a stumbling block for those blind leaders of the blind, for those standing around with their heads looking up into heaven for some kind of "second coming" they call it. It has no scriptural basis, which is evident of the true followers of Christ who are led by the Spirit and the Word. The "rapture" came from a "vision" and weak attempts to wrest scripture in Thessalonians. The unwary and unlearned are quite easily swallowed up in this death trap of a doctrine.

How sad

It was actually a group called The Brethren.

thekingdomkeys · Jan 22, 2012

Lively Stone said:

I agree. Amen!
thekingdomkeys

Lively Stone said:
Hilarious!

Why those who hold a different view of eschatology are so blazingly accusatory is beyond me. There is no view that affects one's standing with God if one is saved. There is no view amonf the three basic views that is demonic. It is an interpretation---not a doctrine!

OOPs! I didn't pick up your quote the first time Lively Stone, but I got it this time.

I agree. Amen!
thekingdomkeys

Lively Stone · Jan 22, 2012

Phillip said:
It is a doctrine that robs men of salvation. That is the exact point. Quit being contradictory, it is quite childish. We are talking serious consequences for men following after the killing doctrine of dispensationalism.

It is not a doctrine that robs anyone of salvation. I think you wish it did.

Those blind folk who trapse off after blind leaders and their damnable lies, die because of lack of knowledge. "my children perish for lack of knowledge" says God. Or is that something you care nothing of Lively? I see nothing worthwhile in your posts and call a spade a spade. You love to argue against scripture for some reason.
Where ever you get your explanations, you best burn that handbook. You speak only lies so far, and I've only been here a few days and it is obvious that you get your religion out of a secular handbook, with no regard for the Word of God. Only insults.

I think the only people who will lose out on anything are those who are needlessly scrappy about their pet doctrines and boorish with sisters and brothers. You'll simply blow a gasket one day.

What I speak is what I know and experience with Jesus through His precious word and in walking with Him 50 years. Poor judgment skills and harsh criticism of the brethren is all you seem to unleash upon us here.

I have nothing but Love for truth. I rebuke wickedness and I rebuke false doctrine. It is because I have a heart of Love for truth and I look for a heart of readiness within others. I suggest you repent of your "orthodoxy" and enter a relationship with Christ while it is NOW TO DAY and cease leading others astray.

So you SAY... but talk is cheap.

1 Corinthians 13:1-3 (NLT)

[sup]1[/sup] If I could speak all the languages of earth and of angels, but didn’t love others, I would only be a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. [sup]2[/sup] If I had the gift of prophecy, and if I understood all of God’s secret plans and possessed all knowledge, and if I had such faith that I could move mountains, but didn’t love others, I would be nothing. [sup]3[/sup] If I gave everything I have to the poor and even sacrificed my body, I could boast about it; but if I didn’t love others, I would have gained nothing.

.

thekingdomkeys · Jan 22, 2012

Phillip said:
It is a doctrine that robs men of salvation. That is the exact point. Quit being contradictory, it is quite childish. We are talking serious consequences for men following after the killing doctrine of dispensationalism.

Those blind folk who trapse off after blind leaders and their damnable lies, die because of lack of knowledge. "my children perish for lack of knowledge" says God. Or is that something you care nothing of Lively? I see nothing worthwhile in your posts and call a spade a spade. You love to argue against scripture for some reason. Where ever you get your explanations, you best burn that handbook. You speak only lies so far, and I've only been here a few days and it is obvious that you get your religion out of a secular handbook, with no regard for the Word of God. Only insults.

I have nothing but Love for truth. I rebuke wickedness and I rebuke false doctrine. It is because I have a heart of Love for truth and I look for a heart of readiness within others. I suggest you repent of your "orthodoxy" and enter a relationship with Christ while it is NOW TO DAY and cease leading others astray.

Phillip do the majority of us in this forum believe that the most important cause in a Christian's life is to lead others to Christ? I hope we can all at least agree on that principal? That seems to be what you are trying to say here: "It is a doctrine that robs men of salvation" ..."Or is that something you care nothing of Lively?" ..."You love to argue against scripture for some reason". So Phillip, if you are so concerned about the lost (this is a good thing by the way), how does the Bible instruct us on how to win the lost to Christ? And remember, let's not "argue against scripture" (your words not mine). You say "I have nothing but Love for truth", but do you also have "love" for mankind, Phillip? You say "I rebuke wickedness", but isn't operating in a forum debate without "love" a form of "wickedness" Phillip?

Hmmm, "Those blind folk" huh, Phillip. What does the Bible state about "Those blind folk"? Yes, you are correct in saying that "my children perish for lack of knowledge", knowledge is important and I don't want to down play the importance of "knowledge". But, there is something much more important and virtuous to God than "knowledge" that you seem to be overlooking and it is called "love" (charity)! Our faith in God obviously has to come first. But next in sequence and importance should be "virtuous" life in Christ and then lastly any "knowledge" that we might gain! If we don't live a "glorious" and virtuous" life before nonbelievers and amongst ourselves (fellow Christians) we can never become affective witnesses to the lost (the thing that you seem to be stating is most important, Phillip) to help lead them to Christ, no matter how much "knowledge" that we claim that we might have!

[sup]2 Peter 1:3-9[/sup]
According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity (love). For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.

Don't you guys see (seeing the opposite of blindness) that even if you are correct on your doctrinal belief on the "rapture" that you might win the battle, but you are ultimately losing the war? What is more important, being correct on your doctrinal view of the "rapture" or living a "virtuous" life in Christ? Which method will win over more converts? How can we lead the nonbelievers to Christ through our so-called "knowledge" if we are "lacking these things and are blind"? How can we reach the lost who are looking at our lives, if we are "barren and unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ"?

[sup]1 Corinthians 13:2[/sup]
"And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity (love), I am nothing."

[sup]John 9:41[/sup]"Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth."

We have got to get past all of these accusations and name calling that is going on in this thread (and other threads), if we are to ever begin this thread's study on the doctrine of the "rapture".
thekingdomkeys

thekingdomkeys · Jan 22, 2012

Phillip said:
That is right.

It came out of a Bible class in Glasgow Scotland from a vision of one 'Margaret mcDonald. Those in the Bible class were associated with the Campbellites, who then influenced this "rapture" doctrine into modern christianity.

The doctrine is a tool of the devil, a stumbling block for those blind leaders of the blind, for those standing around with their heads looking up into heaven for some kind of "second coming" they call it. It has no scriptural basis, which is evident of the true followers of Christ who are led by the Spirit and the Word. The "rapture" came from a "vision" and weak attempts to wrest scripture in Thessalonians. The unwary and unlearned are quite easily swallowed up in this death trap of a doctrine.

How sad

This is all semantics Phillip, I know where the word "rapture" originated from ...I know the history on it, you don't have to explain it to me. Where did the phrase "xerox machine" come from Phillip, when referring to a copy machine? Who cares? It isn't the word that is of importance when determining this doctrine, but rather what the word represents that is important. Some say that the "rapture" represents "pre", some "mid" and some "post" tribulation. The word "rapture" exists in the mainstream when referring to the doctrine of the "caught up", no matter where it's origin came from. We need to be studying the doctrine and get beyond who coined the word "rapture" or what the folks that coined it believed about this doctrine.

"The doctrine is a tool of the devil, a stumbling block for those blind leaders of the blind ...The unwary and unlearned are quite easily swallowed up in this death trap of a doctrine" I have already covered the above quote with you guys in past post's in this thread, so until I receive answers to those posts I don't intend to waste more time trying to further address it.
thekingdomkeys

veteran · Jan 22, 2012

Lively Stone said:
It is not a doctrine that robs anyone of salvation. I think you wish it did.

Is that your way of trying to prove the Pre-trib Rapture idea is Biblical, by just mouthing instead of going into God's Word?

Who told you the Pre-trib doctrine is not a doctrine that robs anyone of salvation? That is exactly... what it is designed to do! How's that, you might say?

It is specifically designed to lead a believer to bow in false worship to the final Antichrist that is coming. How? It's because our Lord Jesus and His Apostles (including Paul) were specific about the coming of a false one that will work great signs and wonders to deceive the world with. That was the subject by Paul about the great falling away of 2 Thess.2.

When Jesus said two women will be grinding at the mill, one taken and the other left, His disciples then asked Him "Where, Lord?" (Luke 17:35-37). Jesus answered, "Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together." (Luke 17:37).

The parallel Scripture to that was given in Matthew 24...

Matt 24:28
28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
(KJV)

That's about symbolically 'dead' carcase where those eagles will be gathered together. It's symbolic of the spiritually dead being gathered to the coming Antichrist.

Christ Jesus and His Apostles used the idea of that one being a spiritual harlot using the Isaiah 54 idea of those who travail with child. Apostle Paul in 2 Corinthians 11 brought the idea from Isaiah when warning brethren against the "another Jesus".

2 Cor 11:2-4
2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.
3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.
(KJV)

The Living Bible version actually nailed... the idea...

2 Cor 11:1-4
11:1 I hope you will be patient with me as I keep on talking like a fool. Do bear with me and let me say what is on my heart.
2 I am anxious for you with the deep concern of God himself-anxious that your love should be for Christ alone, just as a pure maiden saves her love for one man only, for the one who will be her husband.
3 But I am frightened, fearing that in some way you will be led away from your pure and simple devotion to our Lord, just as Eve was deceived by Satan in the Garden of Eden.
4 You seem so gullible: you believe whatever anyone tells you even if he is preaching about another Jesus than the one we preach, or a different spirit than the Holy Spirit you received, or shows you a different way to be saved. You swallow it all.
TLB

Lively Stone · Jan 22, 2012

veteran said:
Is that your way of trying to prove the Pre-trib Rapture idea is Biblical, by just mouthing instead of going into God's Word?

Who told you the Pre-trib doctrine is not a doctrine that robs anyone of salvation? That is exactly... what it is designed to do! How's that, you might say?

It is specifically designed to lead a believer to bow in false worship to the final Antichrist that is coming. How? It's because our Lord Jesus and His Apostles (including Paul) were specific about the coming of a false one that will work great signs and wonders to deceive the world with. That was the subject by Paul about the great falling away of 2 Thess.2.

Nonsense. The Antichrist will deceive the world, but we the Bride, are not the world, nor will the Bride be here. We who are Christ's can read the signs of His coming, and of the end of the age, and we may even see the early beginnings of the rise of the Antichrist and some may even recognze him---before we are caught away to the wedding of the Lamb.

veteran · Jan 22, 2012

Lively Stone said:
Nonsense. The Antichrist will deceive the world, but we the Bride, are not the world, nor will the Bride be here. We who are Christ's can read the signs of His coming, and of the end of the age, and we may even see the early beginnings of the rise of the Antichrist and some may even recognze him---before we are caught away to the wedding of the Lamb.

Might want to read and heed Christ's warning to His disciples about it in Matthew 24 again; our Lord Jesus even gave the warning twice...

Matt 24:21-26
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.
23 Then if any man shall say unto you, "Lo, here is Christ, or there"; believe it not.
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
25 Behold, I have told you before.
26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, "Behold, he is in the desert"; go not forth: "behold, he is in the secret chambers"; believe it not.
(KJV)

Same warning goes for Paul's warning in 2 Thess.2 about the great falling away of brethren to the Antichrist coming to sit in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. Paul declared the same... type of false working of signs and miracles by that false messiah which our Lord Jesus did.

Lively Stone · Jan 22, 2012

The 'elect' of those days is Israel.

veteran · Jan 22, 2012

Lively Stone said:
The 'elect' of those days is Israel.

The ones Paul preached 2 Thessalonians 2 to were just Israelites???

What a great revelation you've made about yourself with that statement, for it reveals you have absolutely NO intention of staying with the Scriptures as written!

Are you of Orthodox Judaism or Islam pretending to be a Christian as some others here try to do?

thekingdomkeys · Jan 22, 2012

veteran said:
Certain usage of the term 'rapture' automatically makes a false assumption from the start, simply because of its popular usage used by the Pre-trib School and doctrinists. As a matter of fact, they try to correct others who label their Pre-trib theory as the 'secret rapture', claiming that phrase was never used to describe it originally. Yet that secret idea is exactly one of the ideas first associated with the Pre-trib doctrine by John Darby in 1830's Great Britain. Today's Pre-trib school has tried to distance themselves from that 'secret' idea which Darby used, dropping it off and using only the term Rapture. So when the word Rapture is used today, in the majority of cases, most people understand it to mean a Pre-trib coming and gathering to Christ, when per Scripture, Christ's coming and gathering of His Church is after... the tribulation per Matt.24. It's not a word written in The Bible, so it's better to preach what Scripture states, which is a gathering to Christ Jesus after the tribulation. Even a lot of folks I know that believe in a rapture don't really know the difference between pre-trib and post-trib. A gathering after the tribulation is definite, just as the Scripture is. We are to speak plainly per God's Word, not in philosophical speech or advertising labels which clouds the Truth. The idea of the 'coming' of Christ is specific to Scripture, as the word "second" associated with it is also... Heb 9:28 28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for Him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. (KJV) So if we're straining at gnats you think, then find us that word 'rapture' you're intent upon using. Oh, there's many Scriptures involving the timing order of Christ's second coming and our gathering to Him; it's better to simply read all of God's Word instead of trying to see who can list them all here. 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? That Matt.24 example is never going to be enough for the false prophets who intend to falsify His Word in order to deceive. I still don't know at this point for sure. But it's not likely that one who understands that the day of Christ and day of the Lord phrases mean the same event would try to isolate them apart like you've tried to do. What would be the purpose? None. But, for one on the Pre-trib ideas, they like to separate different Bible phrases that all point to the same event of Christ's return and our gathering. Their dependence upon the Rapture word itself speaks volumes on that. There you go with that "Word study" idea again, when so far what you've been throwing out involves Topic study, not word study. Remember what I said about that difference, and I know you read what I wrote on that point. Like I just said, those on the Pre-trib idea like to separate ideas in Scripture where no separation actually exists. I can about gurantee, if Apostle Paul himself were around today and came upon one pushing the Pre-trib rapture idea, he'd be very irrate with them, just as he was with other brethren that had fallen away from the Truth. Love has more than just the form you infer, which even Apostle Paul revealed with rebuking some brethren. It was actually a group called The Brethren.

"Certain usage of the term 'rapture' automatically makes a false assumption from the start, simply because of its popular usage used by the Pre-trib School and doctrinists" Some may have done this Veteran, I'll give you that, but have I done that even one time in this thread? "As a matter of fact, they try to correct others who label their Pre-trib theory as the 'secret rapture', claiming that phrase was never used to describe it originally." Have I done that even once in this thread? I have no problem with post-tribbers using the phrase "secret rapture" against the doctrine of the pre-tribbers any more than I do those in the pre-trib camp using the term "rapture" in their defense against the post-trib doctrinal view.

I fully understand your argument here Veteran "So when the word Rapture is used today, in the majority of cases, most people understand it to mean a Pre-trib coming and gathering to Christ, when per Scripture, Christ's coming and gathering of His Church is after... the tribulation per Matt.24. It's not a word written in The Bible, so it's better to preach what Scripture states, which is a gathering to Christ Jesus after the tribulation. Even a lot of folks I know that believe in a rapture don't really know the difference between pre-trib and post-trib. A gathering after the tribulation is definite, just as the Scripture is." but I still suggest that the entire thing is silly and for the most part amounts to nothing more than semantics. If your post-tribulation "gathering to Christ" doctrine stands, and you are able to defend it through the scriptures, it shouldn't matter to you if the pre-tribbers call the event the "rapture" or not. For you will have already demonstrated from the scriptures that the event happens at the Second Coming after the tribulation rather than prior to tribulation right? If you are able to prove your viewpoint (post trib) on the doctrine of the "gathering/caught up", who cares if folks call it the "rapture" or the "gathering", let people call the even what they want to call it.

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". A "false prophet" is one who makes false prophetic claims, many times attributing them to God. A person attempting to determine an understanding of doctrine (correctly or incorrectly) isn't a "false prophet".

"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? That Matt.24 example is never going to be enough for the false prophets who intend to falsify His Word in order to deceive. I still don't know at this point for sure. But it's not likely that one who understands that the day of Christ and day of the Lord phrases mean the same event would try to isolate them apart like you've tried to do. What would be the purpose? None. But, for one on the Pre-trib ideas, they like to separate different Bible phrases that all point to the same event of Christ's return and our gathering. Their dependence upon the Rapture word itself speaks volumes on that. There you go with that "Word study" idea again, when so far what you've been throwing out involves Topic study, not word study." Now I would love to get into this study with you in detail Veteran and defend my position (which I have yet to disclose) through use of the scriptures in what I call a Word study. If you want to call it a "topic" study that is fine with me, again I think we are squabbling over the little things instead of concentrating on the big picture. But I refuse to begin this study in this thread until we can all agree to debate in a manner of "civil discourse" like Christians instead of like animals! When we are all willing to calm down in Christ's Spirit of Love and argue our given points in a civil manner, then I am willing and even looking forward to getting into this study.!

I'll tell you what Veteran ...I'll make a deal with you and all of your post-tribber friends. If you guys are willing to debate in "love" I will be willing to start calling this doctrine the "gathering" and stop calling it the "rapture" in this thread. Do we have a deal?
thekingdomkeys

thekingdomkeys · Jan 22, 2012

veteran said:
Certain usage of the term 'rapture' automatically makes a false assumption from the start, simply because of its popular usage used by the Pre-trib School and doctrinists. As a matter of fact, they try to correct others who label their Pre-trib theory as the 'secret rapture', claiming that phrase was never used to describe it originally. Yet that secret idea is exactly one of the ideas first associated with the Pre-trib doctrine by John Darby in 1830's Great Britain. Today's Pre-trib school has tried to distance themselves from that 'secret' idea which Darby used, dropping it off and using only the term Rapture. So when the word Rapture is used today, in the majority of cases, most people understand it to mean a Pre-trib coming and gathering to Christ, when per Scripture, Christ's coming and gathering of His Church is after... the tribulation per Matt.24.

It's not a word written in The Bible, so it's better to preach what Scripture states, which is a gathering to Christ Jesus after the tribulation. Even a lot of folks I know that believe in a rapture don't really know the difference between pre-trib and post-trib. A gathering after the tribulation is definite, just as the Scripture is. We are to speak plainly per God's Word, not in philosophical speech or advertising labels which clouds the Truth.

Veteran, I still claim that all of this fuss over the word "rapture" is nonsense and silliness and I believe that I have stated my case on that. I don't understand why we can't agree to disagree on the term (rapture)? If you are able to support your position on this doctrine and prove God's position on it, it shouldn't matter what we dub the name of the event. We will be able to say the "rapture" occurs at pre, mid or post. I think we are still fussing over semantics here Veteran. Again with me study, if you prefer to call it a "topic" study instead of a "word" study Veteran, then that is fine with me. Let's stop nitpicking over this little stuff and be more concerned with the big stuff!

Now as far as your other writings in your post are concerned Veteran ...where you were actually getting into the doctrinal study. I prefer not to start this study yet, until we can establish some ground rules. I have argued from the scriptures that God would have us to discuss "knowledge" (doctrine) through "virtue" and "love". And unless you guys can prove from the scriptures otherwise, I insist that we move forward in this thread in only that one direction - in "love"!

I'll tell you what Veteran, I'll even make a deal with you here. If you and your friends are willing to move forward in this thread in a spirit of "love" I will be willing to call this doctrine the "gathering" rather than the "rapture" in discussions within this thread. Do we have a deal?
thekingdomkeys

I'll tell you what Veteran, I'll even make a deal with you.

TWC · Jan 22, 2012

All we're asking for is where the Bible says that the church will be raptured prior to the tribulation. We ask this question every time this subject comes up and no one ever seems to have an answer.

thekingdomkeys · Jan 22, 2012

TWC said:
All we're asking for is where the Bible says that the church will be raptured prior to the tribulation. We ask this question every time this subject comes up and no one ever seems to have an answer.

And I'll I'm asking for TWC is that we do it in the spirit of "love" TWC. Do we have a deal?
thekingdomkeys

A Systematic Study of the Rapture through the use of Bible Scriptures

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Similar threads