Question:
On the thread called mark of the beast, Max suggested we make another thread of a discussion of the Rapture. OK. Here it is. I do not on my lunch break have time to answer all of her exceedingly long post, but will start the ball rolling here. Others should feel free to jump in at any time.


Answer:


Where does Scripture ever say anything about the “Rapture”? The three texts cited all talk about the resurrection. 2Cor.5 compares our present unglorified body with the glorified body we will inherit at the resurrection. Phil.3 likewise is rather obviously referring to the resurrection as is 1Cor.15. None of these says anything about any taking away of Christians prior to Christ’s Second Coming.


Answer:


Where does Scripture say any such thing? You make an assumption with no sound basis for it. Even in your own description you describe it as two separate events: "once to meet the Church in the air…… and the second time when He actually touches down……" If these happen at two different times separated by a period of years (some speculate 7 and others 3½), then they are two separate events: the Second Coming and the Third Coming. Your explanation has no Scriptural warrant and defies logic.


Answer:


Scripture please.


Answer:


The opposite is true. Off the top of my head, I can only think of one reference in all of Scripture to the “great tribulation”. It is in Rev.7:14. The context is a scene in Heaven where an angel asks who are those wearing white robes. The answer is they are those who came out of the great tribulation by washing their robes in the blood of the Lamb. How can you not see that as a mentioning of the church when the great tribulation is being discussed??????
To make matters worse, note it says the faithful came out of the great tribulation. What does that mean? Does it mean as I suspect you will say that they were “snatched out” of the tribulation before it started? I would say no. It means they were in the tribulation and remained faithful to death. Please compare Rev.20:4, which says “I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or his image and had not received his mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.” How could people refuse to worship the beast or his image or receive his mark if they were not in the tribulation. Yet, these folks who were obviously in the tribulation were beheaded for the testimony of Christ. They were faithful Christians who were martyred for their faith, yet you say born again believers are not mentioned when the great tribulation is discussed. Nonsense!!!!!!! It is probably far more accurate to say the great tribulation is never referenced apart from the church.
On that note I must leave for now. I really hope I will find something Biblical in the remainder of your post when I return.

Answer:

This is a very good book on the subject, all three main views are promoted as well and refuted by the other authors. It's basically three people who believe each view promote theirs, then the other two refute it. Excellent book.

Answer:

Thanks for the link, Lost Crow. I am sure it is an interesting read.
You should note, though, that this book refers to three views of the Rapture being pre-tribulation, post-tribulation, and mid-tribulation. All three, though, assume there will be a Rapture of the church before the Millennial Kingdom of Christ. They are, therefore, three distinct views of what is called pre-millennialism. As I noted in a previous post, there is also the more classical pre-millennialism, which did not feature any Rapture distinct from the one and only Second Coming. The post-trib Rapture would be most similar to it.
In addition to the various versions of pre-millennialism, there are also post-millennialism and a-millennialism.
For purposes of this discussion I will take either the a-mil or post-mil (haven't decided which yet) position. Max takes the pre-trib Rapture position. If you want to take one of the other pre-mil positions, that would be great. We could use more diverse views around here. I'll even help you out by saying the mid-trib and post-trib advocates would refer to those same passages I did concerning saints in the tribulation. The mid-tribers say those "taken out of" the tribulation having suffered martyrdom were in the first half of the trib before the rapture. They would also be the ones who speculate the rapture preceeding the Second Coming by only 3½ years instead of 7, coming in the middle rather than beginning of the 7 year "great tribulation".

Answer:



Answer:


As I have noted above, the references provided do not in any way support the claim that the purpose of the Rapture is to remove the Church from all distress, persecution, and oppression. Max goes on to say it is not our wish to escape anything, but God’s wish. I have to wonder what God she is talking about, because the God of Scripture has no such wish. In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ says “Blessed are you when men persecute you”. So, I suppose Max’s God must want to spare us from blessing! In Jn.15:20, Jesus tells His disciples that, if people persecute Him they will also persecute them. I suppose Max’s God doesn’t want us to be like Christ in this way. In 2Cor.12:10 Paul says he takes pleasure in persecution. I guess Max’s God wants to deny us any pleasure in life too. Lastly, in 2Tim.3:12, Paul tells Timothy that all who will live a godly life in Christ will suffer persecution. Lucky for us, Max’s God will rescue us from willing to live godly lives. I think anyone with a concordance can look up dozens of other verses on their own that prove God intends for His faithful followers to be persecuted for Christ’s sake and persevere in it even to the point of martyrdom. Not only does Max’s statement about the “purpose of the Rapture” lack any Biblical support, it bears false witness against God’s will for His Church. His command is to be faithful. He does not offer to spare us the consequences of being faithful. He tells us to count the cost of discipleship, which includes distress, persecution, and oppression. He does not promise to spare us from the cost. He tells us to take up our crosses and follow Him, not to drop our crosses and wait for Him to “snatch” us up.
I can see it will take several days to point out all the falsehood in Max's record length post. Would someone else like to take over for a while?

Answer:

I wasn't waiting for you to start a thread. As you know, I already posted on the "Beast" thread. Things are too spread out now, and in addition, my posts on the other thread speak for themselves, with ample scripture for each point.
Sorry you won't be waiting and watching for the Bridegroom, it's going to be one fantastic wedding and feast. Maranatha!

Answer:



Answer:


Now that rates right up there with saying XSNIDRVER expects to be in the tribulation after he said he thought it took place 67 - 70 A.D.
I am waiting for the Bridegroom. He will return bodily to judge the living and the dead. I just don't believe the banquet will start and last 7 years before He Himself comes back to establish His Kingdom. Wouldn't you feel the slightest bit self conscious about sitting around, eating, drinking, and making merry while your fellow Christians (so called tribulation saints) are being martyred for the sake of Christ? Wouldn't you feel the slightest shame at not staying to suffer with them or comfort them in their suffering? All you care about is being first in line for wedding cake while they are being beheaded. Terrific.
I'm really disappointed no one else wanted to play while I was gone to supper. Oh, well. Where was I? Oh, yea......


Answer:


I doubt that much of anything will confuse Isaiah. He died about 8 centuries B.C. However, some of us in the church really are getting confused. How does the pre-trib rapture maintain the unity of Daniel’s 70th week any better than a mid-trib rapture? Please explain.
Daniel’s 70 weeks are generally regarded to be weeks of years, that is 70 seven year periods. They begin with the command to rebuild the Temple circa 445 B.C. Add 490 years takes you to about 45 A.D. Daniel 9:26-27 references two important events: the cutting off (crucifixion) of Messiah and the cessation of sacrifices (abomination of desolation). The first occurred circa 30 – 33 A.D. and the second in 70 A.D. (destruction of the Temple and end of Temple sacrifices). Daniel was amazingly accurate as to the timetable, landing in the middle between those events. It seems to me that XSNIDRVER’s preterist view that all of Daniel’s prophecy was completed by 70 A.D. is the only view that preserves the unity of Daniel’s weeks.
I, of course, realize good blue blooded Dispensationalists propose there is a gap (excuse me – “parenthesis”) of at least 2,000 years between the last two weeks. The gap was unknown to Daniel and probably even to God who inspired Daniel’s writing, but was obvious to C.I.Scofield. Uh-huh. Why would there be a secret partenthesis between the last two weeks when there were none between any of the other weeks? And, if you can stick a 2000 year parenthesis between weeks, why not a rapture in the middle of the last week? Inquiring minds want to know.

Answer:



Answer:

Finally something to agree with. Mt.24 is an excellent chapter. Every chapter of Scripture is an excellent chapter. All of God’s word is excellent. Hallelujah, praise the Lord. Too bad it doesn’t say anything about any “Rapture”.


Answer:

Who are these who “knew not” and were taken away? It is those who perished. Noah and his relatives had been told by God the Flood was coming and when to enter the Ark. Because God had told them, they alone knew. Everyone else was taken away by the Flood and perished in that great act of God’s judgment, because "they knew not".


Answer:

What does “shall be taken” mean? Many people claim it means to be “snatched up” in the Rapture. But, the passage makes no reference to any Rapture. Further, we read above “as the days of Noah were….” In the days of Noah, being “taken” meant swept away as an act of judgment. Why would it not mean the same in the second part of the comparison as in the first part? And so the context would seem to dictate an understanding more like one will be scar dead and the other left, if we are to follow the simile completely. Whether you follow it that far or not, there is certainly no reason to assume it is a description of some “Rapture” that is nowhere else taught in Scripture.


Answer:

He also shut out Jeremiah’s prayer ( Lam.3:8 ). So how does any of this prove there will be a “Rapture”?


Answer:

Absolutely. I have to agree again. This is great proof that the church is not “raptured” from the earth before the tribulation. The saved are still here when Christ returns after the tribulation. Bless you, Max.


Answer:

Excellent question, Max. Does it have anything to do with the “Rapture”?


Answer:

Thank you for this verse that also says nothing about any “Rapture”. Christ will come again to judge the living and the dead at which time He will receive His own and send all others away from Him.


Answer:

Jesus will return “in like manner” as He ascended. He ascended bodily into Heaven in the presence of angels. He will return bodily from Heaven in the presence of angels at His Second Coming when He judges the living and the dead and raises our bodies to everlasting life. Nothing in this passage about any “Rapture”.


Answer:

What a blessed truth! Christ keeps all those who trust in Him in perfect peace, even through persecution and tribulation so there is no need to “snatch them up” before it begins.


Answer:

AMEN. We can have full confidence in the resurrection of the dead because God’s word promises it. Too bad we can’t say the same for any pre-tribulation rapture.


Answer:

Or should it be improperly understood as that? The passage you quote (Dan 12:1,2 at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.) sounds a lot like the resurrection, not the restoration of Israel. Paul said we believe in the resurrection of the just (saved) and the unjust (unsaved). Revelation talks about those whose names are written in the book of life. The NT uses sleeping as a euphemism for death. When we die our bodies return to the dust of the earth and our souls return to God who gave them. Daniel uses all that same terminology to mean the same things. He is looking ahead prophetically to the resurrection when the dead will be awakened, some to eternal life and some to shame and everlasting contempt. As with all of your “proof texts”, there is not a word about the “Rapture”.


Answer:

I have to agree again. We must be watchful and wait with eagerness for the return of our Lord – not any “Rapture”.


Answer:

Another of Paul’s beautiful passages about the resurrection, which takes place when Christ returns bodily from Heaven to judge the living and the dead. Thank you.
There really is no point in going any further in Max’s lengthy post, because I am as tired of writing as everyone else is of reading. The pattern is clear. There has not been a single evidence given for the pre-tribulation “Rapture”. Scripture simply does not teach it.
Finis

Answer: