PDA

View Full Version : Rapture, Darby, and Christ's Second Coming.



Barry Morris
03-04-2016, 06:41 PM
Bluesky said he would like to respond to several issues regarding the Rapture, Darby, and Christ's Second Coming.

Lead on, sir.

Bluesky
03-04-2016, 11:35 PM
First, I do not understand how what St Paul writes in 1 Thess 4 doesn't seem significant with you, RWGR. Let me exegete the text for you. Then please explain how you regard it, using grammatical and syntactical analysis.


16 For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 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, and so we will always be with the Lord. 1 Thess 4:16-17

See the words "caught up"?
The Douay version says

16 Then we who are alive, who are left, shall be taken up together with them in the clouds to meet Christ, into the air, and so shall we be always with the Lord.

The Douay (RC) version says "taken up"

The original uses the Greek word "arpadzo". It means to be snatched away, or caught up.

This same word is used two other times, both meaning the same thing.

2 Corinthians 12:3 where St Paul describes an experience he had pf yes, being "caught up" into heaven

3*And I know that this man was caught up into paradise..

and Rev 12:5

5*She gave birth to a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne,

All three references use the word exactly the same way.

Now the same three references from the Latin Vulgate - the version the Douay is based on -
1 Thess 4:16
deinde nos qui vivimus qui relinquimur simul rapiemur cum illis in nubibus obviam Domino

See that word 'rapiermur'?

2 Corinthians 12:3

quoniam raptus est in paradisum et audivit arcana verba quae non licet homini loqui

raptus

Rev 12:5

et raptus est filius eius ad Deum et ad thronum eius

So, although I do not know Latin, I can sure see that it is not a big jump at all to say the English word "rapture" is based on the latin word raptus, or rapturo, which in turn is based on the Greek word 'arpadzo' and all of them mean to be caught up, much like a raptor snatches its prey and carries it away.

And grammatically, going back to the English text, it says
"...will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air"

grammatically this indicates (if taken literally) that we will meet the Lord in the clouds in n upward diretion and proceed to go to heaven at tha point.

Now, I know you do not have to agree with this interpretation, but at least admit that you can see the reason why many Christians believe in the rapture.

On the matter of Darby, that is a different discussion, which I don't think is very important but am willing to discuss it with you. You will be surprised at how many believed in and taught and preached the rapture long before Darby. It is an urban myth that it started with Darby. What Darby did that no one else did before his time was to systematize the dispensational system of theology like no one else did. But I digress...

But I do have a question for you.
Tell me what it was/is about Darby's position that you disagree with and why? Do you think you really know what his views were? Or have you simply strengthened your confirmational bias by only reading what critics have said about him?

RWGR
03-05-2016, 10:51 AM
Lead on, sir.

Translation: "Do my work for me, please!"

RWGR
03-05-2016, 10:53 AM
. The simplest way to prove that Rapture does not predate Darby or the Plymouth Brethren church, is the admission of the Plymouth Brethren church today in their own words: "A number of doctrines that are now widely held within evangelical circles were first discovered by the Brethren (post 1830 AD) or were promoted and propagated by the Brethren. In no particular order these include: pre-tribulational rapture, dispensationalism" (Plymouth Brethren: Theological contributions of the Brethren: FAQ #16)

2. "The pretribulation rapture......historians are still trying to determine how or where Darby got it. . . . Possibly, we may have to settle for Darby's own explanation. He claimed that the doctrine virtually jumped out of the pages of Scripture once he accepted and consistently maintained the distinction between Israel and the church". (Timothy P. Weber, Living In The Shadow Of The Second Coming: American Premillennialism 1875-1982, 1983 AD, p 21-22).

3. John Nelson Darby commenting on 2 Thess. 2:1-2 in 1850: "It is this passage which, twenty years ago, [1830 AD] made me [Darby] understand the rapture of the saints before- perhaps a considerable time before- the day of the Lord, that is, before the judgment of the living." (The Rapture of the Saints: Who Suggested It, Or Rather On What Scripture? William Kelly, The Bible Treasury, New Series, vol. 4, p. 314-318, quoting John Nelson Darby commenting on 2 Thess. 2:1-2 in 1850)

4. "When the theory of a secret coming of Christ was first brought forward (about the year 1832), it was adopted with eagerness; it suited certain preconceived opinions, and it was accepted by some at that which harmonized contradictory thoughts, whether such thoughts, or any of them, rested on the sure warrant of God; written Word". (The Hope of Christ's Coming: How is it Taught in Scripture and Why?, S. P. Tregelles, p 35)

5. "Where did he [Darby] get it? The reviewer's answer would be that it was in the air in the 1820s and 1830s among eager students of unfulfilled prophecy". (F. F. Bruce, Book Review of "The Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin" in The Evangelical Quarterly, (Vol. XLVII, No. 1). Note: Bruce is a well known scholar who himself is a member of the Plymouth Brethren which Darby started)

6. "Until brought to the fore through the writings and preaching and teaching of a distinguished ex-clergyman, Mr J. N. Darby, in the early part of the last century, it [rapture theology] is scarcely to be found in a single book or sermon through a period of sixteen hundred years". [230-1830 AD] (Harry Ironside, The Mysteries Of God, 1908).

7. "About 1830 a new school arose within the fold of Premillennialism that sought to overthrow what, since the Apostolic Age, have been considered by all premillennialist as established results, and to institute in their place a series of doctrines that had never been heard of before. The school I refer to is that of 'The Brethren' or 'Plymouth Brethren,' founded by J. N. Darby." (Alexander Reese, The Approaching Advent of Christ, page 18)

8. Robert Cameron: "Now, be it remembered, that prior to that date, no hint of any approach to such belief can be found in any Christian literature from Polycarp down.... Surely, a doctrine that finds no exponent or advocate in the whole history and literature of Christendom, for eighteen hundred years after the founding of the Church - a doctrine that was never taught by a Father or Doctor of the Church in the past - that has no standard Commentator or Professor of the Greek language in any Theological School until the middle of the Nineteenth century, to give it approval, and that is without a friend, even to mention its name amongst the orthodox teachers or the heretical sects of Christendom - such a fatherless and motherless doctrine, when it rises to the front, demanding universal acceptance, ought to undergo careful scrutiny before it is admitted and tabulated as part of 'the faith once for all delivered unto the saints." (Robert Cameron, Scriptural Truth About The Lord's Return, page 72-73).

9. E. R. Sandeen: "Darby introduced into discussion at Powerscourt (1833) the ideas of a secret rapture of the church and of a parenthesis in prophetic fulfillment between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of Daniel. These two concepts constituted the basic tenets of the system of theology since referred to as dispensationalism" (E.R. Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism 1800-1930, University of Chicago Press, 1970)

http://www.bible.ca/rapture-origin-john-nelson-darby-1830ad.htm

RWGR
03-05-2016, 10:55 AM
What’s the Catholic Position?

As far as the millennium goes, we tend to agree with Augustine and, derivatively, with the amillennialists. The Catholic position has thus historically been "amillennial" (as has been the majority Christian position in general, including that of the Protestant Reformers), though Catholics do not typically use this term. The Church has rejected the premillennial position, sometimes called "millenarianism" (see the Catechism of the Catholic Church 676). In the 1940s the Holy Office judged that premillennialism "cannot safely be taught," though the Church has not dogmatically defined this issue.

With respect to the rapture, Catholics certainly believe that the event of our gathering together to be with Christ will take place, though they do not generally use the word "rapture" to refer to this event (somewhat ironically, since the term "rapture" is derived from the text of the Latin Vulgate of 1 Thess. 4:17—"we will be caught up," [Latin: rapiemur]).

Many spend much time looking for signs in the heavens and in the headlines. This is especially true of premillennialists, who anxiously await the tribulation because it will inaugurate the rapture and millennium.

A more balanced perspective is given by Peter, who writes, "But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow about his promise as some count slowness, but is forbearing toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. . . . Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of persons ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be kindled and dissolved, and the elements will melt with fire! But according to his promise we wait for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. Therefore, beloved, since you wait for these, be zealous to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace" (2 Pet. 3:8–14).
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-rapture

Bluesky
03-05-2016, 11:31 AM
1. AS far as the teaching of the millennium is concerned, this is not to be attributed to Darby. Clearly some church fathers held to millennial teaching. In fact Augustine did for awhile and then changed his mind. Certainly Polycarp who was mentored by St John himself (who wrote Revelation) believed in it. So that's a non sequitor.

2. If the disagreement you have is only over disagreement about which word to use (i.e. caught up vs rapture) when your own article says they mean the same thing) I don't understand what the big deal is, and we have no argument.

I suspect you are cutting and pasting from a website somewhere.

What are your own thoughts on the matter as you consider the biblical text?

Barry Morris
03-05-2016, 02:13 PM
Translation: "Do my work for me, please!"

:)...

Barry Morris
03-05-2016, 02:17 PM
1. AS far as the teaching of the millennium is concerned, this is not to be attributed to Darby. Clearly some church fathers held to millennial teaching. In fact Augustine did for awhile and then changed his mind. Certainly Polycarp who was mentored by St John himself (who wrote Revelation) believed in it. So that's a non sequitor.

2. If the disagreement you have is only over disagreement about which word to use (i.e. caught up vs rapture) when your own article says they mean the same thing) I don't understand what the big deal is, and we have no argument.

I suspect you are cutting and pasting from a website somewhere.

What are your own thoughts on the matter as you consider the biblical text?

I had seen some sources, that RW will not accept or discuss, that predated Darby. "Jusuit Futurism" was an interesting study.

Various statements in scripture are somewhat confusing as to the timing of the Rapture, and I would say I 51 percent believe it. I was taught that at the end of, I believe, chapter four of Revelation, the Holy Spirit would be taken away from the world, and the time of troubles begin. This would apparently not be possible unless the church , filled with the Spirit, was removed.

Your comment on that would be appreciated.

Bluesky
03-05-2016, 04:48 PM
Hmm, the above post of mine was in response to a post that RWGR posted, but has now apparently deleted. I will be back to respond again.

Bluesky
03-05-2016, 05:57 PM
. The simplest way to prove that Rapture does not predate Darby or the Plymouth Brethren church, is the admission of the Plymouth Brethren church today in their own words: "A number of doctrines that are now widely held within evangelical circles were first discovered by the Brethren (post 1830 AD) or were promoted and propagated by the Brethren. In no particular order these include: pre-tribulational rapture, dispensationalism" (Plymouth Brethren: Theological contributions of the Brethren: FAQ #16)

Unfortunately, that is what some Brethren wrongly claim. (By the way, I was a part off that movement in my youth, so I know this movement from the inside.) They are simply not aware that a plethora of evidence now exists that the term and the concept of the rapture has been around for centuries prior.


2. "The pretribulation rapture......historians are still trying to determine how or where Darby got it. . . . Possibly, we may have to settle for Darby's own explanation. He claimed that the doctrine virtually jumped out of the pages of Scripture once he accepted and consistently maintained the distinction between Israel and the church". (Timothy P. Weber, Living In The Shadow Of The Second Coming: American Premillennialism 1875-1982, 1983 AD, p 21-22).

Umm, which historians? Pretty poor historians if you ask me. It seems quite evident, easy to find out that the term AND concept was around in England prior to Darby.

So is it the timing of the rapture (or being caught away if you prefer) that you disagree with? Or the fact that Jesus will remove us from the earth and take us to heaven in a moment of time? I want to know more specifically what you would like to discuss.



3. John Nelson Darby commenting on 2 Thess. 2:1-2 in 1850: "It is this passage which, twenty years ago, [1830 AD] made me [Darby] understand the rapture of the saints before- perhaps a considerable time before- the day of the Lord, that is, before the judgment of the living." (The Rapture of the Saints: Who Suggested It, Or Rather On What Scripture? William Kelly, The Bible Treasury, New Series, vol. 4, p. 314-318, quoting John Nelson Darby commenting on 2 Thess. 2:1-2 in 1850)

So let's look at those verses and talk about them in a separate post.


4. "When the theory of a secret coming of Christ was first brought forward (about the year 1832), it was adopted with eagerness; it suited certain preconceived opinions, and it was accepted by some at that which harmonized contradictory thoughts, whether such thoughts, or any of them, rested on the sure warrant of God; written Word". (The Hope of Christ's Coming: How is it Taught in Scripture and Why?, S. P. Tregelles, p 35)

I need more context to understand the issue here.

5. "Where did he [Darby] get it? The reviewer's answer would be that it was in the air in the 1820s and 1830s among eager students of unfulfilled prophecy". (F. F. Bruce, Book Review of "The Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin" in The Evangelical Quarterly, (Vol. XLVII, No. 1). Note: Bruce is a well known scholar who himself is a member of the Plymouth Brethren which Darby started)

And I disagree with FF Bruce at this point. I have a number of his books and he is a good scholar.


6. "Until brought to the fore through the writings and preaching and teaching of a distinguished ex-clergyman, Mr J. N. Darby, in the early part of the last century, it [rapture theology] is scarcely to be found in a single book or sermon through a period of sixteen hundred years". [230-1830 AD] (Harry Ironside, The Mysteries Of God, 1908). Harry Ironside died decades ago. I have numerous of his books and commentaries. He was not aware of the research that has been done since he died of course.


7. "About 1830 a new school arose within the fold of Premillennialism that sought to overthrow what, since the Apostolic Age, have been considered by all premillennialist as established results, and to institute in their place a series of doctrines that had never been heard of before. The school I refer to is that of 'The Brethren' or 'Plymouth Brethren,' founded by J. N. Darby." (Alexander Reese, The Approaching Advent of Christ, page 18)

Once again, ignorance of extant literature that precedes Darby.


8. Robert Cameron: "Now, be it remembered, that prior to that date, no hint of any approach to such belief can be found in any Christian literature from Polycarp down.... Surely, a doctrine that finds no exponent or advocate in the whole history and literature of Christendom, for eighteen hundred years after the founding of the Church - a doctrine that was never taught by a Father or Doctor of the Church in the past - that has no standard Commentator or Professor of the Greek language in any Theological School until the middle of the Nineteenth century, to give it approval, and that is without a friend, even to mention its name amongst the orthodox teachers or the heretical sects of Christendom - such a fatherless and motherless doctrine, when it rises to the front, demanding universal acceptance, ought to undergo careful scrutiny before it is admitted and tabulated as part of 'the faith once for all delivered unto the saints." (Robert Cameron, Scriptural Truth About The Lord's Return, page 72-73).

SIMPLY NOT TRUE.


http://www.bible.ca/rapture-origin-john-nelson-darby-1830ad.htm[/QUOTE]

And the above was gleaned from a single website operated by the Church of Christ.

My next post is coming soon.

PS. It's more fun interacting with your own views, not on cut and paste posts. This makes it easy for you, and makes me do all the lifting. Unfair, I say.

Bluesky
03-05-2016, 06:27 PM
Please respond personally to Post #2

RWGR
03-06-2016, 09:06 AM
1. AS far as the teaching of the millennium is concerned, this is not to be attributed to Darby. Clearly some church fathers held to millennial teaching. In fact Augustine did for awhile and then changed his mind. Certainly Polycarp who was mentored by St John himself (who wrote Revelation) believed in it. So that's a non sequitor.

2. If the disagreement you have is only over disagreement about which word to use (i.e. caught up vs rapture) when your own article says they mean the same thing) I don't understand what the big deal is, and we have no argument.

I suspect you are cutting and pasting from a website somewhere.

What are your own thoughts on the matter as you consider the biblical text?

Well considering I provided a link, yes, I did use text from a site. I used those two sites because they are ones I referenced in the past for this issue, and are ones that reflect what I believe.

As for my thoughts, as I've stated numerous times before, I believe the Lahaye version of the Raputre is false, and I believe it has misinformed millions. My disagreement is not with Jesus rapturing away His believers, it is with the beklief that some people will juts magically disappear, while others will be left here ti face the final tribulation.

RWGR
03-06-2016, 09:13 AM
PS. It's more fun interacting with your own views, not on cut and paste posts. This makes it easy for you, and makes me do all the lifting. Unfair, I say.

Relax, Blue. I was on my way out the door to a hockey game in Gaylord when I saw this thread. I decided it would be best to post from the two sources I've used in the past to get something up here before I left.

You seem to believe you are the only one worthy of cutting and pasting from sources. There's that troubling "I will define the rules, or go home" attitude.

Barry Morris
03-06-2016, 09:53 AM
Cut and paste is OK to a point. But the questions beyond that point are of much more interest.

Personally, I can't blindly accept everything my denomination teaches.

RWGR
03-06-2016, 04:46 PM
I don't blindly follow what the RCC teaches. Remember, my dad was a Prot and my mom was a RC. I was following more towards my dad's side when i was a teenager. But some things brought me to questions, and the more I researched the RCC and Protestantism the more I became convinced the RCC is who she says she is, while Protestantism looked more and more confusing and unstable.

Human institutions last a few centuries, if lucky. They do not last two thousand years. The RCC is no mere human institution.

Satan had no problem tearing Protestantism to shreds the minute it came out of the womb, so to speak. Satan has not been able to take down the RCC in two thousand years, and he never will be able to.

Matthew 16:17-19English Standard Version (ESV)

17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock[a] I will build my church, and the gates of hell[b] shall not prevail against it.

Barry Morris
03-06-2016, 06:26 PM
Unfortunately, for your point of view, even the RCC admits that the Body of Christ, the church that "gates of hell shall not prevail against" is bigger than just one denomination.

But, let's try to stay on topic.

"Various statements in scripture are somewhat confusing as to the timing of the Rapture, and I would say I 51 percent believe it. I was taught that at the end of, I believe, chapter four of Revelation, the Holy Spirit would be taken away from the world, and the time of troubles begin. This would apparently not be possible unless the church , filled with the Spirit, was removed.

Your comment on that would be appreciated."

Still curious.

Barney Rubble
03-06-2016, 06:48 PM
QUESTIONS TO RAPTURE BELIEVERS

1 - After the gathering of The Church, by what means are the tribulation saints saved – by their blood or by obedience?
The Bible says that everyone must be saved through CHRIST.



2 - To whom was GOD speaking, when He said:

(Isa.28:15) Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with Sheol are we at agreement, when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us; for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves.

(Isa.28:18) And your covenant with death shall be annulled, and your agreement with Sheol shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.

(Amos 5:18) Woe unto you that desire the Day of The Lord. To what end is it for you? The Day of The Lord is darkness and no light.

(Amos 9:10) All the sinners of My people shall die by the sword, who say, the evil shall not overtake nor prevent us.

(Luke 21:36) Watch ye, therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before The Son of Man.

(Heb.9:28) And unto them that look for Him shall He appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

(Rev.3:3) If, therefore, you will not watch, I will come on you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come unto you.

(1 Th.5:4) But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.

(1 Th.5:6) Therefore, let us not sleep, as do others, but let us watch and be sober-minded.



3 - How can the seventh trump that calls us home, precede the first six? For a seventh to sound, there must be a preceding six.

Barney Rubble
03-06-2016, 06:49 PM
If there is a secret second coming of our Lord to gather His saints prior to the revelation of the Man of Sin and the tribulation, as rapture doctrine dictates, then this belief must be enforced by Scripture. If The Bible discredits it; it must be discarded as doctrines of men.

We have justification to prove or disprove this belief. The Bible commands, “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but test the spirits whether they are of GOD; because many false prophets are gone out into the world” (1 Jn.4:1).

“beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after CHRIST” (Col.2:8).

“Whom shall He teach knowledge? And whom shall He make to understand doctrine? Those who are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts. For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little” (Isa.28:9,10).

First, it is difficult to believe that The Lord would return in secret. In Matthew it says that the sign of The Son of Man shall appear; then shall they see The Son of Man coming in the clouds to gather His elect (Mt.24:30, 31).

Since The Scriptures tell us that The Lord never spoke in secret (Isa.45:19; 48:16, Jn.18:20) and all of His great deeds were preformed in public, it seems highly contrary to GOD’s nature to state that His coming would be in private. Our GOD is not a secret GOD.

Secondly, Scripture clearly states that the Man of Sin and his false prophet must appear, the Tribulation must begin and the abomination that makes desolate must be set up before The Lord appears to gather us together with Him.

Paul states, “That day shall not come, except there come the falling away, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition” (2 Th.2:3).

“Immediately after the tribulation…And then shall appear the sign of The Son of Man in Heaven…and He shall send His angels…and they shall gather together His elect” (Mt.24:29-31).

“When ye, therefore, shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet (Dan.11:31-35), stand in the holy place…For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be” (Mt.24:15-21).

Some Christians believe that The Abomination That Makes Desolate has already taken place in 171 BC by Antiochus Epiphanes. This can not be the case because CHRIST came later and He tells us to watch for it. He was born almost 200 years later than the Epiphanes event.

Thirdly, all Scripture points towards ONE gathering, not multiple gatherings of rapture doctrine. “And they shall gather TOGETHER His elect” (Mt.24:31). “Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds” (1 th.4:16,17).

In 1 Th.4:15, Paul says that, “We who are alive and remain unto the coming of The Lord shall not prevent them who are asleep”. The Greek word in this passage is ‘phthano’ and correctly translates to precede, not prevent. We, who are alive, shall not precede them who are dead in CHRIST.

The seventh trump of Revelations (Rev.10:7; 11:15-18) is the last trump and is the trump of our resurrection (1 Cor.15:52). For this trump to sound, there must be a preceding six. Since the preceding six trumps describe tribulation (Rev.8,9), it must only be seen that we must endure this tribulation.

Scripture points to the inevitable fact that Christians will face The Tribulation, we will see the Man of Sin revealed and the Abomination of Desolation.

The Lord, however, has given us a way out. He told us to “pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things” (Lk.21:36) and we know that “When a man’s ways please The Lord, He maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him” (Prov.16:7).

Christians should not be afraid to go through The Tribulation (Prov.3:25,26; 2 Tim.2:11-13) and He has given us a way out if we ask. It seems, however, that those who hide themselves in the belief of the rapture shall face the worst of The Tribulation (Amos 5:18; 9:10; Isa.28:15; 28:18).

JESUS commands Christians to watch for His second coming and to be prepared. He tells us to watch even well into the sixteenth chapter of The Book of Revelations (v. 15). If we fail to watch, He will be as a thief in the night to us (Rev.3:3). If we do, however, watch the signs of His coming then we won’t be caught off guard (Heb.9:28; 1 Th.5:4).

RWGR
03-07-2016, 09:18 AM
Lots of copying and pasting, Barney, be prepared for a stern rebuke from BM...












... or not (he's a hypocrite that way)

:) :) :)

Barry Morris
03-07-2016, 10:39 AM
Lots of copying and pasting, Barney, be prepared for a stern rebuke from BM...

... or not (he's a hypocrite that way)

:) :) :)

I said, "Cut and paste is OK to a point. But the questions beyond that point are of much more interest."

If that was all he did, then you would have a point. But such is not the case.

And I said you can't use that as an excuse not to engage.

So do continue your point by point rebuttal to the information.

Thank you.

RWGR
03-07-2016, 11:46 AM
I said, "Cut and paste is OK to a point. But the questions beyond that point are of much more interest."

.

You also said it was not mentioned in the Bible, which is hilarious, sadly for you :) :) :)

RWGR
03-07-2016, 11:47 AM
And I said you can't use that as an excuse not to engage.

So do continue your point by point rebuttal to the information.

Thank you.

I've rebutted.

sorry, I'll take the RCC's interpretation over Blue's every time.

RWGR
03-07-2016, 11:52 AM
All you need to know is here: http://www.uscatholic.org/articles/201407/do-catholics-believe-rapture-29196

Bluesky
03-07-2016, 11:55 AM
Folklore and popculture?? That's kind of weird to say about a minority position.

Anyways, No problem. You are free to hold whatever position you are convinced of. I am not convinced that you haven't just adopted the Amillennial position because of an argument by authority (the RCC holds this position and therefore I believe it is true).

Here is a question for you that will cause you to think about it more extensively. Do you believe Satan is currently bound i.e. contained and limited to the Abyss?

RWGR
03-07-2016, 11:57 AM
Folklore and popculture?? That's kind of weird to say about a minority position.

Anyways, No problem. You are free to hold whatever position you are convinced of. I am not convinced that you haven't just adopted the Amillennial position because of an argument by authority (the RCC holds this position and therefore I believe it is true).

Here is a question for you that will cause you to think about it more extensively. Do you believe Satan is currently bound i.e. contained and limited to the Abyss?

I think Satan is bound simply because he is allowed to do what God wills. If that's in some "abyss", who knows, or cares?

Bluesky
03-07-2016, 12:02 PM
I think Satan is bound simply because he is allowed to do what God wills. If that's in some "abyss", who knows, or cares?

Yup. You answered the way an Amillennialist would. Here is the reference:

3 And he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should no more seduce the nations, till the thousand years be finished. And after that, he must be loosed a little time.
Revelation 20:3

Notice it says that during these thousand years he is not allowed to seduce the nations any longer.
Do you honestly believe that Satan is no longer seducing the nations? If the Millennium is a literal thing that will yet happen in the future, it will be a time when Satan doesn't have any deceptive influence on earth.

Another question. Do you believe in one resurrection or is that going to be two separate events?

Barry Morris
03-07-2016, 12:52 PM
I've rebutted.

sorry, I'll take the RCC's interpretation over Blue's every time.

I have no problem with that. So long as you answer questions.

RWGR
03-07-2016, 01:06 PM
Do you honestly believe that Satan is no longer seducing the nations?

I didn't say that. I said satan is bound inasmuch as he is only allowed to do what God wills. God is obviously allowing him to seduce nations.

Another question. Do you believe in one resurrection or is that going to be two separate events?

One resurrection.

RWGR
03-07-2016, 01:07 PM
I have no problem with that. So long as you answer questions.

Please, coming from you that is a total joke. You sit back and let Blue tell you what you think.

Barry Morris
03-07-2016, 01:54 PM
Please, coming from you that is a total joke. You sit back and let Blue tell you what you think.

Sure, sure. Only the willfully blind would think so, and certainly not Blue!!!

This old joke describes you perfectly: They asked an old man, what do you believe. He responded, I believe what the church believes. Thay asked, Well then what does the church believe, and he replied the church believes what I believe. Alright they tried again, what do you AND the church believe? His response, We believe the same thing!!!

What a hoot!! :) :) :)

RWGR
03-07-2016, 01:56 PM
Sure, sure. Only the willfully blind would think so, and certainly not Blue!!!

This old joke describes you perfectly: They asked an old man, what do you believe. He responded, I believe what the church believes. Thay asked, Well then what does the church believe, and he replied the church believes what I believe. Alright they tried again, what do you AND the church believe? His response, We believe the same thing!!!

What a hoot!! :) :) :)

Yet you sit here and blindly take in whatever Blue or your church leaders tell you.

a hoot indeed!

RWGR
03-07-2016, 01:56 PM
Sure, sure. Only the willfully blind would think so, and certainly not Blue!!!


Translation: "Like me, please!!!"


:) :) :)

Bluesky
03-07-2016, 02:57 PM
Do you honestly believe that Satan is no longer seducing the nations?

I didn't say that. I said satan is bound inasmuch as he is only allowed to do what God wills. God is obviously allowing him to seduce nations.

In that case, you need to figure out what that verse is saying - "And he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should no more seduce the nations, till the thousand years be finished."

Do you see the problem? Your view contradicts the Scriptures.

You have to give those words a different meaning.


Another question. Do you believe in one resurrection or is that going to be two separate events?

One resurrection.

Once again, In Rev 20, there are two resurrections - one before the millennium, and one afterwards. How do you explain that? Do you see the interpretive problem?

Barry Morris
03-07-2016, 03:06 PM
Yet you sit here and blindly take in whatever Blue or your church leaders tell you.

a hoot indeed!

Wrongo!! But you don't care, which is typical, and fine by me!!

RWGR
03-07-2016, 03:16 PM
In that case, you need to figure out what that verse is saying - "And he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should no more seduce the nations, till the thousand years be finished."

You have to give those words a different meaning.

The Bible is full of allegorical writings. And numbers representing time in the Bible are often the same. Seven = spiritual perfection, etc. "A thousand years" just means Christ's reign in heaven with the saints. That is now. Satan cannot deceive the nations in that he cannot stop the preaching of the gospel nor its message. And, it also refers to the survival of Jesus' church on earth.

Anytime after Christ's ascension into heaven is part of the "thousand years", which may end tonight, or in ten million years.



Once again, In Rev 20, there are two resurrections - one before the beginning of the millennium, and one afterwards. How do you explain that? Do you see the interpretive problem?

The problem lies in the insistence to interpret it in a non-allegorical fashion. The 'first' resurrection is that of the saints who reign with Christ. The 'second' is when Christ comes to judge the living and the dead. That is the only one that pertains to souls on earth.

Bluesky
03-07-2016, 05:13 PM
In that case, you need to figure out what that verse is saying - "And he cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should no more seduce the nations, till the thousand years be finished."

You have to give those words a different meaning.

The Bible is full of allegorical writings. And numbers representing time in the Bible are often the same. Seven = spiritual perfection, etc. "A thousand years" just means Christ's reign in heaven with the saints.

And the trick is to know when to interpret something as an allegory or symbol, and when to interpret something literally. Many of the Church Fathers regarded the 1000 years as literal. When does one interpret numbers symbolically?
a. When a literal rendition become absurd
b. When there is an example of other occurrences in the Scriptures of a number or concept or word being used allegorically or symbolically
c. Or when a degree of clarity is obtained by interpreting something symbolically or literally.

Those are generally the rules that have been used in the past by Bible scholars. That's what I go by.

For 1000 years to mean an indefinite period of time does not add any value to what we already know about the everlasting kingdom. But if it is taken literally, suddenly a whole bunch of things become clear, as I ahve already pointed out with the binding of Satan.


Satan cannot deceive the nations in that he cannot stop the preaching of the gospel nor its message. And, it also refers to the survival of Jesus' church on earth.

But he never has been able to stop the preaching of the gospel. And he is NOW deceiving the nations (i.e. the peoples of the earth). And, the text does not say that Satan will be bound so that he will not be able to stop the preaching of the gospel. It says, that he will be
1. Chained up
2. In the abyss (this is a synonym for hell)
3. The measures taken to describe his arrest and his limitations simply do not allow (at least not grammatically) for a mere limitation of his power with respect to gospel preaching.
4. The Abyss is sealed.
5. And what you have not responded to is this - “so that he should not deceive the nations any longer”. Clearly, as you said, he is still deceiving the nations. So you need to reconcile this statement yet. There is no indication that his incapacity will be limited to only not being able to hinder the spread of the gospel. That is clearly an interpolation.


Once again, In Rev 20, there are two resurrections - one before the beginning of the millennium, and one afterwards. How do you explain that? Do you see the interpretive problem?

The problem lies in the insistence to interpret it in a non-allegorical fashion. The 'first' resurrection is that of the saints who reign with Christ. The 'second' is when Christ comes to judge the living and the dead. That is the only one that pertains to souls on earth.

So there are two resurrections, one before the millennium, and one after. That's what I understand you to be saying. But that does not make sense if the millennium is figurative.

RWGR
03-07-2016, 05:57 PM
But he never has been able to stop the preaching of the gospel.

Right. And the Gospels have been around since Jesus' ascension. And, like I said, the "thousand years" is an allegory for His reign in heaven until he returns for the Second Coming.

And he is NOW deceiving the nations (i.e. the peoples of the earth). And, the text does not say that Satan will be bound so that he will not be able to stop the preaching of the gospel.

Would you not say Satan has been deceiving since Eden? He has, and always will, deceive men. But, he cannot the Truth that is Jesus, that is represented in the Gospels. And of course the text does not say he will not be able to deceive the Gospels, seeing the Gospels were not yet created.


And what you have not responded to is this - “so that he should not deceive the nations any longer”. Clearly, as you said, he is still deceiving the nations. So you need to reconcile this statement yet. There is no indication that his incapacity will be limited to only not being able to hinder the spread of the gospel. That is clearly an interpolation.

I don't get what you're driving at here.



So there are two resurrections, one before the millennium, and one after. That's what I understand you to be saying. But that does not make sense if the millennium is figurative.

I said no such thing. I said there is one resurrection, that is stated in my earlier post..."That is the only one that pertains to souls on earth". Because we are...or were...talking about Darby's interpretation, and that deals with souls on earth.

RWGR
03-07-2016, 06:13 PM
And I would like to know if you believe there will come a moment in the future when people will just disappear...gone, in an instance ...sitting around the dinner table, half a family's members will just be gone...at a hockey rink, 1/3 of the people there just gone.

And those left will have to face the terrible wrath unleashed in the seven years of tribulation.

RWGR
03-07-2016, 06:27 PM
...and as to Barry's comment about...













wait a second, Barry hasn't commented. He's letting Blue tell him what to think. :) :) :)

Bluesky
03-08-2016, 07:43 AM
And I would like to know if you believe there will come a moment in the future when people will just disappear...gone, in an instance ...sitting around the dinner table, half a family's members will just be gone...at a hockey rink, 1/3 of the people there just gone.

And those left will have to face the terrible wrath unleashed in the seven years of tribulation.

Do you mind if I just let the text answer your question?

MAtthew 24

“But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only. 37*For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 38*For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, 39*and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 40*Then two men will be in the field; one will be taken and one left. 41*Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one left. 42*Therefore, stay awake, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming

The Bible doesn't tell us how this happens. It just states that it will happen.

1 Cor 15

50*I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 51*Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52*in 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 shall be changed. 53*For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. 54*When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:

1 Thess 4

15*For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left 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 cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17*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, and so we will always be with the Lord. 18*Therefore encourage one another with these words.

How about you explain the above texts in your own words?

Whether this will all transpire in secret or whether it will be an open and very visible process, the text doesn't say. So I am not big on using the word "secret".

But I do believe in the follwoing sequence of events.
1. The rapture followed by a 7 year tribulation in which God turns his attention to the nation of Isael, during which time they will recognize Jesus as the Messiah

2. During the tribulation (which I believe is described in the book of Revelation) the Antichrist figure will set himself up to be worshipped and will persecute Israel in a terrible fashion

3. This era will end with Christ's visible return to earth to rule as promised to King David. This will be the beginning of the millennial reign which will morph into an eternal reign following the renewal of the earth (as described in 2 Peter.)

I could provide Scripture references for all the above, but don't have the time to right now, but if desired, let me know.

RWGR
03-08-2016, 04:01 PM
I'm about to scream. I just had a few long paragraphs typed, and hit some key that took me to another page, and lost all I typed...I hate this netbook I'm using for now with a passion. I don't have the patience to re-type now, I'm too pissed off. I'll come back later to address this issue. When that is depends on how well our school hockey team does. I may be on the road form tomorrow afternoon until late-Sat night, we'll see. But that's okay, this thread isn't going anywhere

Bluesky
03-08-2016, 04:56 PM
No problem. It's happened to us all.

Bluesky
03-09-2016, 09:57 AM
With reference to the original question - Was the concept of the rapture around before Darby or did Darby "invent" the concept? He did not.

First the word, rapture: An etymological study of the word "rapture" as a theological concept seems to have been around ever since before the Gutenberg press. The earliest mention of the word 'rapt' meaning "caught up" was found in a writing by John Lydgate (1370-1541) an associate of Chaucer who writes of the two witnesses who were caught up into heaven after their resurrection.

As far as the event of the rapture saving Christians from the tribulation period of time, a time we believe happens literally, which you and many others say is an invention of Darby, Thomas Draxe (d. 1618), reminded fellow Christians that, just as God saved “Noah and his family” in the deluge, “hee will remember and saue them, when all the world besides perisheth,” and like “Lot in Sodome, hee shall bee preserued when all the rest are consumed.” 4 Quoting Luke 21: 36, Draxe exhorted readers to “watch and pray, that we may be accompted worthy to escape all these things that shall come.”

Although he doesn't use the term, rapture, there is the concept of being caught up, to escape "all these things that shall come" which is exactly what Darby taught.

He then taught that the Tribulation period of time would see Jews coming to faith in Christ by the multitudes, and then Christ would come again. So here is proof that the dual aspects of the 2nd coming of Christ is taught in the 16th century. Not an invention of Darby as most of the world fallaciously assumes.

The word “rapture” appears often in the early seventeenth century, not only to refer to personal mystical experiences, but also to refer to the act of being swept bodily into heaven. In 1626, Barton Holyday (1593-1661), a royal chaplain to Charles I wrote that, “Elijah suffered a triumph and rapture of his bodie.” 10 Joseph Mede (1586-1639), believed in two resurrections, one before and one after the millennium. However, in his 1627 comment on 1 Thessalonians 4: 14-18, he used the same illustration for his “first resurrection” as Darby used for the rapture.

Both analogized the rapture to Noah’s family lifted away from death and suffering on earth. 11 In a single letter, Mede used the word “rapture” six times, all in reference to the saints meeting the Lord in the air, even claiming that “the Apostle calls this Rapture, 2 Thess. 2.1.”

Well, if you need more proof, I can provide it. But This should lay to rest AT LEAST the assertion that Darby invented the theory.

This comes from a well-documented book (heavily footnoted) entitled Dispensationalism before Darby, by William Watson




.
.

Barry Morris
03-09-2016, 11:12 AM
Thank you Blue for the "heavy lifting", much appreciated. I certainly don't have the education, knowledge, resources or time to explore these questions, and find the truth.

Barney Rubble
03-10-2016, 12:25 AM
A question to a rapture believer....

If they found themselves amidst the tribulation, would that person lose faith in CHRIST or would that person admit that they misinterpreted scriptures?
I think would rather feel confident that I might see this & expect it rather than feel lied to & have to endure it....therefore...watch...so that I DO NOT come onto you as a thief in the night

Although, I see that the tribulation will "be shortened for the elect's sake", I see no promise that we are NOT be subjected to tribulation.
That is why it says, "pray that you may be found worthy to avoid this".
Also, if the elect are ascended at the 7th trump, doesn't it make sense that 6 have to precede it &, thus, the elect might have to endure through it?
And why is there mention of "tribulation saints" if there is no tribulation to bear?
Definiteyly, there will be saints at the 5th trump:
"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."
If you have the seal of GOD, you must be a believer & thus around during the tribulation.


My opinion:

The rapture is a man made lie to get Christians to believe that they are safe from persecution & tribulation.
Once they find themselves in it, many will fall away believing CHRIST forsake them.

Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief.
Why watch if GOD will deliver you from it all ??????

Bluesky
03-10-2016, 07:21 AM
I hear you, Barney.
Your entitled to your view of course, but I think you've become a little harsh in your judgment of those who believe in a rapture. I'll not argue with you.

This thread is more or less about the history of the doctrine.

Barry Morris
03-10-2016, 10:58 AM
A question to a rapture believer....

If they found themselves amidst the tribulation, would that person lose faith in CHRIST or would that person admit that they misinterpreted scriptures?
I think would rather feel confident that I might see this & expect it rather than feel lied to & have to endure it....therefore...watch...so that I DO NOT come onto you as a thief in the night

Although, I see that the tribulation will "be shortened for the elect's sake", I see no promise that we are NOT be subjected to tribulation.
That is why it says, "pray that you may be found worthy to avoid this".
Also, if the elect are ascended at the 7th trump, doesn't it make sense that 6 have to precede it &, thus, the elect might have to endure through it?
And why is there mention of "tribulation saints" if there is no tribulation to bear?
Definiteyly, there will be saints at the 5th trump:
"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."
If you have the seal of GOD, you must be a believer & thus around during the tribulation.


My opinion:

The rapture is a man made lie to get Christians to believe that they are safe from persecution & tribulation.
Once they find themselves in it, many will fall away believing CHRIST forsake them.

Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief.
Why watch if GOD will deliver you from it all ??????

I honestly feel that if our faith is based on our interpretation of scripture, we are all in big trouble.

If we are taken away, or have to stay through the times of troubles, we must trust God to take care of His own. THAT is where I put my faith.

Bluesky
03-10-2016, 12:30 PM
We never divide in our churches over secondary doctrines such as the timing or the nature of the 2nd coming. We allow for diversity of views, and that is why the conversation gets difficult when holders of other views use words like heresy, liars, etc..

RWGR
03-10-2016, 04:25 PM
This thread is exhausting, where were we ...[

Bluesky
03-10-2016, 06:40 PM
Don't feel obliged.

Barney Rubble
03-11-2016, 03:30 AM
Had no intention of an argument or hurting any feelings...just i don't believe this doctrine is scriptural as far as i read...yes, it is secondary & is not damning if believed.
IMO, I just feel that it is not safe to believe in that we will be spared tribulation because if we aren't and it comes...well...i can see faith lost in some believers.

Bluesky
03-11-2016, 06:36 AM
So Barney, what do you think about Israel? In light of the question that Paul raises in romans 8-11 do you believe they will experience a spiritual revival?