Is the Rapture Biblical?

[S.T. Ranger]

[S.T. Ranger]

II Pet. 3:14-15: Wherefore, beloved, hoping for these things ..."

Comment: What things? Well certainly the twenty references to Christ’s return.

"... endeavor to be found by Him in peace, unspotted and flawless. And be deeming the patience of our Lord salvation ..."

Comment: What they were calling the Lord’s delay or failure to return, Peter calls "patience" of our Lord. And this patience was for their salvation.

"... according as our beloved brother Paul ALSO WRITES TO YOU ..."

Comment: What a dilemma for the rapturists.

You seriously think you have offered anything that detracts from a pre-trib view? Seriously? lol

If these churches were founded by Paul, WHY IS PETER WRITING TO THEM?

Because he is an Apostle, lol. They do that kind of thing.

And if these churches were founded by Peter, WHY IS PAUL WRITING TO THEM?

This one is a little easier to speculate about: probably to straighten out any confusion Peter may have created, lol.

If, according to our rapturists friends, there was one gospel message for the Jews, and another gospel for the Gentiles,

False argument: Rapture Theology does not teach two Gospels.

This is a false argument and tantamount to false witness. Don't ever kid yourself that God is leading you in your commentary when you false charge your brothers and sisters. That is not of God.

how is it that we have both PETER AND PAUL BRINGING THE GOSPEL TO THESE CHURCHES IN THEIR RESPECTIVE EPISTLES?

Quite simple, actually...there is only one Gospel. And while Peter needed to have a talking to a couple of times by the Lord, and at least once by Paul concerning his denial of the Gospel and playing the hypocrite, Paul maintained a consistent record of teaching a clear presentation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

And that is probably why he was entrusted with the mystery of the Gospel.

As far as Paul ministering, he said himself:

Romans 15:15-16

King James Version (KJV)

15 Nevertheless, brethren, I have written the more boldly unto you in some sort, as putting you in mind, because of the grace that is given to me of God,

16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.

...who he ministered to was God's decision. And I would suggest to you that a case can be made for Paul going first to the synagogues before preaching to the Gentiles anywhere he went.

We see that here...

Acts 13:45-47

King James Version (KJV)

45 But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming.

46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.

Peter says in I Peter 5:12,

"Through Silvanus a faithful brother [Paul’s companion], as I am reckoning, I write briefly to you, entreating and deposing that THIS IS THE TRUE GRACE OF GOD, IN WHICH YOU ARE TO STAND."

Peter says concerning his teaching in this epistle, "THIS IS" the true grace of God. There is no contradiction between Peter and Paul here!

Again, have these debates with yourself often?

Nothing I have said justifies the charges you have levied. Nothing. Contriving an argument is about the poorest form of debating tactic there is, next to levying false witness against people one has never bothered to find out their views on.

Continued...

[S.T. Ranger]

Now, let us get down to the specific things that Paul wrote to these churches.

The specific things we need to get to are the passages that deal with the Rapture.

Just thought I would throw that in there for discussion's sake.

"... as our beloved brother Paul also writes to you, according to the wisdom given to him, as also in ALL THE EPISTLES ..."

Comment: These churches (even if we demand that they were Jewish churches started by Peter himself) had ALL OF PAUL’S EPISTLES! This is a remarkable section of Scripture!

It is irrelevant whether they were Jew or Gentile believers.

If these churches had already received Peter’s gospel, why would they want to hear Paul’s gospel? These are questions that demand answers if it is taught that Christ’s coming for the Jewish saints and Gentiles saints are, in fact, TWO DIFFERENT EVENTS!

The fact that Paul referred at times to "MY gospel" does not negate the fact that he also referred to it as "THE gospel" as well. There is ONE gospel. Peter and Paul both taught the ONE gospel whether they were teaching Jews, or whether they were teaching Gentiles, or whether they were teaching Jews and Gentiles simultaneously!

lol

Continuing:

"... in all the epistles [of Paul], speaking in them concerning THESE THINGS ..."

Comment: What things? All the twenty some verses regarding the coming of the Lord and the fulfillment of their hopes and expectations!

If you read it you will see that Peter has a central focus on false teachers and false doctrine.

Not to be specific or anything.

Now let’s settle the matter right here and now:

PETER has just written two epistles to these churches mentioning the coming of our Lord and the fulfillment of our expectation TWENTY SOME TIMES! We just read that PAUL ALSO HAS WRITTEN TO THEM IN ALL HIS EPISTLES CONCERNING "THESE" (Ver. 16). THESE ARE THE "SAME THINGS," WRITTEN BY THE SAME TWO APOSTLES, TO THE SAME CHURCHES (regardless as to whether they were Jews, Gentiles, or both)! Peter AND Paul taught the SAME THINGS REGARDING THE SECOND COMING OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST.

Again, it is not really the mystery of mysteries that it seems to be for you. Not many people are confused about the Apostles...all of them...preaching the same Gospel.

You equate their unity on the Gospel with the false argument that they taught the same things concerning Return of Christ so your conclusion, based on this false premise, makes that in turn to mean that they taught the same thing concerning the resurrection of the Church.

We call that syllogism, my friend.

THESE IS SECRET RAPTURE!

No, it is a mystery, not a secret. lol

Now listen to Peter’s appraisal of this whole matter regarding Paul’s epistles speaking about the same things that his epistles speak of:

apostles knew either. I think that’s why they use metaphors to describe it.

"... in all the epistles, speaking in them concerning these things, in which are some things HARD TO APPREHEND ..."

Comment: Notice Peter didn’t say they couldn’t be understood, but rather that they were hard to apprehend. But, PETER FOR ONE, CERTAINLY DID APPREHEND THEM!

You could have saved yourself a little time by simply using what Peter concludes with:

2 Peter 3:17-18

King James Version (KJV)

17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.

18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.

What that means, my friend, is that Peter makes it clear he has been speaking about the error of the wicked. You should read it sometime.

Continued...

[S.T. Ranger]

Peter studied ALL OF PAUL’S EPISTLES, and he understood them. But what does he say about those who do NOT apprehend Paul’s epistles?

"... some things hard to apprehend, which the UNLEARNED and UNSTABLE are TWISTING, AS THE REST OF THE SCRIPTURES ALSO, to their own destruction."

Comment: Peter tells us that those who cannot apprehend Paul’s deeper teachings are UNLEARNED and UNSTABLE, and therefore, they TWIST these Scriptures to suit their own interpretations. And, not only do they twist these hard to apprehend Scriptures, but Peter says that they are, "... TWISTING ... THE RESTOF THE SCRIPTURES

So are you saying that besides being harmful, besides being religious, that pre-trib rapturists are to be equated with the wicked Christ rejecting false teachers of error and they wrest the Scriptures?

I would be careful throwing around accusations like that. Especially when such a poor treatment of the Rapture, which you subtly hint is not even a doctrine...is all that you have to offer.

And that my friend is the truth of it.

Glad to see you can still call me a friend, despite my believing and teaching a Pre-Tribulation Rapture.

As to what you have presented being truth, I am not sure I would go around calling contrived arguments that one has to create so they can have an answer for...truth. Nor would I consider it truth to bear false witness against people you do not even know, do not know their doctrine, especially when you have such a hard time expressing and understanding what it is you yourself are teaching.

But I guess, seeing that it is likely you will have learned you are implying that you are a mid-tribulation believer without even knowing that, it might be good cause to make sure we examine your doctrine closely, even as our beloved brother Paul, as well as Peter...has warned us to do.

Once one "twists" one Scripture to suit one’s personal interpretation, if often involves the twisting of MANY other Scriptures as well.

You have illustrated that perfectly, Thanks for the lesson.

Just a last notes:

As to the statement that the gathering of Christ’s elect in Matt 24 is only the living, I will suggest that it doesn’t say living or dead.

I think you mean ch.25.

However, the word "elect" by itself certainly can include the dead, but I know of no law of grammar that could make the word "elect,"exclude the dead.

Seeing that the Rapture is the Resurrection of both dead and living saints, I would think this would be a no-brainer. Perhaps another mystery you have uncovered?

But as far as the two gatherings spoken of in Scripture, lol, one involves the Lord personally gathering only the Church, and the other involves the Angels gathering everyone from every nation.

As far as the third resurrection in Revelation, if one discounts ch.4 being a veiled reference to the Rapture (and I seldom bring this up because we have so much more that can be seen as conclusive to a pre-tribulation Rapture), that is, we see a thousand year span between that resurrection and the resurrection of the Tribulation Martyrs (which specifically excludes the rest of the dead, i.e., the unbelieving who are killed in the Tribulation (as well as the unbelieving that died before then)).

These references regarding the gathering of Christ’s elect do no state specifically whether any of them are alive or dead.

On the contrary: Paul specifically states that only the Church is resurrected and raptured and he is specific that it includes both the living and dead in the Church.

No longer a mystery, by the way.

However, as Rev. 11:18 includes both the "small and great," and particularly "the prophets," and "the saints," it would have to include BOTH.

Sorry, the only ones resurrected in Revelation 11 are the Two Witnesses.

Whatever commentary you have been reading from...throw it out at your soonest convenience.

The "prophets" have mostly died many centuries ago

Mostly? I am assuming you refer to Elijah? I do not take a view that Elijah went into the presence of God in Heaven, but that the heaven in view is likely the sky, which is evident in the text. However, there are always exceptions to the rule, so I am not dogmatic about it.

(yet they will be gathered here), and the "saints" include both dead and many saints who will be alive at Christ’s coming.

Not in Revelation 11. That is not the time of Christ's Return, for one, and secondly there is no mention of resurrection at the Sheep and Goat Judgment.

So clearly, both (the living and the dead), are included in the same event

Only in the Rapture, in regards to Paul's teaching in 1 Thessalonians 4.

At the end of the Tribulation there is only mention of Tribulation Martyrs, and the resurrection one thousand years later is debatable, because we are only told that the dead are raised, which, if believers were part of that resurrection, they would not be called "dead" because they would have the Life which Christ came to bring which is bestowed at the time of the new birth. Christ, John, Paul, James, and Peter are all in agreement on that point as well.

God bless.

[Salty]

Rapture or not, God's elect will see Heaven and that's where we find our Joy.

 

But, the Heavenly order is going to be revealed right here... on earth, for that is where Christ's elect reign with Him at (Rev.5:10)

[Guest]

Rapture or not, God's elect will see Heaven and that's where we find our Joy.

 

But, the Heavenly order is going to be revealed right here... on earth, for that is where Christ's elect reign with Him at (Rev.5:10)

 

 

Down, Down, Down, Those Burning Words Of Fire

 

And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

 

His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

 

And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

 

And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

 

And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

 

And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS. Revelation 19:11-16

 

And Uppity, Up, Up

 

Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.

 

In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

 

And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. John 14:1-3

 

That Eternal House Of Love

 

Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out:

 

and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God,

 

which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God:

 

and I will write upon him my new name. Revelation 3:12

 

~

 

Merry Christmas Beloved~!

 

Love, Your Brother Joe

[Marilyn C]

Hi Joe,

 

And a Christ centred Christmas to you & yours. I am so glad He came `down` so we can go `up.`

 

 

Blessings, Marilyn.

[Guest]

Hi Joe,

 

And a Christ centred Christmas to you & yours.

 

I am so glad He came `down` so we can go `up.`

 

Blessings, Marilyn.

 

 

Amen!

 

Merry Christmas Beloved~!

[rag4aCrown]

I believe God.

I believe Jesus is the Messiah.

I believe the Holy Ghost and the Spirit of truth dwells within my heart, mind, body and strength.

I believe in the RESURRECTION.

Amen.

[S.T. Ranger]

S.T.Ranger

11 posts of  twisted logic... "no its not a second coming that doesn't count" even though lol its says caught up in the air...in order to be caught up in the air with Jesus,  he would need to come to EARTH  in order for you to have a rapture in the first place? No? ....your doctrine has him returning multiple times and further Jesus seems to have passed his judgement... seperated the wheat from the tare..Jesus has done his harvest...that's the rapture...He does all of this but he doesnt COME to earth as you like me to believe? Right.... One of unsound mind. At least begin to acknowledge that the rapture is a second coming for starters. 

Well done on the disrespect to Peter..One of unsound mind

Revelation 3:10

 

You do relies this verse undermines your doctrine?

In Greek "will keep thee from" is TEREO EK. TEREO means to watch over protectively,  guard. 

The word EK is a preposition and it means to be rescued out the midst of danger. Isn't your rapture before danger? 

The entire idea of TEREO EK is actually to be protected within the sphere of danger and not protected from danger.

Like I said you have to twist scripture to support your Rapture nonsense.

Matt 24

Yes Matt 24 doesn't mention resurrection. But that doesn't rule out a resurrection is taking place now does it?

Lets look at Matt 24 and lets compare  to Isaiah to get the full picture of what and who is gathered and its not in the air...you see you need to look at other scripture to get the complete image.

Matthew and Isaiah Description

Matt1:22–23 .........Is 7:14a = virgin shall conceive

Matt2:1–2........Is 60:3 = wise men come

Matt 3:3..... Is 40:3 = the voice of one crying in the wilderness

Matt 4:14–16 .........Is 9:1–2 = people walking in darkness have seen a great light

Matt 5:34–35 .....Is 66:1 = heaven is God's throne, earth His footstool

Matt 8:17 .....Is53:4 = He hath borne our griefs

Matt11:5 .......Is 29:18–19; 35:5–6 = blind see, lame walk, deaf hear

Matt11:23 ........Is14:15 = brought down to hell

Matt12:17–21 ........Is 42:1–4a = bruised reed shall He not break

Matt13:14–15 ......Is 6:9–10 = people hear but don't understand

Matt15:7–9 .....Is 29:13 = hypocrites draw near with mouth, but heart is far away

Matt15:14 .......Is 9:16 = blind leaders and followers both destroyed

Matt 21:13......Is 56:7 = My house called the house of prayer

Matt 24:29 ......Is13:10 and 34:4 = sun, moon darkened, stars fall

Matt 24:31 ......Is 11:12 and 27:12–13 = the gathering

Matt 24:35 .......Is 65:17 and 66:22 = heaven and earth replaced by new heaven and earthquake

1 Thessalonians 4:17

Look at the greek word perileipomenoi it means surviving

We that remain or survive will be caught up in the air.....survivors?  SURVIVING FROM WHAT?

Further had the Paul wanted to communicate that Christ coming downward to take us upward was the goal, he could have chosen to use a word like οὐρανός.  This word, which is interpreted as “air” on some occasions, would have given the impression that going to meet Christ in the “air” was a upward heavenly route.  However, Paul chose to use was one that indicates the lower part of the atmosphere.  Paul had a grammatical choice to make, and clearly he did not want to misguide his first century audience by making them think that being “with the Lord forever” actually meant going to heaven, away from the creation project.  So, in order to keep his metaphorical devices in place without giving the wrong impression, he chose to use ἀήρ to indicate that he was not talking about escaping this world; but rather being part of its redemptive process.

Since my logic is twisted, which is the condescending tone you took previously as you questioned the salvation of all pre-trib believers and teachers, I see no point in further attempt at communication. When you can learn to talk with someone, rather than at someone, perhaps what you have to say might be seasoned with something other than insult.

God bless.