Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

My "Take" on the Current Rapture-of-the-Church Craze
IntellectualConservative.com ^ | December 4, 2002 | J. Grant Swank, Pastor

Posted on 12/04/2002 8:20:11 AM PST by az4vlad

Is there really a pre-tribulation rapture of Christians, as Hollywood movies and many of our religious leaders are currently claiming, or does the rapture occur after the tribulation?

The secular bookstores carry bestsellers sporting it. The secular theaters are showing movies sporting. TV talk shows interview religious figures sporting it. It's out of the churches and into the marketplace.

It's the Rapture Craze. Armageddon's there. AntiChrist is, too. So the secret scoop-up of the church is right there--before all global hell breaks loose. The righteous will miss the awful stuff, for sure. Jesus will take them off the planet's surface into heaven before bad times hit the Earth big time.

A recent Sunday morning's religious broadcasting showed a group of believers jumping up and down, rejoicing as they were getting in practice for the rapture! The "rapture jump" is now "in"?

If so, this is horrifying foolishness! Mark it down as biblical truth: There is no pre-tribulation rapture.

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.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Current Events; Ecumenism; Evangelical Christian; General Discusssion; Theology
KEYWORDS: antichrist; armageddon; hallindsey; johndarby; rapture; revelation; tribulation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-126 next last
To: drstevej
I think that's a bit harsh, but your wrote and posted the article and I defer to your self assessment.

Make that ... grand self-assessment.


21 posted on 12/04/2002 11:52:19 AM PST by Quester
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: drstevej
Actually, grant wrote the article, but his evil twin posted the article.
22 posted on 12/04/2002 11:53:39 AM PST by CCWoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody; drstevej
hmmmmmmm.

i thought the intelligensia gathered at this site. but alas, proven incorrect in some cases once again. nevertheless, for those who truly fit the definition, wonderful chatting with you.

23 posted on 12/04/2002 12:02:58 PM PST by grantswank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: grantswank; CCWoody; drstevej
i thought the intelligensia gathered at this site. but alas, proven incorrect in some cases once again. nevertheless, for those who truly fit the definition, wonderful chatting with you.

LOL...she wacked you guys pee pees. :)

BigMack

24 posted on 12/04/2002 12:06:00 PM PST by PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
they let the loonies out, eh?
25 posted on 12/04/2002 12:07:25 PM PST by grantswank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Quester
how quickly small minds divert from the major topic at hand, that is, the posted article.

o well.

can't win 'em all.
26 posted on 12/04/2002 12:10:07 PM PST by grantswank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: grantswank; CCWoody; drstevej
they let the loonies out, eh?

Well I like these guys, I don't agree with them much, I was just poking fun at them.

And you might get a bit further around here if you would take some poking yourself, and not post and run, this is a site for debate, if you're gonna post something expect it to get debated, and grow some thicher skin, stay and get to know these folks. The may not agree with you, bit they will have more respect for what you have to say.

BigMack

27 posted on 12/04/2002 12:16:27 PM PST by PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
thanks for your counsel but i don't need it.

i wrote the article.

no need for my debating it.

the sentences are plainly presenting the thesis.

further sentences only disturb the small minds such as dr steve and his ilk who hang out where you do.

got it?

got it.

if you have wisdom to disseminate, i would suggest that you begin with a few lines to dr steve and his ilk rather than arranging for a session with yours truly.

thanks.
28 posted on 12/04/2002 12:23:40 PM PST by grantswank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
p.s.:

what a site such as this one needs is not thicker skin, as you suggest, just a few more brain cells that are arranged in a logical progression.

29 posted on 12/04/2002 12:28:46 PM PST by grantswank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: grantswank
I have a question.

What is wrong with debating what you wrote?

BigMack

30 posted on 12/04/2002 12:30:16 PM PST by PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
bye
31 posted on 12/04/2002 12:32:14 PM PST by grantswank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: grantswank
I'm just trying to understand why you post something and then don't want to talk about it, I have not flamed you or spoken ill of you. I just don't understand.

BigMack

32 posted on 12/04/2002 12:35:43 PM PST by PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain; drstevej
Like talking to a tree stump, huh!
33 posted on 12/04/2002 12:46:08 PM PST by CCWoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody; drstevej
I have seen some weird things on here, but this one is at the top of the list.

BigMack

34 posted on 12/04/2002 12:52:01 PM PST by PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: CCWoody
o, cc, of course the 'bye' was not meant for you, natch.

but of course one would want to enter lively, intelligent debate on a topic -- cetainly -- given the snide, juvenile, sophomoric opening post you gave in immediate response to the article.

talk about weeney minds initiating a well-balanced, in-depth debate about a most significant posted topic.

but then again, as i stated earlier, one can't win 'em all. not usually on this site, eh? sad, actually.

so. . .bye. . .cc.

35 posted on 12/04/2002 12:56:27 PM PST by grantswank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: grantswank
***i wrote the article. no need for my debating it.***

Just collect it/them and put into the canon, right?

36 posted on 12/04/2002 1:12:53 PM PST by drstevej
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: grantswank
Did the poetry branch get a little boring for you?
37 posted on 12/04/2002 1:21:16 PM PST by Wrigley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: grantswank
no need for my debating it.

the sentences are plainly presenting the thesis.

You certainly are a proud, little man. As if your words are the end all of any topic.

38 posted on 12/04/2002 1:23:06 PM PST by Wrigley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: drstevej
Just like JS.

39 posted on 12/04/2002 1:23:40 PM PST by Wrigley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: drstevej
o, tiny brain cells showed up again. i thought you had slid off.

bye.

40 posted on 12/04/2002 1:30:35 PM PST by grantswank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-126 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson