Skip to comments.What About The Rapture?
Posted on 06/18/2010 9:45:21 AM PDT by Ken4TA
click here to read article
Again, right on! Amen. Come Lord Jesus. The grace of the Lor Jesus be with all.
I don't know if it's good or not. But I imagine that all those "rapture" up to into that theology would think it is good. It takes all kinds of theological speculation and sensationalism to make life interesting in this world of ours, doesn't it! I wonder how much money he has made from his many books selling his idea of God's revelation?
Excellent! More people should read what you linked to!
However, just the title of those writings will stop anyone "caught up" into the replacement theology camp.
Study Daniel carefully and prayerfully, especially Chapter 9. The tribulation is Israel's seventieth week. Not a five-minute job. (You have to back and forth in time and God's Word - I've been at it 40+ years and nobodys paid me anything I just asked the Lord (not man) to show me the truth.) Also, a careful and prayerful combing through the Book of Revelation reveals seven years in exact recounting of "days, months, years, and 'times'."
As far as the Day of the Lord, the purpose is revealed in Daniel:
to finish the transgression, and
to make an end of sins, and
to make reconciliation for iniquity, and
to bring in everlasting righteousness, and
to seal up the vision and prophecy, and
to anoint the most Holy. Daniel 9:24
The Book of Revelation unveils the spiritual warfare that begins the Day of the Lord. The Day of the Lord is when God Himself takes charge. Before He comes to rule as the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, Hes going to clear the decks, so to speak. He will utterly destroy the false Babylonian World System and all that adhere to it in defiance of His Kingdom come.
Thank you for posting.
That's the same thinking I had when I first started my study of the Scriptures - especially end-time revelations in the Bible. Yes, the position the article(s) from Curtis do follow amillennialism closely, but he prefers it to be called a "Resurrectionist" viewpoint.
I have about 300 articles from Curtis on my Website on a variety of issues - not all of them are anywhere near being called controversial issues. Click Here to visit it.
Again, these are not dispositive issues and our hearts need to seek unity among us as brothers and sisters in the bond of peace. These are important things because I think God wants to comfort His people (plus I enjoy the subject if it can be amicably and intelligently discussed no agreement necessary), but not as sources of division among us.
Well, there's your problem. Lets take a peak at Hebrews 11 and help explain these guys:
It appears that Mark Hitchcock pulled v13 from his loose-leaf Bible. "These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off where assured of them..."
"afar off"? Could that possibly be the exact same faith that makes one a member of the True Church, or is it a different faith, one that doesn't require faith in Jesus Christ? If it is the same faith, how possibly can one make the claim that true church only applies to Pentacost onward?
Very good statement! Jesus will not pour out wrath on His people, but only on those who are not His: And I shudder for those people by knowing this.
Hmmm...While I agree that the 70th week happenings are as you listed them, I don't think there is any "7 year tribulation" to be found there. IMHO, the book of Revelation is sort of a "tower of truth"; an ascending picture of what is going to happen - as one ascends higher and higher towards the top of the tower ones view grows wider and wider over the landscape. When one reaches the top one will see the whole view - chapter 21-22, which completes the picture one sees as one ascends. Does that make any sense?
Thanks for your post Jim0216. I agree w/ everything you stated in your post. I received the gift of faith at 18 and now have 30 years in my walk.
Too bad so many think that the rapture is not possible scripturally and that it somehow divides the kingdom. Think of the harvest as ‘first fruits’ followed by a later completed harvest. The harvest of the multitudes who don’t take the mark of the beast, and re-examine their beliefs vs scripture can be consequently ‘saved’ during the tribulation. I don’t see this as a 2nd chance since they have not yet died.
However, I do think the rapture of the living is the quickest/painfree physical death possible - instantaneously [in the blink of an eye].
I firmly believe their are many ‘good people?’ [see Romans 3:23] who are currently following christian religions, rather than faith, usually involved in good works, who will miss the rapture, yet be spurred on during the 7 year tribulation and find the simple act of faith. Think of it like this - religion is manmade, but faith is a gift from God [free to all who sincerely seek Him].
Far too many complicate the simple and miss the main point - see Romans 10:9-16. When you hear Him knocking don’t neglect to invite Him into your heart!
I beg to differ. The evangelical "doctrine" splits the True Church up into several segments kicking Jews out of God's Kingdom. It also fantasizes about a future slaughter of 2/3rds of the Jews.
Evangelicals also pretend that salvation can come about absent the Holy Spirit, since if a person screws up and doesn't use their Free Will to choose salvation before one of our Lord's many speculated returns, then they get a Mulligan, albeit a painful one with physical stress. They can somehow find salvation outside of the manner taught in Scripture (Romans 10:17). How exactly is one going to hear the true Gospel when all of the Saints are in heaven? Is the reprobate and unregenerate able to do so? (Answer: No, see 1 Corinthians 2:14).
The Evangelical teaching also discredits many of the Kingdom Parables, by denying the much abused "Wedding Feast" parable or even the "Ten virgins". In both these cases, according to Scripture, there is only one chance, and ALL others are cast into outer darkness. Under Evangelical revisionism, those passages are no longer true.
Before 1830, there was nothing anywhere similar to the modern Evangelical fiction of "secret raptures" and seven year "wedding feast". That was all made up. A central bit of sabotage was performed on the words "Prophet" and "Prophecy". For thousands of years, a prophet was simply a person called by the LORD. A prophet of the LORD was simply a person who "spoke God's message to the people under the influence of the divine spirit". The Darbyists forever changed that definition to exclusively mean something akin to a fortune teller. IOW, "Prophecy" no longer holds its rich meaning, rather it only means "to speak of future events". Samuel is no longer a Prophet, he is a soothsayer and forerunner of Nostradamus. And we can't have anything really fulfilled in the past because that just isn't exciting enough and we wouldn't be in on the act. Who is going to pay money to be told that they missed the big show by thousands of years? We don't want to read about Woodstock, we want to live it!
This is why Evangelicals pretend 70AD never happened. They completely ignore the passages in Scripture that speak of the whole world being evangelized in Paul's time, or that Israel did experience all the promises made to Abraham. That wouldn't be Prophecy because Prophecy means stuff that will happen later today or tomorrow when I am here to witness it.
What this has turned into is a carnival. You have some "prophecy expert" who somehow can read the tea leaves of the NY Times and WaPo and confidently claim, that unlike the generations of scholars and theologians before him, he has this [divine?] knowledge of who exactly Gog and Magog are. So buy his book, drop some cash at the resource center at the Prophecy Conference near you, and you will be on the inside track to what will happen to the damned Jews (at least 2/3rds of them), reprobates and unregenerate while you party in Heaven for 7 years.
So this Prophecy worship by the Evangelicals is no different than Saul running to the witch in Endor, trying to see if she can conjur up a spirit (re-interpreting various texts in Daniel, Ezekiel and Zecharaiah) to provide some insight on things that are of no use to them as a true Believer in Jesus Christ who ought to have their minds, not set on the latest earthquake or M.E. troop movement, but to the things of God and His present Heavenly Kingdom.
Trust me, I can go on...
I am not sure what you mean by this. Clearly, God has poured out His wrath on His people. Just check out 2 Kings 21:10-15, very vivid description of God's Wrath.
Yes, that's probably one way of looking at it. Rick Joyners The Quest has a similar theme, very powerful.
However, Jesus tells John that His revelation to John is about a timeline (Rev. 1:19). With care and the Holy Spirit's help, one can add the various "times throughout the book to two divisions of 3 1/2 years each.
BTW, I wouldn't discount the Daniel's words out of hand here. Study closely what he's talking about in these passages. You have to back in time and in God's Word in Kings and Chronicles to the Babylonian captivity during the reign of Zedekiah, the last recorded king of Judah, and Jeremiah 25:11-12, and then count forward from the "command to restore Jerusalem unto Messiah the prince" (when Jesus first came as Savoir) (Dan 9:25). It has been shown to have been exactly 493 years in actual time or "sixty-nine weeks" in Daniel's prophetic time. So the measure here is one week equals seven years.
What about the seventieth week? Dan 9:27 reveals this last week and the broken covenant and abomination of the world ruler in the midst (halfway through) of the "week" (3 1/2 years). This maps exactly to 2 Thess 2:4 and more precisely to the events after Rev 11: 14 and in Matt 24:15-31 (the second 3 1/2 years - what Jesus called "the end").
I'm sorry but I believe in speaking the truth. I know it would be nice if we could escape the birth pangs of redemption but that isnt taught in the Tanakh. And the Tanakh is my only guide to truth. (After studying the NT and all apologetic sources for many years).
I've given you line and verse in God's Word as backup to what I'm saying including Jesus' clear statements in John, which you seem to reject out of hand, that the Holy Spirit will lead us into all truth and will show us things to come.
As I said, agreement isn't necessary as long as the discussion is benevolent and intelligent, but if this devolves into something less, count me out.
This can be a thorny subject, but my weakness is I enjoy it. I think it is meant to be a blessing to people or else God would not have said that the Holy Spirit would show us things to come. It's balancing the enjoyment of the subject, the desire to bless and comfort God's people, while endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. (ie. takes God's grace.)