Preaching a Pre-Tribulation Rapture Weakens the Church

However, untold thousands believe in the "secret rapture of the church" prior to the tribulation period. This is because untold thousands don't want to have to think of suffering through a tribulation time frame. The late Corrie ten Boom called this pre-trib rapture teaching the "American doctrine." Go figure.

The belief in a secret rapture of believers before the tribulation is also because of a best-seller, "The Late, Great Planet Earth," by Hal Lindsey which was set loose in the l960s. It has been a paperback aggressively pushed by practically every evangelical / fundamentalist engine going.

Theologians, videos, films and preachers bolster up this myth with their earnest preachings and teachings.

Yet this is nothing but a myth, accented as much by certain theologically conservative Protestant segments similar unto the Roman Catholic underlining of the immaculate conception of Mary. Nevertheless, if there is no biblical support for such a Mariology teaching, it is bogus. Likewise, the pre-tribulation rapture teaching is bogus.

The pre-trib rapture concept was manufactured in the 1800s in an 18 year old Plymouth Brethren girl's dream, told to her Pastor, John Darby, and then relayed to C. I. Scofield who bought into the dream as revealed truth. Scofield placed this pre-tribulation rapture notion as a footnote in his popular Bible, hence the spread of the myth.

However, just the opposite is biblical truth. In Matthew 24:29-3l, for instance, the rapture ("gathering together") is placed in the same time frame as the open second coming of Jesus Christ. And all of this is "after the tribulation" (verse 29). That is it in a nutshell!

Yet pre-tribulation rapturists sidestep this clear passage for more oblique passages. The latter are twisted and turned in order to fit into the "American doctrine." Yet such twisting is not sound exegesis. And for biblically-riveted evangelicals and fundamentalists to commit this drastic error is bordering on the horrific.

All other passages in Scripture relating to the "gathering together unto Him" must refer back to the literal time line provided by Jesus in Matthew 24.

One must not use a symbolic passage in the Book of Revelation or any other symbolically-based section of the Bible by which to draw a pre-tribulation rapture doctrine.

Further, one must not take words of the apostle Paul so as to insert them opportunistically into a conjured pre-tribulation string of Scripture references. Yet this has been done ad infinitum.

Instead, Jesus' literalism of Matthew 24 must be used as the benchmark for all other "gathering together" themes of Scripture.

One starts with literalism and moves into symbolism when seeking to understand Scripture; it is not the other way around.

During the 1970s and 1980s there was much written and preached about a pre-tribulation rapture. This has wound down some in the last decade or so. Why?

Today, with the world situation being what it is, there is not that much risk-taking in preaching dogmatically the pre-tribulation rapture. Why?

Is it because there are many who are beginning to question its validity? Is it because the world state is so uncertain that to go out on a limb with a false hope may ricochet?

One wonders, with world events progressively becoming more and more anti-Christian, why the pre-tribulation rapture persons are not celebrating each dawn as the day when Jesus may return to earth.

Such is not the phenomenon on a large scale. Furthermore, it may be because the next generation has not bought into this notion.

In any case, it is a myth, a legend of conservative Protestantism's own conjuring and has no base in the Holy Scriptures.

Yet these very Protestants are the ones who ardently point out the myths of Catholicism while holding to some of their own myths. Both segments of Christendom need to do some serious housecleaning of manufactured legends in order to return to the simple Bible truths; otherwise, the church suffers from severe lack of knowledge.

What is so frightening about holding to a pre-tribulation rapture? It is more than mere academic quibbling. Holding to such a notion is drastically weakening the church worldwide.

The church should be preparing for spiritual battle against the most evil forces arrayed by hell.

Instead, the church is languishing with a false hope. This is all orchestrated by the demonic powers in order to eventuate in a limp army of believers. And to see that through in this age of laxity in religion does not take much on the part of the dark powers. In addition, the apostate segment of religion is doing its fair share of blackening truth.

Does it take much intelligence to realize that there are awesomely wretched days yet ahead for the righteous remnant?

Those who are not strong will drop--fall away, as biblically predicted. They will be too numerous to contemplate. But for those who are truly into carrying the daily cross there will be nothing able to thwart their zeal for Christ.

Already the remnant is being strengthened by the Spirit of light. He is gathering His own together in the power of the resurrection and the might of the revealed Word. There numbers are few; but their ardor before the Father is lovingly honored.

Set your vision upon the difficulties yet to be. They are but the trials permitted by the coming Christ.

At the close of the tribulation period, then there will be the gathering together of the believers from the four corners of the earth. They will greet Jesus in the clouds as He descends through space, having left the right hand of the Father in heaven.

The gathering together ("rapture") and the second advent then will be realized as one and the same event occurring at the end of the tribulation time frame. Jesus' declaration in Matthew 24:29-3l states it clearly.

Okay, where do you see that Satan is going to "perdition"?

Revelation 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

You seem to be hung up on the word "perdition" as if it's a place or a person when it's only an archaic word that means "destruction" or "ruin" or "loss".

I see that saying "son of perdition" is kind of like saying he's a "son of a bitch." It's a figurative way to say what his character is like. He's about nothing but destruction and waste, he's a "son of destruction." Like a "son of a bitch" isn't really the son of a bitch but acts like a dog, a son of destruction's character is summed up in that their character is wanting to destroy.

I am hung up on the word Douglas. To me, it is like a name, a title....The Son of Perdition, as in The President of Iran. (I wonder what brought that to mind?)

All I can suggest is that you continue to study and use all the resources you can. Often when starting off studying people will want to hold on to their own ideas instead of believing what scripture actually says.

That is true...and very true about me. I'll keep studying and try to do so with a more open mind but it sure doesn't come easy.

........Ping

I am hung up on the word Douglas. To me, it is like a name, a title....The Son of Perdition.

I would no more recommend a certain translation to anyone no more than I would recommend a vote for a democrat......but, I have found that "Young's Literal Translation" helps me to understand the context of the Greek.......sometimes. LOL

Let's look at John 17:12

On the right hand side you will see various translations of this verse....a central verse to this question. Young's is the last translation on the right hand side of the page. It doesn't even use the word "Perdition"!

Let's look at verses (6-9): I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word. Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee. For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me. I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.

There can be no doubt that Our Lord is speaking of the disciples here....and in verse (12): While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost,......... but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

There is no doubt that the subject of verse...12....that was lost is none other than Judas.....according to the KJV.

Three entities in scripture are identified as "Sons" of perdition....Judas, The Beast and the False Prophet of [Revelation 17:3-14]. The False Prophet is a leader of the false church and the Beast will be a great political leader. It is true that all three have been influenced by Satan. We know that Satan entered the body of Judas [Luke 22:3][John 13:2] and it is quite certain that the False Prophet and the Beast will also be Satanic in their natures.

As Douglas said earlier....there will be many sons of perdition that will go down to destruction. You can say that perdition/destruction is the opposite of salvation/eternal life. None will be in the Kingdom of God who did not specifically choose to be there....by their righteousness! On the other hand....none will be in the lake of fire except those who specifically chose to be there by their wickedness!

[Philippians 1:27-28] Only let your conversation be as it becometh the gospel of Christ: that whether I come and see you, or else be absent, I may hear of your affairs, that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel; And in nothing terrified by your adversaries: which is to them an evident token of perdition, but to you of salvation, and that of God.

[Hebrews 10:37-39] For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry. Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.

[2 Peter 3:5-7] For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition (destruction) of ungodly men.

[2 Thessalonians 2:1-4] Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Do these verses all speak of Satan? Or do they speak of others with Satan's influence?

You seem to be hung up on the word "perdition" as if it's a place or a person when it's only an archaic word that means "destruction" or "ruin" or "loss".

I would agree with this statement.

Okay....I understand but it is difficult (and I am stubborn). Perhaps if it had been worded - Judas, a son of perdition, it would have been clearer to me. But....I do finally see! Thank you both.

I have two other questions to ask and hope you can help.

11 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the Temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

What is meant by the "Temple of God?" I understand that the Temple was standing at that time but the reference is to the future. As there is no Temple and I don't see mentioned anywhere in scripture that there will be another until the millennium....what does it mean?

If the Temple is Christ (raised 3 1/2 days later) how can the man of sin be sitting there? If it means us, as the body of Christ, being the Temple....how can he be sitting there? Is the "he" spoken of here an entity...that man of sin, or is it his group of worshippers and if so...why is he referred to as "man."

Or, could it mean the site where His Temple was. The Holy place of Islam. Will he, the man of sin, "sitteth in" the site of the Temple of God,"shewing himself that he is God?" So...what is meant by the Temple of God?

My second question:

Exodus 16:31 And the house of Israel called the name thereof Manna: and it was like coriander seed,white; and the taste of it was like wafers made with honey.

Why is "house of Israel" written before the separation of the tribes? A sidenote in my Bible said there are "14 occurrences before the division of the nation into two kingdoms." But, it didn't explain why!

I hope you two can help with this.

..........Ping

PS: I thought your remark about recommending someone vote for a Democrat was funny...and scary!

Exodus 16:31 And the house of Israel called the name thereof Manna: and it was like coriander seed,white; and the taste of it was like wafers made with honey.
Why is "house of Israel" written before the separation of the tribes? A sidenote in my Bible said there are "14 occurrences before the division of the nation into two kingdoms." But, it didn't explain why!

I'll attempt to answer this since it's the shortest.:-)

Jacob was of course renamed Israel:

Gen 32:28 And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.

Jacob of course had 12 sons whose offspring are called collectively "Israel"...or the house of Israel.

So this is just a way of referring to Jacob's (Israel's) offspring as opposed to the kingdom of Israel eventually became a political entity separate from the Kingdom of Judah.

In other words, all tribes are part of the house of Israel. But not all tribes were part of the Kingdom of Israel.

To your knowledge was it ever used as that after the split or are all those references after Solomon to the 10 tribes only?

I think the rule of thumb is: Whenever the two houses are mentioned together (Israel and Judah) in the same thought or passage....they are to be considered distinct. Whenever only one is mentioned they are to be considered only one. The problem some folks have though.....is recognizing that Judah is still part of Israel and when Israel is mentioned by itself you should always consider the fact that this includes Judah.

[Jeremiah 3:6-18] is a good example of the separate distinctions of the two houses.....whereas [Revelation 7:4-8] is a good example of The Holy Spirit wanting us to include Judah in the House of Israel (Tribes of Israel).

[Matthew 15:24] But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. This is one of the few times in the New Testament that the "House of Israel" is referred to. Most of the time they are called "Children of Israel" in the New....except for a few passages in Hebrews 8. As you can see....Our Lord is including Judah with this statement.

Sometimes scriptures will speak of "Ephraim" in the same vein as Israel (Ten Tribes). Ephraim was the leading tribe of the north. Many passages in Hosea show this distinction.

[II Thessalonians 2:1-4] Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Two things jump out at me here. This is happening before the second coming and a "Man of Sin" will be revealed.

[II Thessalonians 2:5-7] Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

This man of sin is not Satan. It is a "Man" and he will be a great leader of a Church/State system....commonly called in [Revelation 19:20]....the false prophet.

Paul speaks of the "Mystery of Iniquity" already at work in the first century. This was the early beginnings of the Church/State system that was begun by Simon Magus [Acts 8] after leaving Samaria and traveling to Rome. He was exalted as a god by the Romans and even had a statue erected in his honor on a bridge over the Tiber. Luke identifies this Man of Sin and his mystery religion and the others refer to him and his false religious system continually throughout the New Testament. The system he began was an offshoot of the Babylonian mysteries.....and it still exists today.

The False prophet will be an exalted Church/State ruler and he will sit in the temple pretending he is God. Young's literal translation shows the word temple to be: Strong's #3485. naos (nah-os')from a primary naio (to dwell); a fane, shrine, temple. Young's Literal Translation calls it a sanctuary: [II Thessalonians 2:4] who is opposing and is raising himself up above all called God or worshipped, so that he in the sanctuary of God as God hath sat down, shewing himself off that he is God -- [the day doth not come].

This is not speaking of the temple in Jerusalem....or the Heavenly Temple in the New Jerusalem. It is speaking of a man made edifice, a Church sanctuary, a famous structure, a well known City/Church/State building where this false prophet will attempt to convince humanity he is God!

[II Thessalonians 2:9] Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders. His works follow after the patterns of Satan....and can be actually said to be Satanic......but he (The False Prophet) is a man.

Smiley to you....Douglas! :-) LOL

I need to clarify this statement as after reading it I realize It's not exactly what I meant to say.

The "Abomination of Desolation" [Daniel 11:31][Daniel 12:11] has occurred already occurred twice. Antiochus Epiphanes desecrated the Temple (Jerusalem 168 B.C.) by dedicating it to Jupiter and even sacrificed pigs on the altar. Titus desecrated it in 70 A.D. when Jerusalem was destroyed. Prophecy is sometimes dual in nature and we definitely see that exhibited here......but I did not mean that the False Prophet would not also desecrate a "New Temple" in Jerusalem in the future. What I was attempting....(clumsily) to say.... was that for 2000 years now desecration of "A" sanctuary has been an ongoing thing.

Our Lord said [Matthew 24:15] "When you see it (the Abomination of Desolation) standing in the Holy place" & [Luke 21:20] "When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies Desolation will be near" & [Mark 13:14] "When you see it (Abomination of Desolation standing where it does not belong.....then let those in Judea flee to the mountains." The fact that Jerusalem is being surrounded.....and folks are to flee from Judea to the mountains indicates a Jerusalem locale for the desecration of the Temple.

The problem here is that there is currently no Temple in Jerusalem. That does not mean one will not be built!

The Papacy has called for Jerusalem to become an "International" city for sometime now and an open city for folks of all religious persuasions. The leadership of Israel, for the most part, has always said that "Never Again" will Jerusalem be a divided city. It will always be the Capital of a Jewish state. There is obviously much pressure from the surrounding Arab countries to insure that this policy does not prevail.

The next big war will probably tell the tale....if there is intervention from Europe (probably will be) you can bet your bottom dollar that the Vatican will be involved. If the armies surrounding Jerusalem are European Armies think of the possible misconceptions the world may have! If there is a Temple built at that point, and we see a Papal delegation, in the interest of Ecumenical cooperation....visiting that New Temple.....as the armies of Europe do indeed surround the place, giving off the impression of providing security, and whatever Pope it might be....performing miracles to millions via satellite television......well, read [2 Thessalonians 2:4] again! Maybe his personal intervention has brought "Peace" to the middle East????? You can see the ramifications!

Most folks would be deceived that this could be anything but God sanctioned....after all, European Armies protecting Israel. C'mon now....what's the problem with that? If they were Arab.....we would be concerned....but Armies of Europe and the Pope himself! Not to worry!

Do you see what I'm getting at? The Pope could claim that "THE CHURCH" was returning to its roots......and the "Abomination of Desolation" would be in place!

Everything hinges on when.... and if a new temple is built in Jerusalem. But the desecration of New Testament Christianity has been going on for two thousand years. I think the Prophecy in [Mark 13:14] is the most apropos: But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not, (let him that readeth understand,) then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:

That does clear up some of the scripture I was thinking about when comparing it to your earlier post. I still haven't studied what you are saying (hopefully I can tomorrow at work - I always have more free time at work than at home) but do you believe that a "new" temple will be built or are the references to the holy place there now - holy to Islam? But, if it was Islam's holy place it wouldn't be referred to as "Temple of God." If it doesn't mean Islam's holy place and a new temple isn't built...what is the "Temple of God?"

I ask this because someone speaking about corporate theology believes that the "temple of God" mentioned is the body of believers. Some of us are the temple the anti-christ will be in. He believes that the return of Christ is all of the body of believers...not an entity. He also believes that the anti-christ is not an entity but the body of his believers.

Diego, I just thought of something...please let me know what you think. Christ said:

John 2:19Jesus answered and said unto them, "Destroy this Temple, and in three days I will raise it up."

21. But He spake of the Temple of His body.

He did raise that Temple in three days so He must be the Temple spoken of in:

11 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the Temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Could that scripture mean that anti-christ and/or the false prophet (I still don't know if they are one and the same or separate)but either way...could it be that entity sitting "as God" (pretending to be Christ) in "the Temple of God" (masquerading in looks and actions as Christ, the temple that was raised in 3 days)....."shewing himself that he is God."

The Temple of God is Christ and he will be in that form pretending to be Him...the fake. Could that be what is meant by the above scripture?

......Ping

I have another question on a different subject. When reading about end times the scripture about "ruling with a rod of iron," I always thought it was Christ in that role.

Revelation 2:27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of My Father.

28.And I will give him the morning star

12:5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to His throne.

19:15 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.

The He and Him in caps is Christ but who is the other "he", who is the "manchild" that God gives the rod to? What is meant by Christ giving him - the manchild, the morning star? He is the morning star. Does He make the manchild a morning star? Are these the elect that rule with Him, or instead of Him, during the millennium? Is that what is meant by being gods? And...when is he caught up to the throne?

HELP PLEASE.

.........Ping

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.