There is nothing in the Bible to suggest the Rapture is secret. On the contrary it will be a very public event.
.
It is breathtaking how dishonest Dave Hunt’s writing is about Constantine is here.
It's great how Dave Hunt just makes stuff up out of thin air, isn't it?
Constantine never used the title "Vicar of Christ". Ignatius of Antioch applied an expression (in Greek) similar to it to every bishop -- but that was two hundred years before Constantine. The title "Vicarius Christi" was first applied to a single individual in the person of Pope Gelasius I, two hundred years after Constantine.
Old Connie also never "assumed leadership of the Christian church," and in fact, wasn't a Christian at all until he was on his deathbed.
Hunt's view of church history is generally a network of fables.
Incidentally, nobody believed in your "rapture" before the early 19th century.
He lies, too.
Another example, I’m afraid, of my own variant of Santayana’s dictum about not remembering history. As I’ve often written before: Those who cannot remember Church history are condemned to make it up.
Why is it that self-proclaimed “Biblical Christians” seem to live in an alternate universe in which the Donation of Constantine isn’t forgery? The nonsense about Constantine would be bad enough were it not compounded with a novelty I have not seen before — making the sentimental 19th century notion of “the Rapture” into the centerpiece of Christian belief.
Inadvertently the piece does show some insight: the author rightly opposes the notion of “the Rapture” to chiliasm. Unfortunately the Evil One sends heresies into the world in matched and opposing pairs, (as Arianism and docetism, Nestorianism and monophysitism, Pelagianism and total-depravity,. . .) or in this case chiliasm and belief in a “pre-tribulation Rapture”.
The passages of Scripture adduced to support “the Rapture” describe the experience of the Church still in the world at the time of the General Resurrection. The glory of the Church in the Last Days will be the same as the glory of the Church in its beginning — martyrdom for Christ’s sake.
“It is often argued that belief in a pre-trib Rapture leaves one unprepared to face Antichrist and susceptible to deception. The facts are just the opposite. It is those who deny the Rapture who have set themselves up for the most horrible deception. Antichrist will pretend to be the very “Christ” whom they expect to come to earth to reign. He will congratulate them on the good work they’ve done in preparing the world for his rule. Hundreds of millions of those who call themselves Christians will be completely deceived.”
Ho ho ho, that’s pretty funny stuff. Let’s see what the expectations really are, and see who is really likely to be deceived in each scenario:
Case #1: Pre-tribbers Are Right
In this case, the rapture happens before any seven year tribulation, or the appearance of the Antichrist. Since the rapture isn’t an article of faith pertaining to salvation, all the faithful Christians who are not pre-tribbers should be raptured as well, so they won’t be on Earth to be deceived. The ones “left behind” would only be non-faithful, unsaved “Christians”, who are probably not prepared for the tribulation in any case, and would likely be deceived easily, no matter what.
Case #2: The Pre-tribbers Are Wrong
In this case, the seven year tribulation period and machinations of the Antichrist begin while the pre-tribbers are still waiting for Christ to rapture them away. Some of them probably would notice that events happening are matching up with the prophecies, conclude that their belief in the rapture was premature or misplaced, and prepare accordingly. Others, however, will continue to believe that, since the rapture hasn’t happened, the tribulation can’t be happening either. Some, believing they wouldn’t be around for the tribulation, may not have bothered to study those prophecies closely in the first place. Their faith in the rapture could then be a big obstacle to recognizing and reacting to the dangers of that time.
Basically, it’s a version of Pascal’s wager. If pre-tribbers are right, both pre-tribbers and non pre-tribbers are fine. If they’re wrong, then the pre-tribbers are likely worse off than the non pre-tribbers. So, all things considered, non pre-tribbers have the best aggregate outcome.
Is anyone aware of a more objective account of how the church developed? Something obviously happened that caused the church to change or even grow in a different direction with Constantine’s conversion. I don’t trust Dave Hunt, but I don’t believe the Catholic Church either.
Is anyone aware of a more objective account of how the church developed? Something obviously happened that caused the church to change or even grow in a different direction with Constantine’s conversion. I don’t trust Dave Hunt, but I don’t believe the Catholic Church either.
Is anyone aware of a more objective account of how the church developed? Something obviously happened that caused the church to change or even grow in a different direction with Constantine’s conversion. I don’t trust Dave Hunt, but I don’t believe the Catholic Church either.
Is anyone aware of a more objective account of how the church developed? Something obviously happened that caused the church to change or even grow in a different direction with Constantine’s conversion. I don’t trust Dave Hunt, but I don’t believe the Catholic Church either.
Amazingly ignorant of history. Constantine was Roman Emperor but never claimed to be a bishop or head of the Church.
But I do have to credit the fellow for warning against postmillenialism. Postmillenialism, once secularized, became Progressivism - and we know what that's led to.
With the various neo-pentecostal movements this diversion from Christianity is hastening
The Catholic “religion” hijacked the true Church around the time of Constantine and became the work of Satan with many, many deceptions that are still working on people today. I gotta get this book.