The Rapture: A Biblical Study

[sojourner4Christ]

Still on the subject of the resurrection (as opposed to some theoretical rapture), there are two key passages in The New Testament, both written by the Apostle Paul, that are commonly used by "rapturists" to describe their fictional event.

To the Christians at Corinth, Paul writes "...we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump; for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, an we shall be changed." (I Cor. 15:51, 52).

At this point he has already written to the believers at Thessalonica with a very similar doctrinal statement: "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds..." (I Thes. 4:16, 17).

Because both verses describe people being raised from the dead it should be obvious that this is a significant description of the resurrection of the believers. Both passages are consistent, for they say that "the dead in Christ shall rise first...then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up..." He couldn't make it any clearer: At the resurrection of believers in Christ, all the dead believers will be resurrected; then those that are alive will be "changed" to the same "incorruptible" state as the resurrected believers.

The pre-tribulation rapture doctrine teaches that believers that live in the last generation will be "changed" into a resurrected or eternal state at the beginning of the tribulation period -- which is generally believed to be 7 years in length. The doctrine then goes on to say that there will be many "tribulation saints" that come to know Christ after the so-called rapture. While the "raptured" believers are in heaven during the tribulation, all or most of these "tribulation saints" will all be killed for their faith during the tribulation.

Revelation does describe believers that are martyred during the great tribulation. John writes that "I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus and for the word of God...and they lived and reigned with him a thousand years." (Rev. 20:4). The problem should already be apparent. If the dead believers are resurrected at the same time as the 'rapture' before the tribulation, how then can these so-called "tribulation saints" be resurrected at the end of the tribulation?

Remember the previously cited verses (see post #15 ) that clearly show there are only 2 resurrections: ONE for the believers and ONE for the lost. If you have the "dead in Christ" rising at the time of the fictional "rapture" before the tribulation and the falsely name "tribulation saints" later raised after the tribulation is over, you then have two resurrections of the believers. That contradicts the plain teaching of the scriptures.

Rapturists usually attempt to answer this problem by redefining the raptured believers as "firstfruits" rather than resurrected believers -- that way they can still have the "real" resurrection at the end of the tribulation. The Apostle Paul, however, precludes this as he writes that the resurrection will occur for "every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward they that are Christ's at his coming." (1 Cor. 15:23).

A further refinement of this concept of a singular resurrection of believers needs to be addressed. When the text says "the dead in Christ" are to be raised at a particular point in time, e.g. "at the last trump," we can draw certain conclusions. When scripture uses the term "the," in a collective sense (as opposed to 'some of the dead in Christ'), we see the word as all inclusive. In short, the phrasing of the text obviously means all the dead in Christ that have ever lived will be raised at that time. There is simply no other way to turn this into a partial resurrection, or a progressive resurrection, or anything else other than an all inclusive resurrection of all believers in Jesus Christ.

Now let's say that this theoretical pre-tribulation "rapture" occurs next week. That means that every believer since the time of Christ that has died will "rise first," according to II Thes. 4:16. That would be about 99% of all Christians in history! How then can one say that this event would be the firstfruits -- especially when the text says that Jesus himself is the firstfruits? That sounds like the main 'harvest' to me!

It's really very simple: If you take away the pre-conceived notion of a "rapture" the problems also go away. Jesus returns at the second coming at the end of the tribulation. There will be Christians that are alive at that time. All dead believers will be resurrected from the dead at his return, and "then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds." (I Cor. 15:51).

 

[shturt678s]

S4C,

I agree with most of what you have written here. However, I believe the resurrection spoken of in Rev 20 refers to being "raised with Christ" through faith. This is why those who experience the "first resurrection" have no fear of the "second death" or hell. Those who are raised with Christ are seated in the heavenly places (cf. Eph 2:6), and therefore "reign with him." As Jesus said, those who believe will never die because he is the resurrection. I believe the millennium to be figurative of the church era where resurrections happen through faith and baptism. Those who are faithful to death are shown to be over comers and reign with him even now.

Thumbs up!

Old Jack

 

[Tex]

Tex,

While I agree with your disapproval of the rapture, I would disagree that the view is never taught. In fact, it seems to be heavily taught today in books, Bible commentaries, as well as in the classes and pulpits of many denominations. I think this is why the view is being spread so rapidly...much to my disappointment.

Trekson,

I agree with Tex that none of those verses portray the rapture in the manner you speak of it. We all agree that Jesus is going to return...that is not the issue. Most of those verses contextually deal with the judgment of both the righteous and the ungodly on the same day. There is no verse that suggests that the righteous are raptured away (whether pre-trib or post-trib) and the world is left to carry on with business as usual...minus the Christians. Do you have any verses that spell this out?

You're so freaking pleasant on here. You have both my respect and admiration.

 

[Wormwood]

Thank you Tex.

Trekson,

In my opinion, 1 Thess. 5 makes it clear that the judgment of the wicked is on the same "day" and not some period of time after the rapture.

“For you yourselves are fully aware that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.” (1 Thessalonians 5:2, ESV)

Of all of the Second Coming passages in the Bible, I do not know of any that would suggest only one group is collected while the rest remain. In fact, most of the parables and teaching about the Second Coming indicate the wicked are taken and judged first (Cf. Matt. 13:41-43; Matt. 13:49-50; Matt. 22:7-10; Rev. 20:13-21:4).

 

[Trekson]

Hi S4C, Your words: "Because both verses describe people being raised from the dead it should be obvious that this is a significant description of the resurrection of the believers. Both passages are consistent, for they say that "the dead in Christ shall rise first...then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up..." He couldn't make it any clearer: At the resurrection of believers in Christ, all the dead believers will be resurrected; then those that are alive will be "changed" to the same "incorruptible" state as the resurrected believers."

Of course there is a resurrection first and immediately followed by the rapture. That is what this is emphasizing..."then those that are alive will be "changed" to the same "incorruptible" state as the resurrected believers." After all you can't "resurrect" a living being!!

Your words: "Revelation does describe believers that are martyred during the great tribulation. John writes that "I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus and for the word of God...and they lived and reigned with him a thousand years." (Rev. 20:4). The problem should already be apparent. If the dead believers are resurrected at the same time as the 'rapture' before the tribulation, how then can these so-called "tribulation saints" be resurrected at the end of the tribulation?"

There are four rapture theories. Pre-trib, mid-trib, pre-wrath and post-trib. Please do not confuse all the errant pre-trib doctrines with all the other rapture theories and pre-wrath answers your question quite nicely. There is no timing given on the resurrection of those in Rev. 20:5. Christ is the firstfruits of the first resurrection. The last fruits of the first resurrection would be those of Rev. 20:5. They are not separate but are included in the resurrection/rapture of the church. Nothing in this verse implies they are resurrected at the "end" of Daniel's 70th week. The only thing that separates them from other resurrected saints is the fact that they were beheaded, which I believe will include all martyr's from Christ through the resurrection/rapture.

As a pre-wrather we don't believe in a 7 yr. or 3 1/2 yr. "tribulation period". We believe the "Great Trib" is a short term time period within the context of the 70th week that is Satan's wrath upon the still here church per Rev. 12:17 and Matt. 24:15-22. Those days will be "shortened" via the resurrection/rapture.

Hi Wormwood, Your words: "Of all of the Second Coming passages in the Bible, I do not know of any that would suggest only one group is collected while the rest remain. In fact, most of the parables and teaching about the Second Coming indicate the wicked are taken and judged first (Cf. Matt. 13:41-43; Matt. 13:49-50; Matt. 22:7-10; Rev. 20:13-21:4)."

First of all, you are presuming that all of these are Second Coming passages. I do not believe they are. The first two from Matt. 13; I believe are speaking of the judgment at the end of the millennium Rev. 20:8-9. Vs. 39 in Matt. 13 speaks of the "end of the world", something I don't think the end of the 70th week entails. I agree that Matt. 22 is a Second Coming passage and that Rev. 20 is stage 2 of His coming as I described in an earlier post.

Your words: "In my opinion, 1 Thess. 5 makes it clear that the judgment of the wicked is on the same "day" and not some period of time after the rapture."

I agree, but you are presuming that all rapture views are pre-trib and they are not. In a nutshell, here's how pre-wrath views it. The 6th seal is the sign echoed from the OT prophets that the Day of the Lord is about to begin. That's what the people recognize is coming in Rev. 6:16-17. The 144,000 are sealed and the resurrection/rapture occurs in Rev. 7:9, the dead from the graves and the living out of the Great Trib. Our resurrection/rapture ends the great trib as Matt. 24:22 implies. Matt.24:29 takes us back to the signs of the 6th seal (after the great trib) and vs. 31 is the resurrection/rapture. After the 1/2 hour silence in heaven, Rev. 8:1, judgment of the wicked begins in the forms of the wrath of the Lamb (the trumpet judgments) followed by the wrath of God, the vial judgments. I believe the saints who will judge from Rev. 20 are part of Rev. 6:9,11. I hope this helps to clarify my viewpoint a lttle for you.

 

[sojourner4Christ]

There are four rapture theories. [A, B, C and D]. Please do not confuse all the errant pre-trib [rapture] doctrines with all the other rapture theories

and

Of course there is a resurrection first and immediately followed by the rapture. That is what this is emphasizing..."then those that are alive will be "changed" to the same "incorruptible" state as the resurrected believers." After all you can't "resurrect" a living being!!

When a person imprisoned in the Rapture Cult hears someone does not believe in the “rapture,” what he (or she) thinks he hears is someone saying they don’t believe the Lord is coming back at all. The fact is, Cultspeak is a veritable phenomena, in that all cult systems have misappropriated religious terminology to their own advantage.

Your comments are related to the assumption factor. It is the assumption of the existence of the so-called ”rapture” that is part of the problem. Indeed, if someone says they believe in the “post tribulation rapture,” they are still putting forth the existence of the “rapture,” in that they are characterizing the legitimacy of the term, even in a post-trib context. Conversely, if you say you believe in the second coming, you are saying essentially the same thing -- but you are saying it in a fashion that does not tend to validate the existence of the fraudulent concept itself.

This point merits repetition as it’s crucial. If you set out to study (any or all of the variants of ) the “rapture” in the Scriptures (or even in an interaction with another believer), you have already forfeited a completely accurate result, for you’ve projected the existence of something that does not exist, and then sought to study it. In fact, for many years, I’ve strongly encouraged believers to study the resurrection of the believer, as it is a concept that is categorically enunciated in Scripture; and when a student of Scripture fully understands the resurrection, they will have learned there is no way for the “rapture” doctrine to be valid.

As a pre-wrather we...believe the "Great Trib"...will be "shortened" via the resurrection/rapture.

Once again, there is the assumption of a "rapture."

I’ve repeatedly encountered a particular brand of Dispensationalism (with its marketing vehicle, the “rapture”) that has formed the next phase of the ongoing synthesis between the truth of Biblical Christianity, and the “Jewish fable” (Titus 1:14) that salvation can be obtained apart from Jesus Christ. This variant is another intermediate step between the Rapture Cult and the final Antichrist religious system, and may be labeled “Stealth Dispensationalism.”

This particular error is found in numerous forms as well, but it commonly shows up in prophecy authors, speakers, and teachers that have acknowledged the impossibility of the pre-tribulation rapture, but retained some form of Jewish primacy in their end-times scenario. Teachers of this “error in truth’s clothing” routinely seek to draw away believers with a vociferous criticism of the huge Scriptural inconsistencies found in the Rapture Cult, while concealing the fact that they teach the same system of Jewish Supremacy that is the fountainhead of the rapturist error in the first place.

In effect, a Stealth Dispensationalist still separates the Jews and the Gentiles, but places them side-by-side in the tribulation via either a post-tribulational return of Jesus Christ, or the more recent variant known as “pre-wrath.” The latter is yet another spin of the much older “mid-tribulationist” position wherein the Lord “raptures” the “churh” well into the Great Tribulation but just before he pours out his wrath.

Millions of Rapture Cultists are about to be devastated in the tribulation they’ve been taught they’ll never see. However, as many Cult oriented Christians are beginning to sense the danger, the Stealth Dispensationalists have built another barrier to the truth, and begun to yield on the truth of the timing -- even as they hold on to the one lie they can never release. This is related to the “chosen people” fraud, the 2,000 year-old heresy that God still prefers Jewish people based on race. Because this lie is written in cement, and poured into hearts of stone in the brick basement of the house of Antichrist, we are about to see it explode in popularity -- even in a post-tribulational setting.

The lie that the Christians are not the chosen people, is the single most powerful stumbling block to the truth, an it forms the nexus of the final Antichrist system. It is the evil that is at the core of the Cult, and they can never be delivered from it, for the Antichrist deception must come to pass. The Good News is, you don’t have to be a part of it.

 

[Wormwood]

Trek,

Clearly you have some specifics that distinguish how you view the timing of the rapture and that is played out in your chronological view of Revelation. It's hard to point out the challenges I see in your view in a brief response. First, I would say that viewing Revelation chronologically is errant. Revelation resembles Daniels visions in that different visions are provided of the same scenarios that provide more detail or emphasize different concepts. Daniels visions and dreams of the statue and beasts are revealed to explain the same concepts and progression of empires with different emphases. This is true of Revelation as well. I think this is clear because we see things like the birth of Christ after the resurrection of Christ and so forth multiple times in the book. Forcing Revelation into a chronological depiction of end time events leads to a very confusing and inconsistent picture of the Second Coming which is depicted very clearly in the didactic passages of the NT.

Second, I agree with s4C that the real impetus behind rapture theologies is a misunderstanding of the nature of the Church as it relates to God's plans and purposes in Christ. Rapture theologies were devised as a means of dismissing the Church so that the supposed unfulfilled prophecies toward national Israel could be consummated. I think this view is very dangerous in that it not only misunderstands the fulfillment of all God's promises in Christ for Israel as well as the world, but also leads to modern-day Judaizers that the NT adamantly condemns.

Finally, I think your view convolutes the purpose of the end times teachings of the Bible. It is not to prepare people for tribulation, or lack-thereof, warn people of Anti-Christs, prepare people for the "signs of the times," or to exalt national Israel. Rather, the focus is the encourage faithfulness and perseverance in the faith in spite of the persecution and temptations believers face in the world.

 

[Trekson]

Hi Wormwood, Your words:"This is true of Revelation as well. I think this is clear because we see things like the birth of Christ after the resurrection of Christ and so forth multiple times in the book."
Could you offer an example of this besides Rev. 12:5, which is a brief overview of the history that leads to this point?

Your words:"Second, I agree with s4C that the real impetus behind rapture theologies..."

See, this is where you're confusing the issue. Take the word "theologies" out and just deal with the word "rapture", which you may be unwilling to admit, but you believe in as well. In fact, you stated that in an earlier post. Post #14:"The righteous will be transformed and gathered next (after the dead in Christ have been raised) and will be caught up to meet the Lord in the air." The underlined, boldened part is the one and only thing the word "rapture" means!!! Taken from the Greek "harpazo", Latinized to "rapturo" and Anglicized to "rapture". Forget all the false theologies surrounding the word. When I speak of "rapture", that is what I mean.

Here's a note for S4C as well, if you believe that at any time a living christian's feet will lift of the ground and meet the Lord in the air, whether our return to earth is in 5 seconds or five years, that is the one and only thing the word "rapture" implies!!!

Back to you Wormwood, Yes, I do believe that Rev. is mostly chronological with parts that are set aside for further explanation and identification like the beginning of Rev. 12 and all of Rev. 13 & 14, to name a couple. I think it errant exegesis to believe that the seals, trumpets and vials occur simultaneously or are describing the same events in various forms. Daniel is not the same as Christ. Does Daniel do what you claim? Yes, but in Rev. it is a more direct, concientious effort to relay future truth for our benefit. I also believe that the last generation of christians has a greater world responsibility than the first generation of believers did which is why I'm not pre-trib.

Your words:"Rather, the focus is the encourage faithfulness and perseverance in the faith in spite of the persecution and temptations believers face in the world."
I agree totally, but to quote an unknown source, "An army that is told it will never have to fight, will fail to train adequately for the battle"! So I believe that mental, physical and spiritual preparation are of paramount importance for what lies ahead.

Hi S4C, Your words:"In fact, for many years, I’ve strongly encouraged believers to study the resurrection of the believer, as it is a concept that is categorically enunciated in Scripture; and when a student of Scripture fully understands the resurrection, they will have learned there is no way for the “rapture” doctrine to be valid."

As I explained to Wormwood, your thoughts and ideas of what the word "rapture" implies is dead wrong! It's not a doctrine!!! It's just the Anglicized version of the Greek word "harpazo" which simply means, "caught up"!

Your words:"Millions of Rapture Cultists are about to be devastated in the tribulation they’ve been taught they’ll never see."

In the pre-wrath view, this is patently untrue!! The errancy is believing that the Great Trib is 7 or 3 1/2 yrs. long. As explained earlier, wrath is not the same as "tribulation". I believe the Great Trib is for believers, not the world in general.

The rest of what you wrote sounds like the false view known as "replacement theology", I hope I'm wrong. Imo, the spiritual promises made to Israel were fulfilled with the church, but the land promises for Israel still remain and will be fulfilled in the Millennium. Earth is not the future home of the believer, heaven is. The millennium will be for the living humanity who survive the sheep and goat judgment of Rev. 25. Yes, a select few may rule and reign on earth during the millennium per Luke 19:17-19 but let's face it, the amount of raptured/resurrected believers will vastly outnumber the remaining villages, towns and cities after Armageddon. Unlike Retro, I don't believe that all of Israel is given a "free pass" or all the resurrected Israelites will become human again and join in repopulating the Earth. God keeps His promises! If you don't believe that implies to Israel as well, then your theological foundations are highly questionable.

 

[Wormwood]

Trek,

Sure, here is why I think it is evident that Revelation depicts a series of similar visions that all highlight different aspects of the coming of Christ, the battle between the faithful and faithless, the Second Coming and Judgment.

Revelation depicts five major visions, all of which begin with a presentation/arrival of Christ and end with Judgment and Salvation. These visions are broken up below:

1) The Seven Seals (Revelation 4-7). This vision begins with the arrival of the Lamb that was slain and ends with a multitude no one can count in white singing, "Salvation belongs to our God!" and God wiping away every tear form their eyes.
2) The Trumpets (Revelation 8-11). The trumpets depict God's judgment on the world through various plagues, famines, and the work of demonic forces. God's people witness to the world that like Sodom and Egypt, persecute and kill the people of God. This vision ends with the wrath of God coming, the people being judged and the faithful being rewarded (Rev. 11:18).
3) The Dragon & Beast (Revelation 12-14). This vision begins with the birth of Christ, the resurrection & ascension which causes the Dragon to be cast down from heaven. The Dragon persecutes those who hold to the testimony of Jesus and uses beasts of world power and false religion to kill and persecute the faithful. It concludes with the deliverance of the faithful (Rev. 14:1-5) and the judgment of the wicked (Rev. 14:6-20).
4) The Bowls & Babylon (Revelation 15-19). This vision highlights God's punishment and wrath God has prepared for those who persecute God's people and have sold themselves to the power and luxury of this world. It concludes with the saints song of salvation, the marriage feast of the Lamb and the appearing of Jesus to slay the wicked with the sword from his mouth.
5) The Heavenly Kingdom (Revelation 20-22). This vision emphasizes the victory of the faithful. Once again the casting down of Satan is portrayed with a period where those who are faithful to death reign with Christ. The vision ends with the destruction of Satan, death and the wicked and highlights the dwelling of God with those who overcome and God wiping away every tear from they eyes.

So, I think it is clear that every one of these visions use different metaphors and highlight different elements persecution, suffering, endurance and victory of the faithful. Each vision concludes with final judgment and a song or vision of salvation for the faithful. Most of the visions begin with either the arrival of Christ or the significance of the cross (opening of seals, casting down of the mountain, Satan thrown from heaven, or Satan being chained in the abyss.

Im out of time. I will try to write more later.

Ok, I have a few minutes to address a few more of your thoughts Trek.

I like your quote: "An army that is told it will never have to fight, will fail to train adequately for the battle"!

I think this substantiates my point. Those who think Revelation is about some future time that may or may not happen in my lifetime will likely see it as a book of codes that quite possibly has no relevance for the believer today. According to this predictive, chronological view, it has had little impact or value for the past 2,000 years. In my view, these battles have been going on for all Christians for the past 2,000 years. Not only do Christians need to know they will have to fight, but that the fight is taking place now! The mark of the beast is being branded now! The seal of the Holy Spirit is being placed now! Saints are overcoming and reigning with Christ now! This is a present battle in which Babylon, the prostitute, the false prophet and other forces are presently at work to lead God's people astray and make them shrink from the truth. However, those who are faithful, even to death, will be saved.

 

[sojourner4Christ]

This is the author’s first sentence from his OP:

This is how Tim LaHaye describes the “rapture” in his book, [SIZE=10pt]Left Behind[/SIZE].

Notice how the poster sets the tone for his subsequent post(s) by initially placing the word “rapture" within quotation marks. This literary device is utilized for the benefit of the less informed.

Although significant numbers of “believers” recoil at the term cultist, it is very instructive to recognize how many characteristics that are classically identified with the term cult may be applied to rapturists. Cult experts everywhere have noted that one must be very careful in communicating with such people because terms that mean one thing to most Christians frequently mean quite another to an individual that has had their decision-making processes impaired through spiritual deception.

To put it another way, one of the primary difficulties found in any interaction with a cultist is that people that are programmed into a particular mindset attach meanings to words that others would not perceive in the same way. When you’re talking with a rapture cultist, you may both speak English -- but he/she frequently does not hear your words with the meaning attached to the concept that you intended to convey. The word “rapture” itself is a prime example.

See, this is where you're confusing the issue. Take the word "theologies" out and just deal with the word "rapture....Taken from the Greek "harpazo", Latinized to "rapturo" and Anglicized to "rapture". Forget all the false theologies surrounding the word. When I speak of "rapture", that is what I mean.

...meet the Lord in the air...that is the one and only thing the word "rapture" implies!!!

For instance, I declare here and now that the word “rapture” never appears in the Bible. Now a rapturist will respond ‘that’s not true! I know the word IS in the Bible!’ and in a twisted way of looking at things, he’s right. Let me illustrate.

In Thessalonians 4:17 we see that “...we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together...in the clouds.” In this verse, the Greek word that Paul originally used when he wrote I Thessalonians was “harpazo.” This word means to be caught up or snatched up violently. When Catholic scholars produced early translations of the New Testament, they wrote in Latin. In those translations, they used the Latin word rapere as their equivalent for harpazo. This word rapere is the root word and the origin of the English word rapture. The root has other words associated with it -- including our word raptor, which describes a destructive bird of prey.

The New Testament was written in Greek. It was translated from the Greek into English by a team of spiritually blessed men of God back in the time of King James. I don’t consider any other version (including all English versions) to be the Bible. In this regard, the New International Version is blasphemous garbage -- not the word of God. I don’t speak Latin, no scriptures were ever given to any of the Lord’s Hebrew prophets in Latin, and no prophet of the Lord wrote in Latin. The only Latin writers I have any knowledge of were Catholic, and I am persuaded that the Scriptures demonstrate that Catholicism provides a significant component to what Revelation calls Mystery Babylon. Thus, the argument that the word “rapture” is in the Bible is dependent on a Latin translation -- i.e. work that is derived from Scripture, but is not scripture. Therefore, the word Rapture IS NOT IN THE BBILE.

There is another way to approach the word game that is played by those what are caught in the cult. When they tell you the word “rapture” is in the Bible, ask them if the word Chernobyl is in the Bible. If they’re honest at all, they’ll say ‘of course not.’ Then show them Revelation 9:11 where after the 3rd trumpet the fresh waters are made bitter during the tribulation. The text says “And the name of the star is called Wormwood, and the third part of the waters became wormwood.”

Many of us know that the Ukranian word for “wormwood” (which is actually an herbal purging substance) is Chernobyl. Now, how many of you speak or read Ukranian? It’s likely that this wormwood episode is describing a nuclear contamination of fresh water at some point in the tribulation, but you could hardly say the actual word Chernobyl is in the Bible. It’s a Ukranian word -- not Hebrew, Greek, or English. Indeed, 50 years ago if you said ‘You know, the word Chernobyl is in the Bible!’ people would have sent for the boys in the white coats to give you some Prozac.

The analogy is the same. Why pull out some strange word from a dead or foreign language that has no original connection with the scriptures? The only reason is to defend a doctrine that is not expressly taught anywhere in scripture.

 

[Trekson]

Hi S4C, Sounds to me like you're overly concerned with semantics. I've always known the word rapture isn't in the bible and the word "bible" is not in the bible, yet everyone knows what we're talking about when we speak of the bible. If you want to use the word "harpazo" instead of it's English equivalent, "rapture", I don't have any problem with that as long as you'll admit, it's not the same thing as a "resurrection". Being KJVO explains a lot.



Hi Wormwood, I haven't forgotten about you but it's been an extremely busy weekend and tomorrow I have at least a ten hour drive ahead of me. It takes time to give you the response you deserve but I'll try to post as early next week as I can. P.S. I have a post on spiritual warfare that you might appreciate.

 

[sojourner4Christ]

Hi S4C, Sounds to me like you're overly concerned with semantics.

No more concerned than my Father.

semantics: meaning; signification; the meaning, or an interpretation of the meaning, of a word, sign, sentence, etc.

Satan changed one word of scripture and we all know what resulted.

I've always known the word rapture isn't in the bible and the word "bible" is not in the bible, yet everyone knows what we're talking about when we speak of the bible.

You’re conflating two separate issues. Ragardless, the word bible simply means book. However, ”Holy Bible” is something entirely different.

If you want to use the word "harpazo" instead of it's English equivalent, "rapture", I don't have any problem with that as long as you'll admit, it's not the same thing as a "resurrection".

The word rapture appears neither in the Holy Bible nor in a copyrighted version of the Holy Bible e.g. the NIV. Conversely, the word resurrection does.

Being KJVO explains a lot.

Not understanding the fundamental differences between the copyrighted works of men and the inspired word of God explains even more.

Thanks for responding.

 

[Wormwood]

Hey Trek,

I would be happy to read your post on spiritual warfare. Can you provide a link for me?

 

[Trekson]

Hi Wormwood, I know it's here some place. If you could tell me how to link up with it instead of reposting like I did the Body and the Bride, I'd be glad to.

Hi S4C, We should probably just agree to disagree on this topic but at least let me explain why I'm not KJVO. I believe the only parts of scripture that were inspired of God were the direct texts written by the authors of the various books of the bible. I don't believe the translators of the KJV were any more "inspired" than you or I. However, I do believe that God protects the integrity of His word, no matter who the translators were. In every translation known to man, I believe the greater truths are intact as well as the way of salvation. The variations that occur between translations do nothing to take away the path of salvation, the Lordship and identity of who Christ was, who He became and where He is now.

According to my research, the lowest percentage of the KJV containing translations from the Latin Vulgate is 17%. If you think there is zero Latin Vulgate in the KJV, you are sorely mistaken. Also if you think the Catholic church never had their hands on the early church Greek manuscripts you are again mistaken. The best thing for any christian to do is to depend on the Holy Spirit for the proper understanding of God's word. If you depend solely on men's work, you're doomed to disappointment. By not accepting other translations I think you're doing yourself a disservice if you want to be a true Berean of His word. In what other category of serious study would you use a single text for research?

Some have claimed that if a person isn't born again, they have no business translating the bible but that is foolishness. Do you insist your doctor, lawyer, mechanic, car dealer, etc. be born again? One's knowledge in their field of study doesn't depend on their salvation and if God can consider Nebuchadnezzar as "His servant" in how he dealt with Israel, then I believe He can guide unsaved men to a degree of knowledge concerning the correct translation of His word.

 

[Wormwood]

Hey Trek,

Sure. Just find the post you made. In the upper right hand corner on the green ribbon of your post, you will see the post # and a little < sign. (for instance, this is #35) Click that sign and it will pull up a link to that particular post. Copy it and paste it here. Then I can just click it and go to your post. If you are having trouble finding the post, go to your post history and you can scroll through all your posts there.

 

[Trekson]

Hi Wormwood, Thanks for the help, Here it is: http://www.christianityboard.com/topic/16393-when-the-day-of-evil-comes/?p=159916

 

[sojourner4Christ]

Thanks for your reply. This time, I will respond largely within the body of your reply and via red text.

Hi S4C, We should probably just agree to disagree on this topic That’s not a good idea. In, truth, that attitude is abominable unto the Lord. but at least let me explain why I'm not KJVO. I’m not “KJVO,” either. And a born again believer would never be caught dead so labeling anyone who held the KJB as the word of God. The label is a PERJORATIVE, a presumption employed to preemptively discredit the opposition; again, this is abominable unto the Lord. And I will tell you the reason WHY you are “not KJVO.” It’s because you are afraid. Jesus Christ is the target of hatred by this world. His living Spirit-inspired words, which give his express will on this earth, are the bulls eye. Christians who stand with Christ's word at the very bull's eye will not only suffer persecution but also be subject to a constant barrage of attack. The word of God brings the same reproach he bore. His word is the only vestige on earth of Jesus Christ, other than the Holy Ghost and the testimony of born again Christians. "[W]hen tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word," some move slightly off center to avoid the unremitting assault of questioning scribes and mocking bystanders (Matthew 13:21). Those edging away from the bull's eye are still 'for Jesus,' but the desire not to appear "foolish" finds puffed egos seeking ways and means to avoid the "shame" that comes from saying that you have a book in which God actually talks to man (Acts 5:41, Hebrews 12:2). The living "powerful" quality of the King James Bible incites sinful men to "mock" and "question" it, just as they did Jesus Christ, the living Word, when he was on earth (Mark 10:34, Matthew 22:15, Mark 8:11, et al.). The apostles scurried away when Jesus was tried and crucified. When the KJB is likewise tried with accusing questions, even some of the best men scurry under the cover of a Greek text, some lexicon or the elusive 'originals.' Calvinists such as Carl Earth (1886-1968) and B.B. Warfield (1851-1921), although defending a semblance of traditional Christianity against German rationalism, were among the first to erect imaginary castles to house the word of God, outside of the tangible 'Holy Bible.' Those, who are under their influence, say that the 'Bible is inspired,' but actually mean that only the originals or some Greek or Hebrew text is inspired. They are unknowingly practicing Semler's deceptive theory of accommodation. They are trying to give the impression of orthodoxy to their listeners or readers. The actual title of God's word is the Holy Bible[SIZE=8.5pt] [/SIZE]- not the King James Bible. Jealous new version 'editors' sought to "rename" it centuries ago, a marketing ploy which has worked in their favor ever since. When I use the term 'Holy Bible' or 'Bible' I mean what every church-going person means and exactly what the dictionary calls the "Bible," the sacred book of Christianity including the Old and the New Testament." A 'book' is defined by Webster as "a set of written or printed pages fastened on an end and enclosed between protective covers." This describes precisely the Holy Bible Christians read and have in their homes. A 'book' is no where identified as 'dissolved animal skins or parchments which have been written on'; neither is a 'Bible' thought of by anyone as a rare and unreadable Greek text. No living person identifies a 'Bible' as any of these things, except perhaps those 'clergy' who, like Humpty Dumpty say, "When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean." When children and politicians, like Clinton, do this, it is called lying. B.B. Warfield was one of the first American theologians to declare war on the Holy Bible's inspiration. In the 1800s this American Presbyterian theologian found himself too close to the bull's eye, the Holy Bible. He unwisely positioned himself under a constant barrage of attack in 1876 when he went to study for a year in Leipzig, Germany under the higher critics, who denied that God had given man the Bible. I believe the only parts of scripture that were inspired of God were the direct texts written by the authors of the various books of the bible. You’ve just called God a liar: Psalm 12:6, 7 tells us that the Lord has preserved his pure word forever. So the relevant question is, which one is it? God has no use for any “originals,” otherwise he would have made certain that we had them today. Rather, the question remains, has God kept his promise? I don't believe the translators of the KJV were any more "inspired" than you or I. It’s NEVER been about the translators. Believing it is, is why you have a problem, a disjunction between inspiration and preservation. It’s about whether you believe God has kept his promise. However, I do believe that God protects the integrity of His word, no matter who the translators were. Ahhh, now you would backpeddle, seeking to have it both ways -- again, abominable unto the Lord. In every translation known to man, I believe the greater truths are intact as well as the way of salvation. The Satanic bible has some “greater truths.” The variations that occur between translations do nothing to take away the path of salvation, the Lordship and identity of who Christ was, who He became and where He is now. It’s an irony when some mockingly chatter, ‘Are you saying the the KJV translators were inspired like Moses?’ -- when the printed Greek edition that they naively think is ‘the originals’ was edited by men (e.g. Scrivener) who were no more inspired than the KJV translators. God’s word is inspired.

What would Jesus do? (please choose one):

a) Inspire a Bible people can read?
b ) Inspire conflicting Greek editions which few can read?
c) Inspire unsaved liberals to write conflicting Greek lex-icons to translate conflicting one-man Greek editions?
d) Inspire originals, then lose them?

According to my research, the lowest percentage of the KJV containing translations from the Latin Vulgate is 17%. If you think there is zero Latin Vulgate in the KJV, you are sorely mistaken. Your research is in error. Question is: Do you want to know the truth? ...the documented truth? Also if you think the Catholic church never had their hands on the early church Greek manuscripts you are again mistaken. Are you kidding? Satan (via the RCC) has ALWAYS had his “bible,” as well, and still does -- 600+ modern per-verions, at last count. The best thing for any christian to do is to depend on the Holy Spirit for the proper understanding of God's word. So what are you doing touching something other than God’s Holy Bible? i.e. the copyrighted works of men owned by men? If you depend solely on men's work, you're doomed to disappointment. Again, more doubletalk. By not accepting other translations I think you're doing yourself a disservice if you want to be a true Berean of His word.
In what other category of serious study would you use a single text for research? Are you truly “serious”? Are you not aware that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? Touch not the unclean thing; pass not by it. AVOID IT like the plague it is. I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes. God's pattern has always been the same. He has always given the COMMON MAN the COMMON BIBLE written in the COMMON LANGUAGE of the day to do one thing: evangelize the world. Today, that vernacular Bible is the uncopyrighted, free discourse King James Bible.

Some have claimed that if a person isn't born again, they have no business translating the bible but that is foolishness. Do you insist your doctor, lawyer, mechanic, car dealer, etc. be born again? One's knowledge in their field of study doesn't depend on their salvation and if God can consider Nebuchadnezzar as "[SIZE=8.5pt]H[/SIZE]is servant" in how he dealt with Israel, then I believe [SIZE=8.5pt]H[/SIZE]e can guide unsaved men to a degree of knowledge concerning the correct translation of [SIZE=8.5pt]H[/SIZE]is word.

Again it’s not about men. It’s about believing God’s word in that God has kept his promise to preserve his pure word forever.

P.S. Note that I have highlighted, in blue bold, the upper case letters of several pronouns in your post (i.e. He, His). You believe you are giving respect to God when you do this. You learned this not from a diligent study of your own, but from others in supposed positions of authority and therefore you seek to be like them. The truth is that the modern copyrighted versions of the Holy Bible do this because it is how they cunningly introduce their generic antichrist equivalent.

To illustrate, folks used to memorize the old hymns out of hymnals like Great Hymns of the Faith. These hymns, from AD 800-1900, contain the cognitive tools and messages which make memorization possible and conviction and blessing certain:

- They have a metrical framework, accented syllabication at mathematically predictable intervals: isochronus rhythms, iambic pentameter, etc.

- They have rhyme. Commercial jingles use this tool because they know that it increases memorability. "You deserve a break today, So get up and get away..." Pediatrician Dr. James Sightler has noted that he has never met a child who did not learn the alphabet using the 'alphabet song.'

Contemporary Christian music has few if any of the above features. This is why churches must use overhead transparencies. Members cannot memorize them and consequently will not be able to sing them to themselves during the week. New 'crossover' songs substitute "you" for God, Jesus, Thee; “Spirit” for the Holy Spirit; “the Christ” for Jesus Christ; and “the Name” for ??? -- in step with the modern copyrighted versions (e.g. New World, New International, ad nauseum), ever-moving us toward the final New Age antichrist ”bible.”

And so, it is likewise with today’s “popular” but unscriptural capitalization of pronouns e.g. His, He, Him... You won’t find that in the words of God i.e. the Holy Bible. What saith Scripture?

 

[Trekson]

Hi S4C, Well, we each had our say and disagree. To go back and forth would solve nothing but I do have one comment: Your words: "And so, it is likewise with today’s “popular” but unscriptural capitalization of pronouns e.g. His, He, Him... You won’t find that in the words of God i.e. the Holy Bible. What saith Scripture?"

Well, I don't know what book you're reading but my KJ is just full of them.

 

[sojourner4Christ]

Hi S4C, Well, we each had our say and disagree. To go back and forth would solve nothing

I haven't had any "say." I simply posted the documented truth of the matter. Obviously, you're not able to refute what I've posted; in any case, you are now accountable. Some love the truth and will seek it out, while some love the wiggle room afforded by the inventions of bible critics.

...but I do have one comment: Your words: "And so, it is likewise with today’s “popular” but unscriptural capitalization of pronouns e.g. His, He, Him... You won’t find that in the words of God i.e. the Holy Bible. What saith Scripture?"

Well, I don't know what book you're reading but my KJ is just full of them.

Then it shoud be a simple task, indeed, a pleasurable endeavor, for you to show us everywhere in the KJB you've found a personal pronoun (i.e. He and His), which refers to God/Jesus Christ, that is capitalized (other than as the first word of a sentence).

Further, for our readers, since a majority do not understand what "inspiration" means, I've distilled it down to make it easier to understand.

"Now the Spirit speaketh expressly..." (1 Tim 4:1 KJB)

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Tim. 3:16 KJB)

What does "given by inspiration" mean? What is "All scripture"? I will begin with a discussion of the Greek text, only because that is where this discussion usually, and I might add, somewhat incorrectly begins. This will not come from the standard corrupt secularized lexicons and critical editions (such as Strong, Vine, Zodhiates, Moulton, Milligan, Thayer, Wuest, Trench, Vincent, Liddell, Scott, Persbacher, Gesenius, Brown, Driver, Briggs, Scrivener, Berry, Beza, Westcott, Hort, Aland, Metzger, Green, and Ginsburg - all are proven unreliable in various degrees).

The Greek word "theopneustos" is translated "is given by inspiration of God." The first part of the word is theo which means "God." The second part, from pneuma, is almost always translated as "spirit" (322 times; 91 times as 'Ghost' or ghost; once as 'wind,' once as 'life,' and never as 'breath' or 'breathed'). Given the vast preponderance of the translation of this Greek word into English as "spirit," it is logically translated with the English "spir," as seen in the word "inspiration." The use of the word 'spir," meaning "spirit," lines up perfectly with John 6:63, where Jesus defines his words. He said,

"[T]he words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."

In other words, the word of God is not just ink on paper, like other books; its words are "spirit." Since the spirit of God is alive, his words are also alive. Consequently John 6:63 concludes that the word of God is "life."

Breath is tangible; the spirit is not tangible. Those who are afraid to call the KJB "inspired" are wrongly focused on the physical character of Strong's or Moulton's erring definition, "breathe"; they know that God did close the canon and stopped the physical sign gifts. But God's "Spirit" is still striving with man, comforting man, and leading man into all truth. God never said the Spirit would not translate the canon; he did provide for this in Acts 2 when "every man heard them speak in his own language" from "every nation under heaven." Although the Greek word pneuma can be seen in secular English as 'pneumonia' and 'pneumatic,' both relating to air, its Biblical usage is exclusively as 'spirit,' never as 'breathe.' Even Hodge, as noted in Augustus Strong's Systematic Theology on p. 198 admitted that 'spirit' is the correct correlative.

Not surprisingly, corrupt new bible versions, such as the NIV, replace "inspiration" with the secular word "breathed," thereby erasing the root 'spir' and its connection to the Spirit of God. The Calvinist produced English Standard Version (ESV) similarly says "breathed out" (yet the word "out" also appears in no Greek texts).

So there you have it.

As I indicated previously, there are two types of bibles: God's, and Satan's.

Second, the earlier vernacular (meaning common) bibles, in the common languages of their day, which are ancestors of the KJV-text type, can be trusted. This text type is supported by over 99% of the 5400 extant (meaning existing) manuscripts and autographs. Conversely, those of Alexandrian ancestry, such as all modern copyrighted versions, cannot be trusted, as they are from manuscripts rejected as corrupt (less than 1% of the total) which have been resurrected by unsaved scholars and copyrighted for mammon.

The KJB is not a "perfect version;" rather, it is the words of God, the genuine article, the manifestation of God's promise to preserve his pure inspired word for ever. The modern copyrighted versions are counterfeits -- owned by men.

Again, the KJB is not a "version;" it represents an ascension of the KJV text type which God has kept for his people from the beginning. King James just happened to be the man on watch at the time that particular vernacular (English) Bible was coming together.

Where the word of a king is, there is power (Ecc. 8:4 KJB).

 

[Rocky Wiley]

[SIZE=medium]This is how Tim LaHaye describes the “rapture” in his book, Left Behind. Maybe you have read about the rapture that describes the second coming of Jesus in a similar fashion. Namely, that people will suddenly disappear from all over the world. Cars will be left abandoned, planes will fall from the sky as their pilots and some of the passengers are suddenly raptured away. After all the Christians have been raptured away, the world will be led into a Great Tribulation where the Antichrist rules the world for seven years. [/SIZE]

So be ready. Perhaps today is the day. Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Wormwood,

Tim LaHaye is just another false prophecy teacher. The Christians will be the ones that are left behind, not the wicked.

Mat 13:30 Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

Mat 13:38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;
Mat 13:39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
Mat 13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
Mat 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
Mat 13:42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

How can anyone teach something completely different from what Jesus said and expect people to believe it? Most do though.

Asking you to read the above again if there is any doubt in your mind.




.