Jump to content
Dennis1209

Just How Close is the RAPTURE?

Recommended Posts

it could happe

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just kidding... relax I'm still here  :D 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi enoob,

You`ll have to tell us quicker than that bro.:o

all the best, Marilyn.

  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://sermons.faithlife.com/sermons/168924-leaving-the-rapture-behind

Excerpts: "History of the Rapture
[[Timeline]]
The Rapture was NEVER EVER EVER talked about before 1830. In the history of the world, the rapture was never talked about before 1830! This doctrine is only 187 years old! "

..... ....... ...... ......

...... ...... ...... ......

....... ........ ....... .......

(some say)"I don't care if the Bible says it, I still believe it. I want to keep this comfort.

"This is not the story of the church universally. If we use our comfort as our authority, it can absolutely deteriorate the true message of God. The message of God is not our experience, it's his inspired word. His inspired word does not talk about comfort for the church. It talks about tribulation (John 16:33, 17:15). How does it make sense for the one beacon of hope that the world has to be removed from the earth just before they go through the great tribulation? Oh, that's a good gospel plan! As American's, it's okay as long as we're okay. If a theology can match us being okay, we will attach to it.
It teaches a second chance for unbelievers.
Where in the Bible does it talk about people getting a second chance at the second coming? What does that kind of teaching effect people to do? "I've got time." When I read Scripture, it seems like the 2nd Coming is THE END.
And I’ve seen people who have said they were waiting to submit to Christ until the rapture happens. SAY WHAT?!? It gives a non-urgent attitude to people who don’t have a concept that at any moment, we are on the doorstep of eternity.
How just is it for God to give the people who make it to the rapture a second chance, but everyone else in the history of the world only gets one?

It teaches three comings of Christ.
I don't see three comings of Christ in Scripture.
(1) Incarnation, (2)Rapture, (3)Millennial Kingdom.
Hebrews 9:28 NLT
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.
Some say that it's "two second comings".......... that's a logical fallacy.
"So we see that there are not two Comings of Christ, but rather, there are two phases of his one coming. The first phase is for Christians, and the second phase is for the world of unbelievers as well as those who received Christ as Savior and Lord and survived the awful persecution of the tribulation." (LaHaye Understanding Bible Prophecy for Yourself)
“No matter what rapture position one holds, Christ’s second coming is one event which occurs in two parts.”
(Richard Mayhue, Senior Vice President and Dean and Professor of Pastoral Ministries and Theology at The Master’s Seminary, Why A Pretribulational Rapture?)
As I said before, it is okay if you disagree with my conclusions, but make sure that if you do, it is because you are convinced that the Bible says I’m wrong, not because it is a comfortable position. Because, frankly, I wish the rapture was true because I like being comfortable, but I don’t find compelling support for it in Scripture.
My application to this sermon is almost the same as the application for the Laodicean church:
Repent of your comfort.
And also make sure that Scripture is your final authority. Don’t approach Scripture with an agenda. Submit to Scripture regardless of what you believe of it. I want to be a church and a people that submits to the word of Christ. "

  • Loved it! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

"The Rapture was NEVER EVER EVER talked about before 1830"

 

Wrong .... the rapture is discussed in the New Testament

Your 1830 idea is not scriptural

Edited by Daniel 11:36
  • Thumbs Up 2
  • Oy Vey! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry,  tradition (in error) does not count.   It leads multitudes astray.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

You have been lead astray my friend

Edited by Daniel 11:36
  • Praying for You! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(some say)"I don't care if the Bible says it, I still believe it. I want to keep this comfort."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, simplejeff said:

"The Rapture was NEVER EVER EVER talked about before 1830. In the history of the world, the rapture was never talked about before 1830! This doctrine is only 187 years old! " "

WRONG. Scripture speaks several times about the Rapture. That has NEVER been in dispute.

On that note: Many out there try to claim the Pre-Trib Rapture was an invention of Margaret MacDonald and John Darby. But a document called "Pseudo-Ephraem" (a document that was supposedly written by to Ephraem of Nisibis (306-73))speaks of the Pre-Trib Rapture. While it is doubtful that the document was actually written by Ephraem, the document is a sermon (IT IS NOT SCRIPTURE) that is dated between 373 and 627 AD. It is in section 2 of this document that speaks of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture.

Link to article on Pseudo Ephraem, by Dr. Thomas Ice:

http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1031&context=pretrib_arch

While this document doesn't prove the Pre-trib Rapture's position, it does prove that the idea originated long Before MacDonald or Darby,  unlike what Mid and Post-Trib proponents erroneously claim. That it wasn't written actually by Ephraem is not in dispute here, as we are not questioning who actually wroe it. But that it was written before the supposed 1800's and that it speaks of the Pre-Trib Rapture should give pause to those who try to use the Darby-MacDonald argument as an excuse to disqualify the Pre-Trib position.

Edited by Sojourner414

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What some call 'Scriptural' understanding is actually only deceptions, even from long ago.

When it contradicts other Scripture,  it is known to be false and misleading .

It is still 'popular',  because 'comfort' is important for those who have their ears tickled and God may either deliver them if they will trust in Him,  or God may give them over to believe their own delusions.

  • Oy Vey! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Sojourner414 said:

WRONG. Scripture speaks several times about the Rapture. That has NEVER been in dispute.

On that note: Many out there try to claim the Pre-Trib Rapture was an invention of Margaret MacDonald and John Darby. But a document called "Pseudo-Ephraem" (a document that was supposedly written by to Ephraem of Nisibis (306-73))speaks of the Pre-Trib Rapture. While it is doubtful that the document was actually written by Ephraem, the document is a sermon that is dated between 373 and 627 AD. It is in section 2 of this document that speaks of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture.

Link to article on Pseudo Ephraem, by Dr. Thomas Ice:

http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1031&context=pretrib_arch

While this document doesn't prove the Pre-trib Rapture's position, it does prove that the idea originated long Before MacDonald or Darby,  unlike what Mid and Post-Trib proponents erroneously claim. That it wasn't written actually by Ephraem is not in dispute here, as we are not questioning who actually wroe it. But that it was written before the supposed 1800's and that it speaks of the Pre-Trib Rapture should give pause to those who try to use the Darby-MacDonald argument as an excuse to disqualify the Pre-Trib position.

Where is the rapture in the Old Testament?

  • Oy Vey! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • By Steve Conley
      Greetings in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ,
      Can someone please help me? Can you tell me if all these verses refer to the same event?
      Isa 2:12  For the day of the LORD of hosts shall be upon every one that is proud and lofty, and upon every one that is lifted up; and he shall be brought low:
      Isa 2:13  And upon all the cedars of Lebanon, that are high and lifted up, and upon all the oaks of Bashan,
      Isa 2:14  And upon all the high mountains, and upon all the hills that are lifted up,
      Isa 2:15  And upon every high tower, and upon every fenced wall,
      Isa 2:16  And upon all the ships of Tarshish, and upon all pleasant pictures.
      Isa 2:17  And the loftiness of man shall be bowed down, and the haughtiness of men shall be made low: and the LORD alone shall be exalted in that day.
      Isa 2:18  And the idols he shall utterly abolish.
      Isa 2:19  And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth.
      Isa 2:20  In that day a man shall cast his idols of silver, and his idols of gold, which they made each one for himself to worship, to the moles and to the bats;
      Isa 2:21  To go into the clefts of the rocks, and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth.
      Isa 13:6  Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty.
      Isa 13:7  Therefore shall all hands be faint, and every man's heart shall melt:
      Isa 13:8  And they shall be afraid: pangs and sorrows shall take hold of them; they shall be in pain as a woman that travaileth: they shall be amazed one at another; their faces shall be as flames.
      Isa 13:9  Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.
      Isa 13:10  For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.
      Isa 13:11  And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.
      Joe 2:31  The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.
      Rev 6:12  And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;
      Rev 6:13  And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.
      Rev 6:14  And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
      Rev 6:15  And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
      Rev 6:16  And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
      Rev 6:17  For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?
      Luk 21:25  And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
      Luk 21:26  Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
      Are each of these passages speaking of the same event? It appears that they are. Please provide proof if they are not all referring to the same event.
      Thanks
    • Guest Omegaman
      By Guest Omegaman
      The debate continues, and I suppose it will until/if the church finds itself recognizing that the antichrist/man of sin/beast/son of perdition/abomination that cuases desolation/etc. has been revealed and recognized.
       
      So, here is what I am asking, this is the question that this thread is about:
       
      Where in the bible is it stated, or which combination of verses do you believe imply (evidentially, not wishfully) that there is either:
       
      a secret coming of Jesus for the church before the great tribulation an invisible coming of Jesus for the church a two part second advent a scriptural distinction of Jesus coming for His church, versus His coming with His church From my perspective, in case it is not obvious, the only thing invisible about Jesus coming, is that it is that the pre-trib rapture is invisible in the sense that it is no where to be found in scripture.
       
      Some of you disagree, what I am asking then, is for the biblical basis, the scriptural evidence, for one or more of the bulleted points (•) above. Some of you are so sure that Jesus will return before the great tribulation, that certainly you must have biblical evident of the truth or likelyhood, of the pre-trib return of Christ.
       
      To those who want to reply in this thread:
      Please stick to the premise of it, scriptural evidence for a coming of Jesus to catch up His church to be with Him prior to the great tribulation.
       
      I know that I am asking a lot of people to stay on topic. I understand that people are passionate about their eschatological beliefs. However, please exercise some self control and not start in with a statement of or defense of your own, other than pre-trib persuasion.
       
      Let's let this thread be limited to actual scriptural evidence of a pre-trib rapture.
       
      Opposing viewpoints are o.k., but limit those to just enough to present an answer to any posts claiming to present scriptural evidence of a pre-trib rapture, without making it about what you believe instead.
       
      To those taking up the challenge presented here, please note that I have gone to great lengths to be specific in limiting the type of posts appropriate to this thread. For example:
       
      Stating that "the rapture is Jesus coming for His church before the trib" is a definition of your belief, and is not scriptural evidence, such a statement is just an opinion, and is evidence that you believe, not for your belief. Stating things like "the church is not mentioned after verse such and such in Revelation", is also not evidence, it is merely an argument from silence. Stating that "the church is not destined to suffer God's wrath" is also not evidence, unless you can prove that the whole to the great tribulation is in fact the wrath of God, and that if the church is present for that, that she cannot and will not be protected from God's wrath during the great tribulation Hopefully, examples like those above, will convey the idea of what I am seeking, and that you can understand the nature of evidence as opposed to statements of faith in your doctrine. The idea here, is to present some quality reasons to believe in the pre-trib rapture. So here you have an opportunity. Please, give it a shot if you think that you have scriptural evidence.
       
      Thanks in advance
    • Guest
      By Guest
      In the topic of eschatology, few things are debated with more passion than the timing of the rapture with respect to the great tribulation. In online forums there are many opinions expressed. Some of them in my opinion are so far out there that few people if any take them very seriously.
        Some people read these topics and will express their opinion that the topics are not important. Somehow though, they seem to think it important to express their opinion that it isn't important. I have not quite figured that one out yet.
        One of the opinions often expressed is the tongue-in-cheek position:" I am pan tribulation". At the risk of possibly offending those people who say they are pan tribulation, I say this: "The pan-trib position is supposed to be cute or humorous, and I suppose it is the first time one hears it. By now though I am sure that I have heard it over 100 times, and to me it has become a worn-out old joke. I have been hearing it since the 1970s, so pardon me if I don't laugh too hard.

      Still there are those who are reading this post who have no doubt not heard of the pan-trib position even now. For their sakes I will explain the pan-trib position. "I do not care if the rapture is before, during, or after the tribulation, as long as it all pans out".
        I have very little respect for the pan-trib position. I suspect that people who hold that position fall into one of several categories: Perhaps they are too lazy to study the Bible. Perhaps they feel they are underqualified to have a real opinion. Perhaps they detest debate. Perhaps they are afraid to express their opinion.  
      Sometimes they will make the point that eschatology is not a salvational issue and therefore is not worth having a strong opinion about. It often seems to escape their notice though, that almost all of the Bible is not about salvational issues, so I would have to guess that most of the Bible is also not important to them.
       
      Considering how much space (in the New Testament especially) is devoted to eschatology by the apostles and even by Jesus Himself I find it extremely difficult and even disrespectful to imply that the things that Jesus said and that the apostles (who were inspired by God to write) expressed, are of little importance.

      Coming up with flippant, worn-out remarks does not in my mind, justify what seems to be an aire of superiority in being wishy-washy about Scripture.
       
      I know I am on my high horse. I know I am often on my high horse. I know that I am on my high horse frequently lately. You can reply to this post and inform me of that if you wish, but don't think you're telling me anything that I do not already know and freely admit.
        As I have already stated there are many opinions and many positions in the field of eschatology. The different positions contradict each other of course and most of them (if not all of them) contradict Scripture at at least one point. No more than one position can be 100% accurate and perhaps none of them are. In spite of the fact that I have used a lot of words so far in this post, I really only want to invite comments on the following proposition:   There are many reasons that people may use to explain why they believe what they believe about eschatology. With respect to the issue of whether or not the rapture is before, during, or after the great tribulation, I believe the following reasons should be discounted.   The character of God argument.   Some people believe that the church will not go through the great tribulation because it is not within the character of God to allow his church to suffer. This reasoning is invalid because God's people have always been allowed to suffer historically. This is true whether we are talking about the Jews or the Christians, prophets or apostles, martyrs since the time of Christ and even today, and of course Jesus himself who said a servant is not above his master.   If God has allowed his people to suffer for thousands of years, how can we think that it is not in God's character to allow such suffering?   Wishful thinking.   It is so easy for us in the West to find the idea of suffering distasteful. Many of us have never missed a meal even one time in our entire life nor slept without a roof over our head unless it was by choice. We live in a time and in cultures where most people have access to transportation which requires no physical work, access to nearly continual entertainment and access to vast amounts of knowledge that we never had to study to obtain.   I read just today that Google claims that the average Android user checks his or her Android 150 times each day. In these days of comfort and convenience, fast food and instant gratification, it is no wonder that some of us cannot conceive of going through a time of suffering and persecution lasting from 3-1/2 to 7 years. However, just because we have had it so easy does not mean there won't be a time when we will have it so hard.   I have gone on long enough. I intended to list a lot of reasons which are not valid reasons for believing some of the things that we do believe. It seems to me that in the area of eschatology the only reason to believe anything is because the Bible tells us so.   I am sure that many of us believe we believe what the Bible says about these things. It is my observation however that many of us if not most of us believe what we believe by taking preconceived ideas to the Scripture and then interpreting the Scripture in a way that agrees with what we already believe about it, rather than taking Scripture at its word and adjusting our thinking to align with what the Bible itself says.   Do we really want to be a people who gather to themselves teachers who will tell us what our itching ears want to hear? Or do we think that the better idea is to be like the Bereans, and search the Scriptures daily to see whether these things be so?
×