Any day any time NOW Jesus will rapture believers that are looking for Him.

[GISMYS_7]

Hebrews 9:28 tells us tells us who Jesus is returning for at the rapture=those that are looking for and expecting Jesus to return any day any time. Don't be left behind!!

 

[Randy Kluth]

That is absolutely untrue, the way you describe it. Jesus told his followers to be "ready always," to be "watching for his Coming." But the implication is *not* that he could come "at any time."

It really matters what Jesus meant by our need to "watch for his Coming." He meant by this that we should keep our lives pure and sin-free. He meant by this that we should watch out for distractions, temptations, and misrepresentations of his Kingdom. We should watch out for deceptions.

All this is part of what he meant by "watching for his Coming." It did not at all mean that *he could come at any time, on any day.* He positively denied such a thing when he said that his Father had already appointed a day, which is not possible if he could truly "come on any day."

Sure, we don't know what day that will be, so should we kind of expect it *could* be today? No, he never said that our ignorance of the day of his Coming means we should expect he *could* come on any day.

Rather, he said that he is coming on an unknown day *long after the fall of Jerusalem in his generation.* He is coming long after the false representations of his Coming and of his Kingdom in the present age. He is coming when it is time to regather the true disciples of Jesus in Israel. By implication that also includes the gathering of true believers from among the nations, because he also said that the preaching of the Gospel to all nations must also precede his Coming.

So please stop adding to the words of Jesus. He *never* said he could come *on any day.* Distorting his words to sound like this is terrible! I don't, however, judge you because I know how long we've been battered with Imminency Doctrine. I'm sure I held to it at one time too. But it truly is an illogical doctrine, and not something the Early Church actually believed, even among those who thought the time was *near.*

They almost never believed it could literally happen *today.* The gospel message had to be preached first as a warning to Israel and to the world. And Israel would have to go through a long Diaspora throughout the world until it was time for them to be regathered.

It is best to just tell others to *always be ready.* And we don't do that by *expecting he could come today.* Rather, we do that by keeping our lives pure and holy, doing the works God has called us to do in preparation for His Kingdom. To say that he could come at any time invalidates the current ministry of the Church, which I believe God mandates as a necessary part of His plan.

 

[GISMYS_7]

Hebrews 9:28
28 so also Christ was offered once for all time as a sacrifice to take away the sins of many people. He will come again, not to deal with our sins, but to bring salvation to all who are eagerly waiting for him.
The New Testament teaches the imminency of the Lord’s return, and that means that Christ could return at any moment.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Hebrews 9:28
28 so also Christ was offered once for all time as a sacrifice to take away the sins of many people. He will come again, not to deal with our sins, but to bring salvation to all who are eagerly waiting for him.
The New Testament teaches the imminency of the Lord’s return, and that means that Christ could return at any moment.

Nothing in the Bible teaches that he could come *today.* If so, quote it rather than claim it is so!

I know what you'll do. You'll quote all of the Scriptures I already referred to. But I've already explained what those meant in light of his placing his Coming *after* the Tribulation of the current age.

Matt 24.29 “Immediately after the distress of those days

“‘the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’

30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven.

If the Son of Man is coming *after* the Tribulation of the current age, then he *cannot* come today! You are creating a false kind of imminency that the Scriptures do not describe. The nearness of the Kingdom does not indicate he could come today. It only means that the Kingdom is within reach for mankind who want Salvation, and close enough to evildoers to judge them even in the present age.

 

[GISMYS_7]

There is NO prophecy that needs to be fulfilled before the rpture!
The rapture is not the same event as the return OF JESUS TO EARTH.

 

[quietthinker]

Hebrews 9:28 tells us tells us who Jesus is returning for at the rapture=those that are looking for and expecting Jesus to return any day any time. Don't be left behind!!

Poof!...you mean like smoke into thin air?
Just don't have heart failure from anxiety in the interim, or anticipation fatigue from the 'never can tell when it's gonna happen' syndrome.

 

[Randy Kluth]

There is NO prophecy that needs to be fulfilled before the rpture!
The rapture is not the same event as the return OF JESUS TO EARTH.

That's the opposite of what Jesus said. He said he is coming "after" the Tribulation" of those days, also described as the "punishment" of the Jewish People. Clearly Jesus is coming to judge the world, and not until God is ready to do so. That time is not today, and is not now.

 

[GISMYS_7]

Yes!! Jesus will return to earth after the great tribulation but the rapture comes before the tribulation!
1 Thessalonians 4:13–18 — New Living Translation (NLT)
13 And now, dear brothers and sisters, we want you to know what will happen to the believers who have died so you will not grieve like people who have no hope. 14 For since we believe that Jesus died and was raised to life again, we also believe that when Jesus returns, God will bring back with him the believers who have died.

15 We tell you this directly from the Lord: We who are still living when the Lord returns will not meet him ahead of those who have died. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven with a commanding shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet call of God. First, the believers who have died will rise from their graves. 17 Then, together with them, we who are still alive and remain on the earth will be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. Then we will be with the Lord forever. 18 So encourage each other with these words.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Yes!! Jesus will return to earth after the great tribulation but the rapture comes before the tribulation!
1 Thessalonians 4:13–18 — New Living Translation (NLT)
13 And now, dear brothers and sisters, we want you to know what will happen to the believers who have died so you will not grieve like people who have no hope. 14 For since we believe that Jesus died and was raised to life again, we also believe that when Jesus returns, God will bring back with him the believers who have died.

15 We tell you this directly from the Lord: We who are still living when the Lord returns will not meet him ahead of those who have died. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven with a commanding shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet call of God. First, the believers who have died will rise from their graves. 17 Then, together with them, we who are still alive and remain on the earth will be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. Then we will be with the Lord forever. 18 So encourage each other with these words.

There is not a single idea in 1 Thes 4.13-18 that is inconsistent with Christ coming *after* the tribulations of the present age. In other words, a Pretrib Rapture is being manufactured out of nothing. And it never existed as an eschatological system in the history of the Church up until John N. Darby contrived it in the 1800s.

 

[GISMYS_7]

THINK!!! How can Jesus bring with Him those believers that have died unless they have been raptured???
1 Thessalonians 4:13–18 — New Living Translation (NLT)
13 And now, dear brothers and sisters, we want you to know what will happen to the believers who have died so you will not grieve like people who have no hope. 14 For since we believe that Jesus died and was raised to life again, we also believe that when Jesus returns, """"God will bring back with him the believers who have died.""""

15 We tell you this directly from the Lord: We who are still living when the Lord returns will not meet him ahead of those who have died. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven with a commanding shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet call of God. First, the believers who have died will rise from their graves. 17 Then, together with them, we who are still alive and remain on the earth """"will be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air"""". Then we will be with the Lord forever. 18 So encourage each other with these words. THINK!!!

 

[quietthinker]

THINK!!! How can Jesus bring with Him those believers that have died unless they have been raptured???
1 Thessalonians 4:13–18 — New Living Translation (NLT)
13 And now, dear brothers and sisters, we want you to know what will happen to the believers who have died so you will not grieve like people who have no hope. 14 For since we believe that Jesus died and was raised to life again, we also believe that when Jesus returns, """"God will bring back with him the believers who have died.""""

15 We tell you this directly from the Lord: We who are still living when the Lord returns will not meet him ahead of those who have died. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven with a commanding shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet call of God. First, the believers who have died will rise from their graves. 17 Then, together with them, we who are still alive and remain on the earth """"will be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air"""". Then we will be with the Lord forever. 18 So encourage each other with these words. THINK!!!

where are the believers going? ....all who are translated both the living and the resurrected dead?...... isn't it back to where Jesus came from? And who will he take with him back to where he came from?

The dead are dead that's why they are resurrected. They are not in heaven then ferried back into their dead decayed bodies only to be resurrected to meet the Lord in the air......and where did that idea come from anyway?.....you might be alarmed to find out!

 

[GEN2REV]

Don't be left behind!!

BUT, ... in the off chance that you ARE left behind, it's ok because there will be a second bus coming later.

Right?

 

[prism]

There is not a single idea in 1 Thes 4.13-18 that is inconsistent with Christ coming *after* the tribulations of the present age. In other words, a Pretrib Rapture is being manufactured out of nothing. And it never existed as an eschatological system in the history of the Church up until John N. Darby contrived it in the 1800s.

The issue is not how new a teaching is, but how true it is..

 

[GISMYS_7]

where are the believers going? ....all who are translated both the living and the resurrected dead?...... isn't it back to where Jesus came from? And who will he take with him back to where he came from?

The dead are dead that's why they are resurrected. They are not in heaven then ferried back into their dead decayed bodies only to be resurrected to meet the Lord in the air......and where did that idea come from anyway?.....you might be alarmed to find out!

Only the body dies the spirit of believers goes to heaven and we receive a new immortal body at the rapture!!

 

[Randy Kluth]

The issue is not how new a teaching is, but how true it is..

True, but not normally with respect to Scriptures we are told to ensure that our teaching is in line with the apostles' teaching. That means any new teaching must be scrutinized to see if there is precedent for it in the Scriptures. In other words, the basis of new teaching is its relation to old teaching. Even NT teaching had to show conformity with OT teaching. Christ's death had its basis in the Law of Moses.

 

[Randy Kluth]

THINK!!! How can Jesus bring with Him those believers that have died unless they have been raptured???
1 Thessalonians 4:13–18 — New Living Translation (NLT)
13 And now, dear brothers and sisters, we want you to know what will happen to the believers who have died so you will not grieve like people who have no hope. 14 For since we believe that Jesus died and was raised to life again, we also believe that when Jesus returns, """"God will bring back with him the believers who have died.""""

15 We tell you this directly from the Lord: We who are still living when the Lord returns will not meet him ahead of those who have died. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven with a commanding shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet call of God. First, the believers who have died will rise from their graves. 17 Then, together with them, we who are still alive and remain on the earth """"will be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air"""". Then we will be with the Lord forever. 18 So encourage each other with these words. THINK!!!

Jesus brings with him the spirits of departed saints as well as those who he gathers to himself in a second of time. In other words, there is an instant transformation of the Church, dead and living, into immortal bodies so that they may appear with Christ as rulers together with him over the world. We gather with him in order to return with him--all in a moment of time, according to 1 Cor 15.

51 Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed— 52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet.

 

[prism]

True, but not normally with respect to Scriptures we are told to ensure that our teaching is in line with the apostles' teaching. That means any new teaching must be scrutinized to see if there is precedent for it in the Scriptures. In other words, the basis of new teaching is its relation to old teaching. Even NT teaching had to show conformity with OT teaching. Christ's death had its basis in the Law of Moses.

Right but you used an ‘if it’s new, it’s not true’ type argument . We can’t dismiss a teaching out of hand just because it’s new. Even Jesus was put under suspicion for introducing something new…


Mark 1:27 KJV
[27] And they were all amazed, insomuch that they questioned among themselves, saying, What thing is this? what new doctrine is this? for with authority commandeth he even the unclean spirits, and they do obey him.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Right but you used an ‘if it’s new, it’s not true’ type argument . We can’t dismiss a teaching out of hand just because it’s new. Even Jesus was put under suspicion for introducing something new…

Mark 1:27 KJV
[27] And they were all amazed, insomuch that they questioned among themselves, saying, What thing is this? what new doctrine is this? for with authority commandeth he even the unclean spirits, and they do obey him.

That's right. Something new may emerge that hadn't happened before. But it would not be inconsistent with what had gone before.

That is the important element in this. If Pretrib Rapture beliefs is new teaching that did not exist as a fundamental and organized doctrine in the Church for most of history, then we have to ask ourselves if it is simply something that applies only to modern history, or if it something that is inconsistent with earlier teachings in the Church?

In this case, earlier teachings in the Church did not exclude Pretrib Rapture teaching because it could evolve in the future, but because it was inconsistent with biblical doctrine as they taught it. They taught, in accord with Dan 7, the Olivet Discourse, 2 Thes 2, and the book of Revelation, that the Son of Man comes with his Kingdom, and not before. Antichrist has to precede the Return of Christ.

To say that Pretrib teaching is new because it can only be viewed in modern times is not the case. Not even in modern times can such a teaching emerge when it is inconsistent with earlier teaching.

 

[prism]

That's right. Something new may emerge that hadn't happened before. But it would not be inconsistent with what had gone before.

That is the important element in this. If Pretrib Rapture beliefs is new teaching that did not exist as a fundamental and organized doctrine in the Church for most of history, then we have to ask ourselves if it is simply something that applies only to modern history, or if it something that is inconsistent with earlier teachings in the Church?

In this case, earlier teachings in the Church did not exclude Pretrib Rapture teaching because it could evolve in the future, but because it was inconsistent with biblical doctrine as they taught it. They taught, in accord with Dan 7, the Olivet Discourse, 2 Thes 2, and the book of Revelation, that the Son of Man comes with his Kingdom, and not before. Antichrist has to precede the Return of Christ.

To say that Pretrib teaching is new because it can only be viewed in modern times is not the case. Not even in modern times can such a teaching emerge when it is inconsistent with earlier teaching.

The early Church had a Premillennial view of eschatology, whereas later on an Amillennial view emerged under Augustine. Perhaps the Church should scrutinize the Amil view as they do the Premil due to its novelty?
Pretrib view is simply an outgrowth of a literal approach to Scripture, as well as seeing a distinction between OT Israel and the Church. 1948 had confirmed that theory in bringing to pass a literal fulfillment of some OT prophecies.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The early Church had a Premillennial view of eschatology, whereas later on an Amillennial view emerged under Augustine. Perhaps the Church should scrutinize the Amil view as they do the Premil due to its novelty?

I do scrutinize and reject Amill, though I give it credit for having a long history. Pretrib, however, does not have a long history.

Furthermore, Amill had a reason for its change from Premill, even though I still don't believe it is correct. It changed the view from Premill because Premill considered the restoration of Israel part of its belief system. And after a few centuries it was clear that Israel was not being restored as a godly nation.

I believe, nevertheless, that Israel will be restored. It just won't be in the current age. It will take place *after* Christ returns.

And so, Amill has a justification for having a long history, because the restoration of Israel simply wasn't that important in light of the evangelism going on in many other countries of the world. Whether one believed in Amill or not, the Gospel was being preached, and the Jews still had access to that Gospel.

Pretrib, on the other hand, has no justification for separating Christ's Coming into 2 stages, since dismissing the importance of Antichrist's reign for the Church remains dangerous for Christians in every age. There are antichrists in every age, as the Apostle John suggested. And Christ said we are to beware of false Christs and false prophets at all times.

The things Pretrib has going for it includes the urgent exhortation to always be ready for Christ's Coming. I just don't like the way Imminency Teaching is being tainted by Pretribulationists. They say that to be ready at all times means that we are to actually expect he *could come* at any time!

But I think true biblical imminency ignores the question of "what day Christ will come." Instead, it urges Christians to live godly lives at all times, so that we are always ready for the Kingdom, whether we die or remain until he comes.

The other aspect of Pretrib Dispensationalism I like is the belief that Israel will be restored. I share with them that belief, although again, it seems to be tainted. Their idea seems to be that Israel will be central on earth in the Millennium, whereas I think at that time many nations will be restored as Christian nations together with Israel's national restoration.

I don't think that just Israel will become God's exclusive nation, with many Gentile remnants who are Christians joining them from among the nations. I think there will be many *nations* that become, once again, Christian nations.

Pretrib view is simply an outgrowth of a literal approach to Scripture, as well as seeing a distinction between OT Israel and the Church. 1948 had confirmed that theory in bringing to pass a literal fulfillment of some OT prophecies.

Right, I agree in the literal restoration of Israel, in accord with a literal interpretation of God's promise to Abraham. I also believe that God promised him *many nations,* along with his biological inheritance of the nation of Israel. Thanks for the reply.