Spock Posted February 6, 2016 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,239 Content Per Day: 0.86 Reputation: 1,686 Days Won: 6 Joined: 12/26/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted February 6, 2016 Just now, thereselittleflower said: Harpazo doesn't mean rapture. The English word "rapture" doesn't mean "caught up" ἁρπάζω harpázō, means: to seize, carry off by force to seize on, claim for one's self eagerly to snatch out or away Rapture means: rap·ture ˈrapCHər/ noun 1. a feeling of intense pleasure or joy. Two very different words. True, caught up, snatched up, is probably more literal, but to me, it conveys the same meaning- snatched up. What does this verb convey to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thereselittleflower Posted February 6, 2016 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 58 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 5,457 Content Per Day: 1.69 Reputation: 4,220 Days Won: 37 Joined: 07/01/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted February 6, 2016 4 minutes ago, Spock said: True, caught up, snatched up, is probably more literal, but to me, it conveys the same meaning- snatched up. What does this verb convey to you? I go for the definition of the Greek word. Most people don't know how the word "rapture" was chosen for this particular belief. It didn't come from the Greek. It came from the Latin. So what happened was, instead of going to the Greek, they went to a Latin translation and then translated that word "rapturo" - or transliterated it - which in Latin is much closer to harpázō than our word "rapture" is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omegaman 3.0 Posted February 6, 2016 Group: Graduated to Heaven Followers: 57 Topic Count: 1,546 Topics Per Day: 0.21 Content Count: 10,320 Content Per Day: 1.41 Reputation: 12,323 Days Won: 9 Joined: 04/15/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/05/1951 Share Posted February 6, 2016 1 hour ago, thereselittleflower said: Harpazo doesn't mean rapture. The English word "rapture" doesn't mean "caught up" "snatched away" "taken by force" . unless, of course, you use an adequate dictionary (such as every one I looked at): rapture Syllabification: rap·ture Pronunciation: /ˈrapCHər/ Definition of rapture in English: noun 1A feeling of intense pleasure or joy:Leonora listened with rapture 1.1(raptures) Expressions of intense pleasure or enthusiasm about something:the tabloids went into raptures about her 2(the Rapture) North American (According to some millenarian teaching) the transporting of believers to heaven at the Second Coming of Christ. verb [WITH OBJECT] (usually be raptured) North AmericanBack to top (According to some millenarian teaching) transport (a believer) from earth to heaven at the Second Coming of Christ. Origin Late 16th century (in the sense 'seizing and carrying off'): from obsolete French, or from medieval Latin raptura 'seizing', partly influenced by rapt. and certainly, in the vocabulary of 21st century Christian discussion, we are NOT speaking of intense pleasure or joy, other than the joy of being transported into the physical presence of our Lord In any case the "the word rapture isn't in the Bible argument", is like the "the word trinity" is not in the Bible" argument Consider millenium, atheism, incarnation, divinty, immaculate conception, original sin, and other terms commonly used in Christian discussion. It is okay to use specialized words, when speaking in specialties. Lawyers used them, doctors use them, scientists use them, so I think it is okay that Christians use them. Exact words my not be in the Bible, but concepts are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollinTHUNDER Posted February 6, 2016 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 83 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 2,985 Content Per Day: 0.37 Reputation: 433 Days Won: 2 Joined: 04/23/2002 Status: Offline Share Posted February 6, 2016 1 hour ago, thereselittleflower said: Harpazo doesn't mean rapture. The English word "rapture" doesn't mean "caught up" "snatched away" "taken by force" . ἁρπάζω harpázō, means: to seize, carry off by force to seize on, claim for one's self eagerly to snatch out or away Rapture means: rap·ture ˈrapCHər/ noun 1. a feeling of intense pleasure or joy. Two very different words. How 'bout "the great snatch!" That sounds pretty good, don't ya think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spock Posted February 6, 2016 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,239 Content Per Day: 0.86 Reputation: 1,686 Days Won: 6 Joined: 12/26/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted February 6, 2016 That is my take too RT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thereselittleflower Posted February 6, 2016 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 58 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 5,457 Content Per Day: 1.69 Reputation: 4,220 Days Won: 37 Joined: 07/01/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted February 6, 2016 12 hours ago, rollinTHUNDER said: How 'bout "the great snatch!" That sounds pretty good, don't ya think? LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thereselittleflower Posted February 7, 2016 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 58 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 5,457 Content Per Day: 1.69 Reputation: 4,220 Days Won: 37 Joined: 07/01/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted February 7, 2016 On 2/4/2016 at 1:48 AM, n2thelight said: Time for the chart again =) Matthew 24, 1 Thessalonians 4 and 1 Corinthians 15 are the same event The following tables demonstrate very well that all three passages in the Bible that are referring to the second coming of Christ are precisely that. God never intended for His Word to be cryptic or some mountain of confusion where one or more passages are supposedly referring to the second coming and others to some supposed fictional secret rapture. By comparing point by point in the following two passages, we can observe that both of the following two chapters are referring to the same event. Observe the perfect parallels below. 1 Thessalonians 4 1 Corinthians 15 4:16 - the Lord Himself shall come 15:23 - are Christ’s at His coming 4:14 - sleep 15:51 - sleep 4:16 - shout, voice, trump 15:52 - the trumpet shall sound 4:16 - dead in Christ shall rise first 15:52 - dead shall be raised Now compare Matthew 24 with the above events using 1 Thessalonians since some erroneously teach that Matthew 24 is talking about the glorious second coming of Jesus, which they teach is a different event to the above chapters which they say refers to a secret rapture. 1 Thessalonians 4 and 5 Matthew 24 4:15 - coming (Parousia) 24:27 - coming (Parousia) 4:17 - clouds 24:30 - clouds 4:16 - shout, voice trump 24:31 - sound of a trumpet 4:17 - caught up together 24:31 - gather together 5:1 - times and seasons 24:36 - day or hour 5:2 - a thief 24:43 - a thief 5:3 - sudden destruction 24:39 - took them all away 5:6 - watch 24:42 - watch As you can see, not only are these the same event and so parallel each other perfectly but are even in the same order. There are not two different aspects of the return of Jesus. There is only one second coming and the theory of a secret rapture with a second chance is just another deception of the enemy. Matthew 24 1 Thessalonians 4 1 Corinthians 15 Jesus coming Jesus coming At His coming Trumpet Trumpet Last trump Angels gather saints Dead saints raised Dead saints raised Angels gather saints Living saints caught up Living saints changed Coming in the clouds Coming in the clouds Not mentioned So you just copy and paste without attributions and treat it as if you came up with it yourself? Everything word for word is found here: http://www.the-second-coming.org/ Is this your site? I notice it comes from a site that calls the Trinity a FALSE doctrine - the "ministry" claims to have 130 domains and links out to one such domain to a page all about the Trinity, in which it says: Once you fully understand this topic you will have no trouble seeing that the trinity doctrine is the work of Satan So is this yours? Or are you plagiarizing again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n2thelight Posted February 7, 2016 Group: Non-Conformist Theology Followers: 2 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,139 Content Per Day: 0.69 Reputation: 796 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/20/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted February 7, 2016 2 minutes ago, thereselittleflower said: So you just copy and paste without attributions and treat it as if you came up with it yourself? Everything word for word is found here: http://www.the-second-coming.org/ Is this your site? I notice it comes from a site that calls the Trinity a FALSE doctrine - the "ministry" claims to have 130 domains and links out to one such domain to a page all about the Trinity, in which it says: Once you fully understand this topic you will have no trouble seeing that the trinity doctrine is the work of Satan So is this yours? Or are you plagiarizing again? I gave the site for that ty, So if that's all you got to say Im out...Discussion with you is impossible So like I said,believe what you will,I really don't care.................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thereselittleflower Posted February 7, 2016 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 58 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 5,457 Content Per Day: 1.69 Reputation: 4,220 Days Won: 37 Joined: 07/01/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted February 7, 2016 9 minutes ago, n2thelight said: I gave the site for that ty, So if that's all you got to say Im out...Discussion with you is impossible So like I said,believe what you will,I really don't care.................... There is no link in your post. There is no attribution in your post. You've used it before too. And you've used it repeatedly in this and another thread without including the attribution such as and Just like in the other thread where you took extensive quotes from a couple pages in a book without attribution. I see a pattern? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n2thelight Posted February 7, 2016 Group: Non-Conformist Theology Followers: 2 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,139 Content Per Day: 0.69 Reputation: 796 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/20/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted February 7, 2016 12 minutes ago, thereselittleflower said: There is no link in your post. There is no attribution in your post. You've used it before too. And you've used it repeatedly in this and another thread without including the attribution such as and Just like in the other thread where you took extensive quotes from a couple pages in a book without attribution. I see a pattern? And your point is what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts