Posted on 01/13/2013 9:28:12 PM PST by madison10
I cannot believe I never caught this before as I've been reading the Bible most of my life and have been listening to evangelists, preachers, etc for almost as long. (50+ years)
I started reading in the Song of Solomon last night, but ended up in the Book of Revelation. Here's the quote from Revelation, Chapter 14:
9A third angel followed them and said in a loud voice: “If anyone worships the beast and his image and receives his mark on the forehead or on the hand, 10 he, too, will drink of the wine of God’s fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. He will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb.
11 And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone who receives the mark of his name.” 12 This calls for patient endurance on the part of the saints who obey God’s commandments and remain faithful to Jesus. 13 Then I heard a voice from heaven say, “Write: Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.” “Yes,” says the Spirit, “they will rest from their labor, for their deeds will follow them.”
See verse 12? This statement is made more than once in Revelation. So I was rather unnerved and went to the Scripture that spoke of the Last Trumpet--I Corinthians 15 (NASB) Also in Revelation 13:10. If the saints are already "raptured" then why is their patient endurance required? Answer: They are not "raptured," they are still on the earth dealing with the antichrist.
The Mystery of Resurrection
50 Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 51 Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, 52in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, “DEATH IS SWALLOWED UP in victory. 55“O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR VICTORY? O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR STING?” 56The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law; 57but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
Then I flip back to Revelation and count to the Last Trumpet--The Seventh Trumpet (or when the Seventh Angel Blows the Trumpet)--Revelation 11.
The Seventh Trumpet—Christ’s Reign Foreseen
15Then the seventh angel sounded; and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ; and He will reign forever and ever.” 16And the twenty-four elders, who sit on their thrones before God, fell on their faces and worshiped God, 17saying, "We give You thanks, O Lord God, the Almighty, who are and who were, because You have taken Your great power and have begun to reign. 18“And the nations were enraged, and Your wrath came, and the time came for the dead to be judged, and the time to reward Your bond-servants the prophets and the saints and those who fear Your name, the small and the great, and to destroy those who destroy the earth.”
What is weird is that I never tied the scriptures together before. Am I missing something? I see no where that is says we are to be rescued prior to the antichrist taking over.
Maybe someone else sees it, but IMHO there is no Rapture prior to the Tribulation, the Rapture IS the Coming of the Lord.
And your attempt to elevate your own opinion to the level of God-written Scripture has crashed and burned just like it does for everyone who clings to demonic false doctrine even after been repeatedly proven wrong and even after NEVER being able to give ONE VERSE OF SCRIPTURE that validates their false doctrine.
Since you don't know Scripture and can't produce any to validate your beliefs, I'll do you a favor and instruct you on what was said by Paul in 1 Thessalonians. The only thing Paul talked about with the Thessalonians in 1 Thessalonians was the Rapture. Like the article says, and like you can't contradict with anything other than your own opinions:
"Whatever Paul is referring to in his reference to " the departure," was something that both the Thessalonian believers and he had discussed in-depth previously. When we examine Paul' s first letter to the Thessalonians, he never mentions the doctrine of apostasy, however, virtually every chapter in that epistle speaks of the rapture. (cf. 1:9- 10; 2:19; probably 3:13; 4:13- 17; 5:1- 11). In these passages, Paul has used a variety of Greek terms to describe the rapture. It should not be surprising that he uses another term to reference the rapture in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Dr. House tells us:
"Remember, the Thessalonians had been led astray by the false teaching (2:2- 3) that the Day of the Lord had already come. This was confusing because Paul offered great hope, in the first letter, of a departure to be with Christ and a rescue from god' s wrath. Now a letter purporting to be from Paul seems to say that they would first have to go through the Day of the Lord. Paul then clarified his prior teaching by emphasizing that they had no need to worry. They could again be comforted because the departure he had discussed in his first letter, and in his teaching while with them, was still the truth. The departure of Christians to be with Christ, and the subsequent revelation of the lawless one, Paul argues, is proof that the Day of the Lord had not begun as they had thought. This understanding of apostasia makes much more sense than the view that they are to be comforted (v. 2) because a defection from the faith must precede the Day of the Lord. The entire second chapter (as well as 1 Thessalonians 4:18; 5:11) serves to comfort (see vv. 2, 3, 17), supplied by a reassurance of Christ' s coming as taught in his first letter".[10]
And you can leave your dead idol, Justin Martyr, on the ash heap of history where he already is. The final authority for me is the Scriptures written by the living God, not some long-dead "expert" worshipped by people who have to deny the Bible to make their Godless beliefs work, and one who was such an "expert" that he didn't even address the word apostasia as it is used throughout the New Testament. And as far as a falling away from the church being the meaning of apostasia used in 2 Thessalonians, the falling away from the church has been going on for 2000 years and the Antichrist has yet to appear. And as those of us who read the article know, the word apostasia in 2 Thessalonians was written in such a way as to indicate a specific event, not an ongoing, endless thing that would continue for two millennia. Was that another personal opinion I just heard going up in flames?
Just one more thing, sasportas. Was Jesus Christ lying when He said:
...upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it. (Matthew 16:18)
Did Jesus lie when He said that the gates of hell would never prevail against His church?
This is what i say cor-15 contradicts.
So then the underlined part of 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 is false and God lied when He wrote it?
But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, so that you will not grieve as do the rest who have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus. 15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.
Did God lie in verse 17?
Did God lie in verse 17?
Aren't you a Christian? Don't you take everything God says literally? Where does God ever tell anyone to not take what He says literally and to either deny what He says or change it? Where does God give man that authority?
Well, yes, I take whatever God says literally.
Aren’t you a Christian? Don’t you take everything God says literally? Where does God ever tell anyone to not take what He says literally and to either deny what He says or change it? Where does God give man that authority?
Does God say that Paul is still alive?
Does God say that Paul is still alive?
For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus. 15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.
Do you believe that God told the truth in this Scripture or do you think He is lying?
Do you believe that God told the truth in this Scripture or do you think He is lying?
GN, you are a pretrib premillennialist, I am a post-trib premillennialist. We are both Futurists and Premillennialists, I am not one of these Amillennialists, Preterists, Historicists that come against you. “Rapture isn’t in the Bible,” and so on. Fact is, I come down on your side most of the time. We only differ on whether the rapture takes place before or after the tribulation.
Apparently you are not capable of discussion on this subject without throwing out vicious statements such as:
Your Demonic false doctrine
Since you don’t know scripture
You can’t produce any to validate your beliefs
Your dead idol Justin Martyr
Justin Martyr worshipped by people who have to deny the Bible to make their Godless beliefs work
There is no call for such as this. Do you have any idea what you sound like?
I realize you believe your pretrib system, but you should allow the possibility that you might be wrong. You really shouldn’t be so closed minded. A good example: the Pretrib author back in 1988 who put out the book, “88 reasons why the Rapture will take place in 1988.” All 88 Pretrib reasons were wrong, of course. As is this preposterous notion that apostasia means the pretrib rapture.
As to Justin Martyr (he’s not my “idol,” by the way), when he spoke of “the man of apostasy,” he was merely repeating what everybody who knew the Greek language knew. Which was everybody, they well knew what apostasia meant.
As to your comment about the apostasy an “ongoing endless thing for two millennia,” I never said that, nor do I believe that. The context again, GN, the context of 2 Thess. 2 is the end time. The man of sin, son of perdition, is the main figure, and identifying individual of the end time. Thus the apostasy, an end time rebellion against God, that he rises out of is end time specific also.
You are a Futurist, and not a Historicist, are you not? Well, so am I. Hence, my understanding the Bible teaches a future end time apostasy, rise of the antichrist, tribulation, and millennial. I see us in that end time apostasy now, the man of apostasy is just around the corner.
If you don't like statements like what you posted, then have the decency to simply admit that there is not one verse of Scripture ever given by God that validates post-Trib rapture yet you choose to believe it anyway. The problem arises when someone asserts a belief while denying the Scripture that destroys that belief and denying the Scripture that confirms the Biblical doctrine.
I realize you believe your pretrib system, but you should allow the possibility that you might be wrong. You really shouldn’t be so closed minded. A good example: the Pretrib author back in 1988 who put out the book, “88 reasons why the Rapture will take place in 1988.” All 88 Pretrib reasons were wrong, of course. As is this preposterous notion that apostasia means the pretrib rapture.
This is a perfect example. You claim that I may be wrong, yet you have given not one verse of Scripture that supports what you believe. That means that you not only have no credibility with what you say you believe, you certainly have nothing to say to someone who has repeatedly produced the Scripture that proves that the Rapture will happen before the Tribulation. As far as the occasional nut that comes out with a date, that is one every few years and they are soundly condemned by Bible-believing Christians who take the word of God literally, including the part where Christ says that no man knows the day nor the hour of the Rapture. Contrast that will the utter, hopeless buffoonery of post-Trib Rapture dupes who constantly, not every few years but constantly deny and lie and circumvent and do anything other than give the Scripture where God validates their beliefs.
And, as further proof of what I've said, you deny what the article says about the correct use of the word apostasia while giving absolutely nothing that proves your position on the issue. This is where your total lack of credibility reveals itself. If you're going to say that Biblical scholars who have studied Greek for years and have presented both Biblical and scholarly evidence for what they have claimed is wrong yet give no evidence for your position that they are wrong, then you come across as a blinded cultist who has gulped down the Kool-Aid and repeats what you have been told while having no way to prove that what you believe is true.
I have asked you on at least two occasions to give me the verses in 1 Thessalonians where Paul talked about the "apostasy" being a rebellion against God by the Antichrist and you can't do it because the Scripture that would support that belief does not exist. So instead of just admitting that the Scripture doesn't exist (because if it did you'd post it in a second), you continue to propagate the lie that the "apostasy" is talking about a rebellion against God or a falling away from the church when Paul never mentioned either one of those things in 1 Thessalonians.
This is why things get a little rough for you. When you insist on continuing a glaringly obvious lie, and have been shown over the course of several posts that God does not validate your beliefs and in fact actively opposes your beliefs and you still cling to that which contradicts the clear, inarguable Scripture, those of us who don't have the delusions of divinity and grandeur that allow us to deny and discard and change the word of God to fit our beliefs are going to stand up for the Word of God.
And I know it's a waste of time, but I'll try again to give you a chance to put aside your un-Biblical beliefs and agree with God. Did Jesus Christ lie when He said the following:
...upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.
Did Jesus lie or tell the truth when He made that statement?
1Cor 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
1Cor 15:52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
1Cor 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal [must] put on immortality.
1Cor 15:54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
While this clearly says we will be changed, it does not say that we will keep our physical body.
Our physical body is the home for our spirit and our soul, and if we are to be changed, the technical term for that fleshly home, and what will happen to it, is either death or total transformation
Our physical body may disappear entirely, it also my change state just like Jesus did at His resurrection, and since He is the Firstborn of the resurrection, I would lean heavily to the changed nature and state of our physical body, being changed to an immortal one, since it is the power of God that changes it, I am not worried about it.
As for death, that implies, death, destruction, decay, injury, harm...
Nowhere does it say the rapture would involve that at all
Death does separate the spirit and soul from our fleshly body, but the rapture, when it describes the relationship of our bodies to our coming heavenly state, says we will be changed
http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/proph/questrap.htm
Some Questions About the Rapture
1. Is the term “rapture” found in the Bible?
Yes and no. It is not found in the English translation of the Bible (KJV), but it is derived from a Latin verb (rapere, to snatch, seize) which was used in the Latin Bible to translate the Greek verb “caught up” (harpaz) in 1 Thessalonians 4:17— “Then we who are alive and remain shall be CAUGHT UP [raptured] together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.” It is very interesting to see how this verb “caught up” is used in the New Testament. Study the following verses: Acts 8:39 (”caught away”), 2 Corinthians 12:2,4 (”caught up”), Revelation 12:5 (”caught up”); John 10:28-29 (”pluck out of”), etc.
2. Has a rapture-like event ever taken place in history?
Yes, on several occasions. Enoch was suddenly removed from earth by God. God took him (Gen. 5:21-24). Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven (2 Kings 2:11). Philip was raptured (suddenly removed) from one place to another (Acts 8:39). Paul was raptured to the third heaven (2 Cor. 12:2,4). The Lord Jesus was raptured to heaven at the ascension (Rev. 12:5). But that a whole generation of believers will suddenly be removed from earth to heaven without seeing physical death is an event unprecedented in the history of the world (compare 1 Cor. 15:51).
3. What do people mean when they say “secret rapture”?
This is a common term used by men who deny the Pre-Tribulation Rapture of the Church. In what sense is the rapture a secret? In 1 Corinthians 15:51 the truth pertaining to the Rapture is called a “mystery.” This means that it was a truth that was unrevealed to men in previous ages. Moses, David, Isaiah and John the Baptist knew nothing of the rapture of the Church. It was a secret or mystery that had not yet been revealed. However, a New Testament “mystery” is something that was once hidden but now revealed. God has made it known to His saints and it is a secret no more. Paul said, “I shew you a mystery.” If he showed it to us, then it is no longer hidden. It is clearly revealed to those who have ears to hear and eyes to see.
The Rapture is also a secret event in the sense that it will occur suddenly and be unannounced to the world. There will be no forewarning. It will take place at God’s appointed time and it will take the world by surprise. It will be over before the world has time to realize that it happened.
4. Will the Rapture be a “silent rapture”?
When Christ calls His Church to Himself there will be sounds and noise involved. “In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed” (1 Cor. 15:52b). “For the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first” (1 Thess. 4:16).
How much of this noise the unsaved will hear is not revealed in Scripture. The event will happen so suddenly and will take place so quickly that it is probable that the only thing the unsaved will notice is the sudden disappearance of those who are true believers. So it was in the case of Enoch. He was there and suddenly “he was not; for God took him” (Gen. 5:24).
5. How quickly will the Rapture take place?
This is answered in 1 Corinthians 15:52, “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye.” The word “moment” is interesting. It is the Greek word “atom.” The word atom means “not cut, you cannot cut it anymore.” Suppose you were to keep cutting up a pie into smaller and smaller pieces. If you had a knife sharp enough (that is, with a small enough blade) you could keep cutting the pieces down to the point where you could not cut the pieces or particles any smaller. We call this an “atom.” [However, we now know that you can even cut atoms into smaller particles].
The term “atom” is also used of time. We can cut time into years and into days and into hours and into minutes and into seconds. An “atom of time” is the smallest measurement of time (the point where you can’t cut time anymore). In English we might call this a “split-second.” How fast will the Rapture take place? In a split second, in the twinkling of an eye. If the unsaved blink, they will miss it!
6. As the Rapture takes place, what is the order of events?
This is answered in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.
FIRST, God (in the Person of Christ) will come down from heaven and He will bring with Him the souls of those “which sleep in Jesus,” that is, who have died in Christ (see verse 16 and verse 14).
SECOND, those who have died in Christ will rise first (v. 16). Their bodies will be raised from the graves.
THIRD, those believers who are alive and remain unto the coming of Christ will be caught up or raptured. Thus those who have died in Christ and those who are alive when Christ returns will together meet the Lord in the air, to be with Him forever (v. 17 and see John 14:3).
7. When was the Rapture first revealed?
The Rapture was not revealed until the Lord spoke the words “receive you to Myself” found in John 14:1-3 the night before He died on the cross. Don’t make the mistake of looking for the Rapture in Matthew chapter 24. His coming mentioned in Matthew chapter 24 is His coming to the earth following the great Tribulation.
8. What about those who set dates for the Rapture?
Edgar Whisenant wrote a book entitled, 88 Reasons Why The Rapture Could Be In 1988. Of course, the Lord did not come in 1988 so a new book might have been written: 89 Reasons Why the Rapture Will Take Place in 1989. Someone surmised that the added reason given in the new book could be this: “Reason #89—Because He did not come in 1988.”
Many others have foolishly tried to set dates. (1) How unwise to try to announce that which God has chosen not to reveal? God has not told us the time. He wants us to be ready always.
9. What will happen to infants at the time of the rapture?
The best selling book Left Behind and the film by the same title depict all infants and young children being removed and raptured from the earth, including infants and children of unsaved people. Mothers were running around in panic crying out, “Where is my baby?”, etc. But does the Bible really teach this?
The rapture is when Christ comes to remove (”catch up”–1 Thess. 4:16-17) the church (all true believers) from earth. He will come to receive His bride and bring her to heaven. Thus, the rapture is for those “in Christ,” those who are part of the body and bride of Christ.
Infants are not saved and they are not in Christ; nor are they part of the church. It would be wrong to point to a living infant and say, “That baby is saved and has eternal life and his sins are forgiven!” On the contrary, every baby is born in sin and every infant has a wicked sin nature (Rom. 5:12, Psalm 51:5; Job 14:4; Psalm 58:3). Babies are not saved and they do not possess eternal life. If this were true, then does this mean that when they get older they become UN-saved and forfeit eternal life? This is Biblically absurd. It would also be absurd to say that all the unsaved children around the world growing up in Hindu and Muslim and Buddhist homes are part of the church that is in Christ.
Keep in mind that an infant that is a year old at the time of the rapture will be approximately 8 years old at the time when Christ returns to this earth to rule and reign, and thus will be certainly old enough to make a responsible decision for or against Christ at that time or even prior to that time.
Whether or not Christ takes infants that belong to saved parents is not revealed in the Scriptures, though it does seem reasonable to suppose that God would take such infants instead of leaving them parentless and defenseless. Compare 1 Corinthians 7:14 where the child of even one believing parent is said to be “sanctified” or “holy” (set apart in a special way). One thing we do know for sure is that God will do what is right (Gen. 18:25; Rom. 9:14). God is certainly far more concerned for every infant and young child (saved or unsaved) than we are.
What kind of concept of God does the Left Behind book and film convey to the world when unsaved mothers are going around in deep panic crying, “Where’s my baby?” It makes God look like a kidnapper! This gives Reformed men and others all the more reason to mock our “secret rapture theory” (as they call it).
It is important to realize that the issue under discussion is not what happens to infants who die. Though it is not our purpose here to defend the doctrine of infant salvation, yet we are assured, based on Scripture, that they will be SAFE IN THE ARMS OF JESUS (see the helpful book by Robert P. Lightner entitled Heaven For Those Who Cannot Believe). The issue is this: What happens to infants that are alive at the time of the rapture? This is an entirely different question.
The book LEFT BEHIND is a fictional book based on prophecy, but it does teach doctrine. One of the very questionable doctrines it teaches is that at the time of the rapture pregnant women will suddenly become un-pregnant (that is, the unborn babies will be taken in the rapture, leaving the unsaved mother many pounds lighter!). A rapture for embryos! The following is found on pages 46-47 of the book LEFT BEHIND:
Most shocking to Rayford was a woman in labor, about to go into the delivery room, who was suddenly barren. Doctors delivered the placenta. Her husband had caught the disappearance of the fetus on tape. As he videotaped her great belly and sweaty face, he asked questions. How did she feel?
Then came the scream and the dropping of the camera, terrified voices, running nurses, and the doctor. CNN reran the footage in superslow motion, showing the woman going from very pregnant to nearly flat stomached, as if she had instantaneously delivered. “Now, watch with us again,” the newsman intoned, “and keep your eyes on the left edge of your screen, where a nurse appears to be reading a printout from the fetal heart monitor. There, see?” The action stopped as the pregnant woman’s stomach deflated. “The nurse’s uniform seems to still be standing as if an invisible person is wearing it. She’s gone. Half a second later, watch.” The tape moved ahead and stopped. “The uniform, stockings and all, are in a pile atop her shoes.” Etc.
According to this teaching, after the rapture there will be a period of nine months when no babies will be born anywhere in the world (the only exception being some babies conceived after the rapture that may be born pre-mature)! Maternity wards in hospitals will be empty for months! Later in the book there is an argument between Rayford and his flight attendant, Hattie, about Hattie’s sister who is out of work because she worked at an abortion clinic and there simply aren’t any abortions to be performed. In summary, the film and book teach that at the time of the rapture all infants on earth are raptured and taken to heaven including all unborn children.
The tribulation is a period of time when God’s wrath will be put on display. It will be the most severe period of judgment the world has ever known. It will be similar to the plagues that fell on Egypt, only on a world-wide scale and more severe. It is helpful to think back through history on other occasions when God’s judgment fell in order to see what happened to infants. 2
Is it unthinkable that God should expose helpless infants to a terrible time of judgment? What about the babies in Jericho? Were they supernaturally delivered? What about the children of the kingdom of Bashan and the children of the kingdom of Heshbon (see Deut. 3:6)? In Egypt the firstborn of each household was slain from the palace of Pharoah and on down. In Bethlehem God allowed babies to be slain due to Herod’s jealous rage (Matthew 2).
Children often in Scripture and in life bear the consequences of their parents’ unbelief. Is this principle going to be overthrown at the rapture? Unsaved moms going around and saying, “Where is my baby?” eliminates one of the horrors of that time of judgment—having your children suffer with you throughout that period. It undercuts one important reason to be saved—that is, for the sake of our children and other family members (Acts 16:31; 2:39; 1Cor. 7:14 etc.). Was not one of the rich man’s worst torments in Hell (Hades) the fact that his brothers were going to join him (see Luke 16:27-31)? One of the greatest reasons to be saved is for the sake of family and friends that we may influence, that they may save themselves from this wicked generation. Cornelius is to be the example of us all, who called together his kinsman and friends to hear the gospel (Acts10:24).
Why would God deliver infants and unborn of the unsaved just prior to the first half of the tribulation, which is much milder, and have other infants suffer in the last half which is more severe (Luke 21:23)? Why would God allow pregnant women to be ripped up in other historical judgments and do extraordinary things to avoid it in this last one (2 Kings 8:12; 2 Kings 15:16; Hosea 13:16; Amos 1:13; Isa. 13:15-18)? See also Deuteronomy 28:54-56 and Lamentations 2:20 for other examples of children suffering (being literally devoured) in historical judgments.
The fact that people have experienced historical judgment does not automatically mean they have come under damnation. Moses is the classic refutation of this. He came under historical judgment which involved death, but certainly he was a saved man ( Hebrews 11: 24-26; Matt. 17:3-4). Are we to believe that all the infants that drowned in the flood are in hell because they experienced an historical judgment? Certainly not.
Those who advocate that all babies throughout the world will be raptured might reason in this way: Since infant salvation is true, then infant rapture must also be true. The rapture of infants of the unsaved is a very bold extrapolation on no Biblical grounds and seems an unwarranted sensationalist device for creating a dramatic effect in a book or film. The real horror is not babies disappearing, but remaining to grow up in those awful times. “Woe unto them with child and to them that give suck in those days” (Matthew 24:19).
Consider the message our Lord gave to the women of Jerusalem who were bewailing Him on His way to the cross. “Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children. For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck. Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, Fall on us; and to the hills, Cover us [compare Hosea 10:8 and Rev. 6:16]. For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry?” (Luke 23:28-31). If what God has done in the past is a indication of what He will do in the last great historical judgment, then this passage has great bearing. Children suffered greatly in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD which is a prototype of the last great judgment.
“But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people (Luke 21:23). This passage is significant because Luke seems to connect the sufferings in 70AD with end time events in the future at the return of Christ. The future tribulation will be a time of special suffering for those who are pregnant and for those who have small children who are nursing.
The days of Noah are parallel to the days just prior to Christ’s coming to earth (Luke 17:26; Matt. 24:36ff). Certainly the unsaved babies of Noah’s day did not escape the terrible judgment that came upon the entire world (and the fetuses did not escape either). They all drowned. I am not commenting on the eternal destiny of any of these children, but the historical judgments in this life certainly are experienced by them. Why would the judgments of the tribulation be any different than those of the past?
It seems far more in line with Biblical teaching to suggest that infants of unsaved parents at the time of the rapture will enter the tribulation along with their parents, and with their parents will face whatever those frightful days will bring. If an infant should suffer physical death during the horrors of the tribulation period, God will take care of this person based on His abundant mercy and the work of Christ on the cross. The benefits of Christ’s cross-work (justification, etc.) are applied to this person at the time of death and not before.
10. If a person rejects Christ before the Rapture can he be saved after the Rapture?
There are some who teach that those who do not get saved prior to the Rapture have no hope of being saved after the Rapture. This view is based upon a misunderstanding of 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12: “And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. (11) And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: (12) That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” They understand this passage to mean that if a person rejects the truth prior to the Rapture, he will be deluded and unable to believe following the Rapture. Who then will be saved during the Tribulation? They teach that those saved during the Tribulation will be only those who never heard the Gospel prior to the Rapture.
What does the passage really teach? These verses in 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 are not talking about people who reject the truth before the Rapture. They are referring to people who reject the truth during the Tribulation. These are people who willfully decide to follow the devil’s man (see the context of 2 Thess. 2:3-9). These are people who reject the truth and receive the LIE that the man of sin is to be honored as God and worshiped. These are those who deliberately choose to take the mark of the beast and worship this evil man. According to Revelation 14:9-11, those who take the mark cannot be saved. Their destiny is Hell. Thus, during the Tribulation, those who willfully identify with the devil’s man are doomed and damned (2 Thess. 2:12). In that day the issue will be very clear: worship God (Rev. 14:6-7) or worship the devil’s man (Rev. 14:9-11). One’s choice will determine one’s eternal destiny.
If a person refuses to believe on Christ prior to the Rapture, there is still hope that he will trust Christ after the Rapture. His earlier rejection was not final and not fatal. God still reaches out to men in grace during the Tribulation. However, it is always dangerous to reject the truth, no matter when you live. The time to be saved is today, not tomorrow. If a person refuses to be saved today, what guarantee does he have that he will be willing to be saved in the future?
If a person refuses to trust Christ today when it is easy (for many, little or no persecution), why should this person be willing to trust Christ tomorrow when it will be very difficult (great persecution for believers during the Tribulation). Those who reject the Gospel today are in danger of rejecting the Gospel tomorrow. The person who rejects the Gospel before the Rapture could very well be one of those who will worship the man of sin during the Tribulation. Those who are unbelievers today will probably be unbelievers tomorrow.
God can certainly save a person who at one time strongly rejected the truth. Remember Saul of Tarsus. Remember how you yourself once rejected the truth before you were saved! During the Tribulation, God will be willing and able to save all those who will turn to Him. The same is true today: “Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them” (Heb. 7:25).
The time to believe is now. “Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation” (2 Cor. 6:2). It is never safe to delay such a decision. The time to be saved is now, prior to the Rapture.
Isaiah summed up the duty of man regardless of what dispensation he lives in: “Seek ye the LORD while He may be found, call ye upon Him while He is near: (7) Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and He will have mercy upon Him; and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon” (Isaiah 55:6-7).
The Middletown Bible Church
349 East Street
Middletown, CT 06457
(860) 346-0907 More articles under Prophecy
The difference between pre and post, is theory (pretrib) vs what the word of God actually says. I am a former pretrib myself (and not a superficial one, I might add, you are no more devout about it than I was), so I know precisely where you are coming from. Been there done that.
As a pretrib, I didn’t realize it, but I was reading into the scripture a theory of men. For instance, 1 Thess. 4, 5. I sincerely believed Paul was describing a pretribulation rapture, but where does it say that? It doesn’t, the word “tribulation” isn’t there. The same with a host of other passages pretribs regularly quote as describing a pretribulation rapture, 1 Cor. 15:50-54, etc.
Verse 54 (of 1 Cor. 15) was quite an eye opener for me. Paul said, “THEN shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.” He was quoting from Isa. 25 (the saying that is written), which premillennial scholars everywhere agree is in a post-tribulational millennial setting.
THEN, he said, is when the resurrection takes place when the bodily change takes place, v. 50, 51. THEN is when the last trump sounds, v. 52. THEN is when death is swallowed up in victory. He’s talking about the rapture.
Paul obviously wasn’t a pretrib, for he applied a POST-TRIB resurrection from the OT to the rapture. of course, he wasn’t, pretrib hadn’t been invented yet, that came along some 1800 years later.
You charge me with not having any scripture support, you’ve got it backwards, my friend, it is you that has none. What you do have is lot of inferences. Which you guys read a pretrib rapture into.
Truth is, you have no scripture anywhere that sets forth a two phase second coming, the first secret, the latter a public one, that every eye shall see. If it were truth, on such an important doctrine as this - so important that you see the need of using the word “demonic” for anybody who doesn’t hold to your doctrine - we would surely see the two second comings clearly set forth. If it was there, we wouldn’t be having this disagreement.
22
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
which doesn’t prove anything I said wrong
which doesn’t prove anything I said wrong
Nice try, but no sell. Just like the birth of Jesus Christ can't be found anywhere in the book of Exodus, the Biblical fact that the Rapture will occur before the Tribulation can be found all throughout the Bible, not necessarily in the two passages you posted.
Truth is, you have no scripture anywhere that sets forth a two phase second coming, the first secret, the latter a public one, that every eye shall see. If it were truth, on such an important doctrine as this - so important that you see the need of using the word “demonic” for anybody who doesn’t hold to your doctrine - we would surely see the two second comings clearly set forth. If it was there, we wouldn’t be having this disagreement.
Really? There's no Scripture that tells us there are two phases to Christ's second coming? Let's see if you're right. Let's take a look at a few verses contrasting the pre-Trib Rapture to the literal second coming of Christ to earth.
Wait! There's more!
The rapture is a resurrection of those "in Christ" (1 Thess. 4:13-18). Isn't it a little bit odd that in Rev. 19:11-21, which is the clearest picture of the second coming of Christ, there is no mention of a resurrection? The rapture will be the biggest event since the resurrection of Jesus where hundreds of millions of Christians will be resurrected and translated, yet there isn't any mention here. Don't you think it deserves at least one verse? The rapture isn't mentioned because it doesn't happen at the second coming.
Concerning the return of Jesus, the Bible presents a day we can't know and a day we can know. Matthew 25:13 says Jesus will return at an unknown time, while Revelation 12:6 says the Jews will have to wait 1,260 days for the Lord to return. The 1,260 days begins when the Antichrist stands in the Temple and declares himself to be God (Matt. 24:15-21, 2 Thess. 2:4) This event will take place at the mid-point of the seven year Tribulation (Dan 9:27). The Antichrist has authority to rule for 42 months, which is 1,260 days (Rev. 13:4) and will be destroyed by Jesus at His second coming (Rev. 19:20, 2 Thess. 2:8). The known and unknown days must happen at different times, meaning they are two separate events.
The armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, follow Jesus out of heaven at His second coming (Rev. 19:14, Zech. 14:5, Col. 3:4). These are not angels because Rev. 19:8 tells us the fine linen is the righteousness of the saints. In order to come out of heaven we first have to go in, indicating a previous rapture.
When Jesus returns to earth at the second coming, He will return from a wedding (Luke 12:36). At the rapture, Jesus is married to His bride, the Church. After the wedding, He will return to earth.
Jesus said He would prepare a place for the Church in heaven, then He would come again to receive us to Himself. Why would Jesus prepare a place for us in heaven and then not take us there? At the rapture, He will come to receive us to Himself, "that where I am (heaven), there you may be also." If the rapture occurred at the same time as the second coming, we would go up to the clouds and then immediately come back to earth. That would contradict John 14:2-3.
If the rapture occurred at the second coming, why would the sheep and the goats need to be separated immediately after the second coming? A rapture at the second coming would have already separated the sheep and the goats. With a Pre-Tribulation rapture, the people saved after the rapture will need to be separated after the second coming.
If the rapture occurs at the second coming and the wicked are cast into hell at that time, who will be left to populate the millennium? Only people in their natural (non-resurrected) bodies will be able to have children (Matt. 22:30). With a Pre-Tribulation rapture, the people saved after the rapture who are alive at the second coming will populate the earth during the Millennium.
"In passages that deal with the Second Advent there are signs or events that lead up to and signal the return of Jesus Christ (e.g., Matt. 24:4-28; Rev. 19:11-21). In each of these passages of Scripture there is the careful and extensive itemizing of details that should alert believers in that day that the Second Advent is about to occur. . . . On the other hand, there is no mention of any signs or events that precede the Rapture of the church in any of the Rapture passages. The point seems to be that the believer prior to this event is to look, not for some sign, but the Lord from heaven. If the Rapture was a part of the complex of events that make up the Second Advent, and not distinct from it, then we would expect that there would be a mention of signs or events in at least one passage." (See Paul D. Feinberg, "The Case For The Pretribulation Rapture Position," in Gleason Archer, Paul Feinberg, Douglas Moo, The Rapture: Pre-, Mid-, or Post Tribulational? p. 80)
"Second advent passages are invariably followed by talk of setting up the kingdom after the Lord's return (e.g., Matt. 24:31; 25:31ff; Zech. 14; Joel 3; Rev. 19-20). So, the second advent is preparatory to the establishment of the millennial kingdom. On the other hand, clear rapture passages give no hint that after the rapture the Lord establishes the kingdom." (John Feinberg, p. 198)
"It is very clear from 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 and 1 Corinthians 15:51ff that at the rapture those gathered to the Lord will be glorified. On the other hand, second advent passages say nothing about anyone (living or dead) receiving a glorified body." (John Feinberg, p. 198) "Nowhere in the texts that deal with the Second Advent is there the teaching about the translation of living saints." (Paul Feinberg, p. 82)
Nowhere in the Second Coming passages is a meeting in the air mentioned.
Revelation 4-18 gives the most detailed account of the seven year Tribulation period. If the Church were to be in the Tribulation period, surely one would expect at least one reference to the Church in this time period. The Church, however, which is referred to nineteen times in the first three chapters of Revelation, is suddenly silent and never referred to in chapters 4-18. "It is remarkable and totally unexpected that John would shift from detailed instructions for the Church to absolute silence about the Church for the subsequent 15 chapters if, in fact, the Church continued into the tribulation." (Richard L. Mayhue, Snatched Before the Storm, p. 8)
Nature of Tribulation centers on Israel. According to Daniel 9:24-27, the "seventy weeks" prophecy including the final "one week" (seven years) is for Israel ("your people"). Jeremiah 30:7 refers to the Tribulation period as a time of "Jacob's distress." "While the church will experience tribulation in general during the present age (John 16:33), she is never mentioned as participating in Israel's time of trouble, which includes the great tribulation, the day of the Lord, and the wrath of God." (Ice and Demy, The Truth About The Rapture, p. 36)
"Passages such as 1 Corinthians 1:7; Titus 2:13 and Philippians 3:20 are applicable at this point. The believer is pictured as eagerly waiting and earnestly expecting the Savior. Watching for signs is entirely foreign to these passages. It never occurs. Not even once. Furthermore, not only is the believer to look for the any-moment return of the Lord, but he is to direct his life in the light of it (cf. Rom. 13:11-14; James 5:7-8; 1 John 3:1-3). If, on the other hand, there are specific prophesied signs, in reality we would not be looking for the Savior at any moment but instead should be watching for the revelation of the man of sin, the Great Tribulation, etc. There would be at least a seven-year preparation period." (Earl D. Radmacher, "The Imminent Return of the Lord," in Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 264-65). "It is incongruous then that the Scriptures would be silent on such a traumatic change for the Church. If posttribulationism were true, one would expect the epistles to teach the fact of the Church in the tribulation, the purpose of the Church in the tribulation, and the conduct of the Church in the tribulation." (Mayhue, p. 9)
In this passage, Paul notes that the Thessalonians had been "shaken" and "disturbed" because they had been led to think that they were presently in the Day of the Lord (i.e. the Tribulation period). The fact that they were disturbed is significant. If Paul had taught a posttribulational rapture, the Thessalonians would have had no reason to be disturbed since they would be expecting signs and persecution before the coming of the Lord. Thus, they could joyously look to the soon coming of the Lord after the Tribulation. However, the fact that the Thessalonians were shook up indicates that they did not expect to be in the Day of the Lord.
So, yet again, you provide absolutely zero Scripture to support post-Trib Rapture mythology. But then again, you can't because that Scripture doesn't exist.
And by the way - if the Biblical doctrine of pre-Trib Rapture "came along" in the 1800s, then the Biblical doctrine of salvation by grace alone and not by works "came along" in the 1500s.
Agreed. Alot of contortion in the pretrib circles. I post below from Revelation 9:
3 And out of the smoke locusts came down on the earth and were given power like that of scorpions of the earth. 4 They were told not to harm the grass of the earth or any plant or tree, but only those people who did not have the seal of God on their foreheads. 5 They were not allowed to kill them but only to torture them for five months.
**********
This is during the 5th trumpet; if all the Christian’s are gone, why would God mark our foreheads wo we wouldn’t be harmed? We’re not even supposed to be on earth, as believers, during this time if left up to the pretrib beliefs, correct?
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.