Author Claims To Debunk Rapture Theory Popularized By 'Left Behind'

Agape Press ^ | May 5, 2004 | By Allie Martin

[dangus]

>> Israel is now in existence after nearly 1900 years. <<

Take a look at a map. What "Israel" controls today is what was called "Phillistia." The core of the ancient kingdom is what is now known as "the West Bank."

[Cvengr]

One thing is clear. His second coming is imminent. (Imminent, not necessarily immediate). There is no other prophetic stipulation which must occur prior to His return. Interpretations, perhaps, but IMHO, His grace will continue even during the wrath of the Lord. Perhaps a gift of letting those who suffer during the Tribulation understand why they are suffering so that the issues are indubitable and one final opportunity for salvation whether seized or not by those perishing.

[ladyinred]

That link was really interesting! Thanks.

[Teleosis]

From Cvengr: One thing is clear. His second coming is imminent. (Imminent, not necessarily immediate). There is no other prophetic stipulation which must occur prior to His return.

I agree in the first instance. For each of us individually we are only as far away from the gathering or being with the Son of Man (as Jesus referred to Himself more than any other phrase) coming on the clouds as we are from our own death. Since none of us knows what will happen to us in the next five minutes, it behooves us to lead our lives as if each waking moment could be our last. Thus the emphasis on leading a righteous life, being sober and moral, because our meeting the Lord could happen at any time. Remember, Paul said the dead in Christ are raised first, or as I like to say, they get a six-foot head start on those that are alive and are left.

In the second part, I ask you to examine the Jesus' Olivet Discourse found in Matthew 24, Mark 13 or Luke 21. Jesus gives several events in linear sequence order that predate His physical return to earth. These have not all happened yet. There has not been a Temple for the Abomination of Desolation to be set up in for over 1900 years. That is a condition that has to be satisfied before Jesus returns. This is the same reason by which Paul reassures the Thessalonians that they have not missed the coming of our Lord. I may not live to see that or other prerequisite conditions take place, but I know I will see Jesus arriving in His Glory as will all those in the Book of Life who have died up to that time when I am gathered up.

[Cvengr]

There has not been a Temple for the Abomination of Desolation to be set up in for over 1900 years.

Please correct me if I am mistaken. The temple today is the body of the believer in the Church Age. The believer is indwelt by the Holy Spirit to provide a temple for the indwelling of Jesus Christ.

The soul is the battleground of temptation and our remaining in Him, it resides in our thinking and our volition. The filling of the Holy SPirit is the Spirit controlling our soul and reigning over our thinking, taking the gnosis or academic knowledge and thought and turning it into an epignosis or working knowledge which flows out of our self or our heart.

I've often considered why some who receive a physical mark of a beast would not receive salvation. God's sovereignty might declare anything except that which dpes against his essence. Surely it would seem that the Perfect Sacrifice was a far greater payment than any mark associated with commerce. But the mark is only identified to us as associated with the ability to buy and sell or transact.

I've also considered that in recent years, technology has evolved to the point of provided personal commuication and studied the interface between neural activity and thinking.

I suspect the mark is presented as necessary for economic transaction, but is also used by the beast to counterfeit God in the thinking process of man. Such would be an abomination of desolation. It would also compete physically with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ creating a situation where God in His love for us would probably act in wrathful expedient indignation.

There is a difference between potential and actual correlation, though, so this interpretation may not be accurate. When I look at those who are unbelievers in their zeal to promote an artificial state or world through anything antiChristian is seems an ideal target for them will be to control the thoughts of others and in a fashion that is antiChristian. If they found a mechanism to perform this by planting a subdermal computing and communication device, then it would be a natural ploy to associate the device with something for our personal good and safety,..something to preserve our financial identity and retain the apparant security which a cosmic world might appeal to provide.

Those who seek to control in such a world, might not even divulge their ulterior motives as they would already have been hardened in their hearts to reject anything of divine good, but would instead even lower themselves to worship anything supernatural if it promised them power such as fallen angels. A concealed animosity towards anything Christian would prevail in their hearts and their thinking solution would be the mechanics of physically eradicating any thought or volition which might choose God over rebellion from His plan.

But then again you may be correct, in that the temple referenced is more similar to the physical building more associated with the Temple Mount.

[The_Reader_David]

You are of course correct that the notion of a 'pretribulation rapture' is a demonic snare which will allow the Antichrist or the forces preparing his arrival to lead many astray.

But 60% of whom believe the notion to be Scriptural. Certainly no faithful child of the Orthodox Church, nor any faithful papist, monophysite or nestorian believes any such thing: I think I've just covered the vast majority of professing Christians with that. 60% of protestants? Americans?

[Teleosis]

The temple today is the body of the believer in the Church Age.

Yes, this is correct and I think everything you wrote about the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is on solid theological ground.

There are some verses that may help you in understanding the physical nature of the events surrounding Christ's parousia (or presence or coming).

In Daniel 9:24-27 Gabriel sets conditions and a timeline for Daniel's people, [which I would say extends past Israel in the physical sense, but also to Israel in the spiritual sense since we Gentiles are grafted into Judaism (Rom 11:17)] and Jerusalem, being the focal point for God's attention on earth. Daniel 9:24 lists six things that are to be accomplished and after studying the verbs in each in the Hebrew, I would say that these are to be accomplished through Christ Jesus. Daniel 9:27 sets forth three items:

1. He (the Antichrist or ruler that will come) initiates a Peace treaty ostensibly with Israel (since Jerusalem is one the focus points) to her many enemies. This starts the 70th 'seven' which most people mistakenly identify as the Tribulation period although that is reserved for a lesser amount of time as identified by Jesus in the Olivet Discourse (Mt ch 24, Mk ch 13 or Lk ch 21).

2. In the middle of the week, or 'seven' year period, this same person puts a stop to sacrifice. This requires an altar, perhaps the Mercy Seat on the Ark of the Covenant, and the Temple, whose location is currently occupied by the Dome of the Rock. This ground may be acquired in the aforementioned Peace Treaty that has eluded every world leader until the Antichrist comes along.

3. And "on wing" which the King James translates as "overspreading" using the sheltering image of a wing, the abominations (he shall make it) desolate (or more accurately, desolator since somem has the prefix me which makes it a noun). The problem for translators (and with a dozen different versions I have a dozen different translations) is that in the Hebrew it is (on) kanap siqqusim mesomem -or three nouns in order. I think one way wing can legitimately be translated using the picture form language of Hebrew is like the King James does it, with an attribute of a wing. In this case, from my study, I would combine the quickness of the flood image in Daniel 9:26 and the multiple account of the end times found in Daniel 11:40 with a common attribute of winged animals, their speed, and say "quickly the Desolator (sets up) the Abomination." (I would buttress the argument for translating mesomem as a person because this same word is used as the object of God's Wrath at the end of the verse, and as a theological consideration, God's wrath is not poured out on conditions, but on people.)

The magnitude of this Abomination is revealed in Revelation 13:14, where an image of the Antichrist is set up. And unlike a statue of an emperor or even the man-like pagan god Zeus which Antiochus Epiphanes set up in 168 B.C. (the object of Daniel 11:31), and unlike any animal idol set up by wayward Priests during their periods of transgression, unlike any object of worship that cannot hear, see or talk, this one speaks! This lends emphasis on the little horn of Daniel 7:20 being able to speak, not only does the Antichrist boast and blaspheme God, but his image can talk.

Paul, in his eschatology to the Thessalonians spells out a necessary condition. Remember, he has met John, because he says he would boast not of himself, but of a man that went up to Heaven, and besides Ezekiel, that would be John from his account in Revelation (being revealed by God through Jesus to John). Paul says in 2Th 2:4: "so that he sets himself up in God's temple." (This is where the NIV interjects its theology in translating Daniel 9:27 and takes kanap or wing and adds the words 'of the temple' to wing which actually changes the shape of the Temple since the Temple doesn't or won't have a "wing" in the physical sense of a building.)

So putting all these verses together in a cohesive fashion, at the midweek point of the seventieth 'seven' the Antichrist sets up a talking statue of himself in the reconstructed Temple. This represents his high point of his ascent and initiates a response from God. From there on, the seventieth 'seven' takes on a very different perspective than the first half.

Those who seek to control in such a world, might not even divulge their ulterior motives as they would already have been hardened in their hearts to reject anything of divine good, but would instead even lower themselves to worship anything supernatural if it promised them power such as fallen angels. A concealed animosity towards anything Christian would prevail in their hearts and their thinking solution would be the mechanics of physically eradicating any thought or volition which might choose God over rebellion from His plan.

You are correct in the mark of the Beast as far as I can tell. There is a spiritual aspect of control in wanting to be able to monitor every activity. This mechanism may be presented and even wanted by people as a solution for identity theft and convenience as electronic transfer becomes the norm.

The test for the believer is whether you are willing to put your trust in God for your life, or whether you are going to do what it takes to sustain your own life. This is the Tribulation proper as identified by both the man in linen to Daniel in verse 12:1 and Jesus in His Olivet Discourse (megas thlipsis or great tribulation).

One aspect of the mark can be made back to Deuteronomy. The point in Deuteronomy 6:6-9 is that this would be a sign. Don't confuse hands and head here as being literally the same as Revelation 13:16. The operative word in Deuteronomy is what the NIV calls symbols and the NASB calls a sign. This comes from the word, ‘ot and is best described in the Greek as semeion, according the Word Book of the Old Testament (page 39). As a sign it appears as an outward expression, like the signs in the sky. It can also be a token expression. It can mean a sign of something that is greater than itself like the rainbow is the sign of the covenant.

But in Revelation, the mark is not a sign as it is in the symbolic sense as ‘ot is in the Hebrew. The Greek has it as charagma, an impression, as a mark or a stamp according to the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. And it is received as in 'to give,' from didomi. You do well to put it into the context that John puts this mark in: it relates wholly to economics.

I think it is relevant that God dismisses those that receive this mark as not being in the book of life. The seal we are to keep is with God, and it is to guide our thoughts and our actions just as the head rules the thoughts and the hand represents the actions which is what the Hebrews were to protect from Moses' sermon in Deuteronomy. But I will not discount this as a physical impression because it is tied to a physical activity, buying and selling and the impression likewise being on the head and hands because this represents a rebellion from trusting God in both thought and action.

[strongbow]

The "intellectual left" resorted to this highly effective technique in the 50's and 60's, and they are returning to it's use now.

I spent a lot of time wrapped around the wheel studying eschatology back in my younger years. There is a great deal to read and get excited about. I think I would classify myself an "amellinalist" now if you need a label. However I think when it comes to confronting my brothers and sisters in Christ now I am a "panmillenialist". In other words once we get to the point of being regenerated in Spirit and reconciled to God through the blood of Christ it will all "pan" out in the end however imperfectly we understand end times. The need to be "right" sometimes gets to be heady stuff and in my mind verges on pride for some. I want to understand scripture rightly and when it comes to core belief I will stand my ground firmly. However a brother's understanding of end times doesn't have to square with where the H.S. has led me to make him a brother in Christ. To this end I agree with the premise of the statement above.

[Cvengr]

Thank you very much. I'm young into the studies of Greek and Hebrew, but have recently become much more studious in them. This guidance is appreciated.

[Seven_0]

I do not understand your argument. Treating these passages as the same event does not work for me.

In the Matthew 13, passage the bad guys are taken away and the good guys are left behind. In the Revelation 14 passage, the good guys are taken away and the bad guys are left behind.

Where are you addressing this reversal?

[Teleosis]

In the Matthew 13, passage the bad guys are taken away and the good guys are left behind.

I presume you mean Matthew 24:40 and 41 since that is what we were talking about before.

I showed before that the word for "taken" in verses 40 and 41 does not have the same definition as what we would normally associate with it in the English nor is it like the "took" of the previous verse 39. In fact, this same word, paralambano is the very Greek word used when it is said that someone 'receives' Christ.

Furthermore, the took away in the example of the bad people in regards to Noah is an entirely different word than the take in regards to the two men or two women. That word is airo and means to raise up, take up, lift which is more like how we would define take.

I also think you have to understand that the portion of text in the Olivet Discourse as written in Matthew from verse 24:31 up to verse 24:45 extrapolates on the events happening in verse 24:31; the gathering of the elect.

When Jesus says in verse 24:32, "Now learn the lesson of the fig tree:" this is a break in the linear sequence of events Jesus has been teaching to the Disciples that will happen in answer to their question which starts the whole discourse: "Tell us," they said, "when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?"

So the example of the two that receive their inheritance (a better translation of what the 'take' in verses 40 and 41 are saying in the original language) goes back to the gathering - it is when we are redeemed from the world ourselves as Luke wrote in 21:28: "When these things begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near."

Again here is a definition of "taken" in Matthew 24:40-41:

The compound has such senses as “to take over,” e.g., a position, and “to inherit,” especially intellectual things, e.g., a student from a teacher…With a personal object the term is used for the reception of Christ by the world (Jn 1:11) and for acceptance into the kingdom of Christ (Jn 14:3; Mt. 24:40-41).—Theological Dictionary of the New Testament p.496-7.

I hope that helps you to see that being taken means to receive your inheritance at this point in the sequence of events. I certainly hope to be taken at that time, because what happens next can be read in Revelation when the seventh Seal is opened and God's wrath is delivered.

[Teleosis]

In the Matthew 13, passage the bad guys are taken away and the good guys are left behind.

I think another thing to look at in the passage you are referencing and seem to be stuck on for meaning is that the context of that lesson about the gathering has to do with that people don't know when Jesus is coming. People can and will be ignorant. Even when that day comes, and the prophets tell us it will be a day unlike any other, no one knows the hour. I think it will go on long enough that people will eventually go about their normal business. At some point, someone is going to say, 'Well it may be dark out, but someone has to get something to eat,' or 'I'm tired; I'm going to bed.'

ZEC 14:3 Then the LORD will go out and fight against those nations, as he fights in the day of battle. 4 On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south. 5 You will flee by my mountain valley, for it will extend to Azel. You will flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the LORD my God will come, and all the holy ones with him.

ZEC 14:6 On that day there will be no light, no cold or frost. 7 It will be a unique day, without daytime or nighttime--a day known to the LORD. When evening comes, there will be light.

Likewise, the people in Noah's time didn't know the flood was coming. To some, especially the wicked, this day will catch them unaware. They will be "left behind." I think too that even those that are to be gathered up with the elect do not have to have perfect knowledge of what is going on. You do not have to pass an eschatology test to be admitted to Heaven. So the theme of Mt 24:36-41 is that people will not know exactly when this day will come.

I will reemphasis, that even though Jesus gives us a series of events that precludes the sign of the Son of Man and the attendant gathering of the elect, there is enough latitude of time regarding what Jesus remarked as being a great tribulation unequaled in time that it is impossible for anyone to predict which particular day after the midpoint when the Abomination is set up when the words of Ezekiel come true:

EZE 32:7 When I snuff you out, I will cover the heavens
and darken their stars;
I will cover the sun with a cloud,
and the moon will not give its light.

EZE 32:8 All the shining lights in the heavens
I will darken over you;
I will bring darkness over your land, declares the Sovereign LORD.

[Seven_0]

"Likewise, the people in Noah's time didn't know the flood was coming. To some, especially the wicked, this day will catch them unaware. They will be "left behind."

This might be my problem. In Matthew 24:39, this is the group that is taken, that means Noah was left behind.

"And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away"

[Teleosis]

Yes, the flood did take (airo) the wicked and wipe them off the face of the earth.

But Christ will put down His sickle and then be joined by the angels putting down theirs as the Harvest is taken over (paralambano) so we receive our inheritance in God's Kingdom because Christ bought us with His own Blood and so redeemed us from slavery to sin in the marketplace of the world. We who have washed our robes clean in the blood of the Lamb will come from every nation, tribe, people, and language and we will stand before the throne and before the Lamb and cry out:

"Salvation belongs to our God,
who sits on the throne,
and to the Lamb."(Rev 7:10)

This same order of gathering before destruction is noted in the parable of the tares in Matthew chapter 13: "At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn." (Mt 13:30) First the weeds are bundled, next the wheat is gathered into the barn, then the weeds are burned. This is supported in the Greek with to be burned in the future tense.

I hope this helps. I think the main point of Matthew verses 24:36-41 though is the unexpectedness of Christ's return for the average person rather than saying exactly how the Harvest is done. I think the change of wording in what we read as the same word "take" is instrumental in showing that the two groups taken do not necessarily have the same end.

[Seven_0]

Does Noah represent the one taken or the one left behind? You can't have it both ways, analogies don't work that way.

If you get it backward, then any argument you build on it, will be wrong also.

[connectthedots]

I'm a Christian and have no interest in reading the "Left Behind" series. Never have been a Tim La Haye fan.

His book on sexuality, "The Act of Marriage" is just about the worst Christian book dealing with marital sex from a Christian perspective that has ever been published.

I don't think a whole lot of his theology, either.

[Teleosis]

Noah was not taken (airo) by the Flood but he was removed from harms way by God.

In likewise manner, right now, Noah (assuming he is in the Book of Life) is resting by Abraham's side in Paradise (Luke 16:22 and 23:43). On the Day of the Lord, when those in Christ will be gathered up, and the dead in Christ will rise first (1Th 4:16), Noah will be taken over (paralambano) to the Heavenly Realm by God (--everyone whose name is found written in the book--will be delivered -Daniel 12:1).

Noah was not left behind when the Flood came. God had a special place for him and seven others in the ark. The ones left behind were all those outside of the ark. They all died.

Christians for the most part will not be left behind. Jesus has gone to prepare a place for us. Those that are left behind will suffer God's wrath and almost all will die. They will become "more rare than the gold of Ophir" --Isaiah 13:12.

The hang-up you are experiencing is focusing too closely on the word 'take.' Again, it reads totally different in the Greek and equating the two groups, those taken away in the flood with those taken over by angels does not mean the two groups come to the same end.

[Teleosis]

Another way of saying the first part of what I tried to communicate is that Noah was removed from harms way by God is analogous to the Christian being removed from harms way in the Rapture.

In each case, you have a rescue effort. In Noah's case it is the ark they had prepared. In the future case, it is the saving power of God through Christ Jesus where those that are alive and are left are literally snatched up.

In each case, you have the following wrath of God. In Noah's case it was the flood. In the future case it will be the seven trumpets, the first four working in thirds upon the earth and the last three being woes. The seventh trumpet shows the depth of God's wrath and is revealed as seven bowl judgments that work in total.

Do these analogies help?

[shotgunjohn]

this answer was as nuanced as john kerrys campaign...what a stretch you make to get there! the plain language of pauls letters is easy to understand, but to support your position you have interpreted it into an unrecognizable mangled heap of theological manure.

regardless, faith demands that we accept that His will and ability are omnipotent, and any way he wants to usher in the last days will do fine. pre or post? whatever! just be ready to be with the Saviour, keep up your faith and pray daily. the Holy Father will take care of the rest

[ladyinred]

I never read Tim's book on marriage. What was it that you disliked about it, if you don't mind my asking?