Posted on 05/21/2016 8:38:01 AM PDT by Salvation
Q. Many of our Protestant brethren say that, before Jesus comes, there will be a rapture wherein all the faithful will be taken up, I guess, to meet Him in the sky. When I tell them that the Bible says we will “see the Son of Man coming upon the clouds of heaven” (Mt 24:30) and “he will send his angels ... and they will gather his elect from the four winds” (Mt 24:31), and then ask them who will be left to “gather” if everyone has previously been “raptured,” they say it will be the Jews. What is the Church’s teaching on this? Will there even be such a thing as the rapture? I’m confused! Any light you can shed on the subject will be greatly appreciated!
Rich Willette, Springfield, Vt.
A. The notion of rapture (a Latin word that means to be snatched away) is a very novel concept among certain (not all) evangelicals. It is a notion less than 150 years old and finds no real support in the biblical text as you point out. Fundamentally, the theory asserts that before the final tribulations of the last times, faithful Christians will be snatched away. Rapture theorists disagree about the exact moment of the snatching. Some say it will be pre-tribulation, others midway through the tribulations, and some even say post-tribulation.
The root text for evangelicals who hold rapture theory is a text from the First Letter to the Thessalonians: “Indeed. we tell you this, on the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will surely not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself, with a word of command, with the voice of an archangel and with the trumpet of God, will come down from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. Thus we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore, console one another with these words” (4:15-18).
The context is the second coming of Christ. There are not two second comings taught in Scripture, but rapture theory posits two — the one described in First Thessalonians and another one, some 1,000 years later. Note, too, that in First Thessalonians there is no mention of some people being left behind. There is no mention of a 1,000-year reign. Nor does St. Paul indicate that what he is describing here is a different coming of Christ, distinct from other texts in the Gospel wherein Christ describes His own second coming.
Thus we are left with a text that simply does not support what rapture theorists say. They further strive to unnaturally stitch this account with other texts in the Book of Revelation. The result is a highly debatable account of the last days that even rapture theorists hotly debate in terms of the details. The whole enterprise amounts to an attempt to shoehorn biblical passages into rapture theory that more clearly call it into question. To say the “elect” are merely the Jews is speculative at best and fanciful and contrived at worst.
As for Catholic teaching on these matters, the Catechism of the Catholic Church summarizes it as follows: “Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers [see Lk 18:8; Mt 24:12]. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the ‘mystery of iniquity’ in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh. [see 2 Thes 2:4-12; 1 Thes 5:2-3; 2 Jn 7; 1 Jn 2:18-22]” (No. 675).
And thanks for the heads-up, Laz. I missed the telltale odor of government stooge the first time through this thread, until well into the two-hundred plus posts and another one surfaced.
“This then is the beginning of the journey to the Father’s House, seven years before returning with The Lord to set foot on the Earth and destroy the armies arrayed agains5t Israel’s remnant.”
This is where you went off the rails, because multiple passages of Scripture that describe the event place it after the tribulation at the Second Coming.
“And thanks for the heads-up, Laz. I missed the telltale odor of government stooge...”
This type of nonsense isn’t allowed in the religion forum, keep it up and I’ll report you as well.
There is ample scholarship founded in the scriptures refuting your error, but your mind is closed to any education on the topic so ... have nice day. And BTW, please report me! The mods like adding to their list of grumblers to be watched like government stooges who sidle over here to find and argument if they can raise one. Add yourself to their list. They are seeing our posts as we hit ‘post’.
BTW, on a suggestion, by what other profile names do you post at FR?
Reported.
“There is ample scholarship founded in the scriptures...”
There’s nothing in Scripture to support it. You can cite whatever human writers you want, but the Bible is the only authority that counts on these matters. I don’t need to cite any human authorities, I can easily quote you the verses from the Bible that refute your argument.
The Church is promised exemption from God's judgmental wrath (1 Thess 1:10; 5:9). But, God's judgmental wrath is poured out during the tribulation.Second, as to non-glorified bodies, Scripture shows that some people will enter the millennial kingdom in natural bodies and then give birth to children (Isa 65: 20). Some of those children will rebel against the Lord (Rev 20:7-10). But, people in glorified bodies cannot give birth, nor do they sin. Thus, there must be some people who enter the kingdom in non-glorified bodies. But, everyone who is raptured is glorified. So, if the rapture occurs posttribulationally, it seems that no one is left to enter the millennial kingdom in a nonglorified body.
Third, given the context of the marriage supper of the lamb as heaven (Rev 19:1-10), followed by the second advent at the end of the tribulation, and given semitic customs surrounding marriage which John most likely would have had in mind as he wrote Revelation 19, it appears that the Church must be in heaven for this event somewhat prior to the end of the tribulation. But, how is one to explain the Church's presence in heaven prior to the second advent?
Finally, Paul states that all believers must stand before the judgment seat of Christ. At that time our works will be evaluated by Christ and rewarded. But, when is that event most likely to occur? And Paul indicates that seat is in Heaven and the rewards ceremony in Heaven.
All I know is, each and every prayer we say should begin with, should have at its root, the plea “Come Lord Jesus”. Every prayer has at its root this desire, this desire for the Ressurection, or else it’s nothing more than the greedy demand of a petulant teenager.
All the rest of this stuff, all of this prognosticating balderdash, is a complete waste of time.
The earliest believers coined the term ‘maranatha’ to express just what you so eloquently stated!
Absolutely.
“It’s not biblical, it was not thought of in the early Church...” LOL, tell that to Jesus, Paul, and John. [ See 1 Thess 4:13-18; 1 Cor 15:51-55; John 14:1-3 ]
My concern about government stooges is Biblically-based. As the disciple Peter admonished us, "Be ye aware of the government stooge, above all, the Rapture-denying government stooge, for they are the stinging nettle in a bed of the flowers of God our Father."
“But, God’s judgmental wrath is poured out during the tribulation.”
Certainly, but only if you assume that the only way that God could spare believers is by whisking them away can you claim this is an argument for a pre-trib rapture. However, we don’t need to make that assumption, because Revelation 16 tells us that the wrath is only poured out on those who took the mark of the beast, which precludes believers suffering the wrath:
“And the first went, and poured out his vial upon the earth; and there fell a noisome and grievous sore upon the men which had the mark of the beast, and upon them which worshipped his image.” Rev. 16:2
The rest of the chapter confirms this, telling us those who suffer the wrath “have shed the blood of saints and prophets” (verse 6), “blasphemed the name of God, which hath power over these plagues: and they repented not to give him glory” (verse 9) “And blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and repented not of their deeds.” (verse 11), and “blasphemed God because of the plague of the hail” (verse 21), none of which are the actions of believers.
So the wrath in the tribulation is poured out on those who worship the beast and refuse to repent. God does not target people indiscriminately, as the angels confirm “Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgments” (verse 7).
“Second, as to non-glorified bodies, Scripture shows that some people will enter the millennial kingdom in natural bodies and then give birth to children (Isa 65: 20).”
Let’s look at that verse and see if your argument holds up:
“There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed.”
This is indeed speaking about a period after the tribulation, for it is preceded three verses before by this:
“For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.”
However, the verse you cite claims that “the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed”. If we take this verse to be a description of people in the heavenly kingdom giving birth to babies, then we would also have to conclude that sinners would be part of that kingdom as well, which is a ridiculous conclusion that contradicts a great many scriptures. Since that interpretation creates such a glaring contradiction, it cannot possibly be correct.
“Some of those children will rebel against the Lord (Rev 20:7-10).”
Those verses say nothing about the “children” of people in the kingdom, they are about Satan and “the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog”. In the Kingdom, the glorified believers will live with Jesus in the New Jerusalem, not “the four corners of the earth”. This is confirmed because that is where Gog and Magog go to attack them in verse 9: “And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city...”
“But, how is one to explain the Church’s presence in heaven prior to the second advent?”
Quite easily, because it simply isn’t the case. Rev 19 and Rev 20 are not in sequence, they are parallel visions of some of the same events. This is easily demonstrated by noting that at the end of chapter 19, we are told:
“And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.” (Rev 19:20)
Yet this event is also described as happening in chapter 20:
“And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.” Rev 20:10
Since this event only happens once (they are never released from the lake of fire between the two verses), the only possible conclusion is that the chapters are parallel and not sequential.
“Finally, Paul states that all believers must stand before the judgment seat of Christ. At that time our works will be evaluated by Christ and rewarded. But, when is that event most likely to occur?”
Mostly likely at the first resurrection, which is described in Rev. 20:4-5, where the risen believers are rewarded with thrones and judgement. This happens after Satan is bound in prison for a thousand years, which is described in verse 2, so it happens after the tribulation.
When I lived up north I saw Oral Roberts in person hold a Bible up and tell the crowd they would find God in there.
Don't deny it, maybe you aren't, but many others worship the Bible and that makes them idolaters. Any one that kneels down with a Bible in their hand and prays is an idolater.
You are the victim of a flawed Greek translation.
In reality:
"Peter shouted rudely, Pay Attention to what I'm saying.
Don't get ruptured or fall in a briar patch. My dad said so".
Wearing shoes in the outdoors is also a theme much lost.
Peter was kind of a safety guy.
You've proven what Christians have been saying all along. Catholics worship "Mary".
The millennial Kingdom is on Earth. If you don't even know that, we are done here. Dissemble to someone else, stooge.
They're not talking about a secret rapture where the church is taken away by a returning Christ only to come back later. They're describing the 2nd coming of Christ. That's the difference.
The notion that Christ returns in a secret rapture to take away the church is an invented fairy tale. When Christ returns and the events in scripture happen everyone will know it because THIS is the event that Christ is returning as king.
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.