Pretty big theological errors - Left Behind (2001) Discussion

[–] julielb67 14 years ago

Well, seeing how a "rapture" itself is completely unbiblical the rest is kind of moot.

reply

[–] bransrubar 14 years ago

True there are no babies or toddlers that can make that decision and that is the reason they are raptured. They are still innocent and have not yet done wrong so God spares them from the horrors to come.

reply

[–] life4all 14 years ago

Well it is of course understandable why we would want to believe that God would spare the innocent. About 30,000 people starve to death every day (10,950,000 annually). Most of them are innocent and many of them are children. It takes about 60 days to starve to death so I would rank their suffering as very high upon the list of Apocalyptic evils. Apparently for them, the “Rapture” came too late.

Most of the people who can use this website have never known what hunger or true suffering really is. Consequently they feel a need for God to remove his “chosen” before “a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation” comes to pass upon the earth. We need to be mindful that historically, God’s deliverance has always come in very painful, pragmatic ways. We need only study the events of the last 100 years (WW1, the Great Depression, the Great Dust Bowl, WW2, massive resource depletion, ecosystem breakdown, ozone decay, Global Warming, etc.) to realize that much of what is written in Revelations is already happening. 60 million people died in WW2 alone. Jesus said:

Luke 21:32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.(KJV)

It takes about 100 years for an entire generation to pass away. Do the math. I have studied the “Rapture” concept for more than 25 years and found it to be mostly zealous misinterpretations of what is written in the New Testament. The USA has been sovereign for only 234 years. The very idea of a biblical “Rapture” is contemporary and is less than 200 years old. We must all open our eyes if we are to see clearly.

reply

[–] nagorskimb 14 years ago

I'm having a hard time seeing which side of the fence you're on. One minute t seems like you're criticizing God, and the next you're talking about how what is written in Revelations is happening now (like you believe it), and then you argue that the "Rapture" idea is contemporary which implies it isn't true.

What is it? What are you arguing for and against?

reply

[–] life4all 14 years ago

The criticism is not against God. It is against the idea of a rapture (which trends to ignore history so that contemporary thinking might prevail) and the casual reading of books like the Bible. So what I am against is the quick, cursory, oversimplification of any ideas we can learn about from reading books. Why not take the time to understand what the author is really trying to say before we formulate our opinions? Narrow interpretations of certain Bible passages close the mind to alternatives and that can cause us to think in terms of days rather than of years. WW2 for example, fits into apocalyptic perspective if we apply context and history to the verses we read in the Bible. It is the narrow thinking that causes Jesus to be crucified by the very people he came to help (because he did not fit into preconceived notions of what a Messiah should be).

So simply put, since death and suffering is the same throughout the ages, why do some modern Christians believe God loves them more than their ancestors? The Romans fed some of the early Christians to 400 pound, half-starved lions! Is being persecuted by an Antichrist really any worse than that? Yes, I know some say Nero was the Antichrist!

The main reason people believe in the rapture is because they won’t take the time to apply context verses to the verses they read (a text, taken out-of-context becomes the pretext to error). I find that people end up poking fun at or defending ideas they say come form the Bible, which are really not in the Bible at all! Have you ever sent out an email detailing the particulars of some event at work and people reply asking questions you have already addressed in the original email? When our focus is too narrow we ignore what is already known and this gets us all into trouble! We end up formulating opinions that cannot be substantiated by the very references we quote. Books like the Bible tend to be myopically digested by both people who say they believe in it and even those who do not. Consequently, we sometimes attack or defend the straw man! That is at the very heart of why people fly planes into buildings in the name of God!

For example, did you know that:

1) Muslims say the Qu’ran forbids the consumption of alcohol yet in truth it only advises the reader to avoid alcohol. This means one can drink and still be Muslim!
2) The Bible does not tell us the exact date Jesus was born on yet somehow we erroneously believe it was December 25th.
3) According to the Bible, there is a difference between the House of Israel and the Jews (I have nothing against either).
4) Jesus was a Jew but Moses and Samson were not. Moses was a Levite and Samson was a Danite.
5) According to the Bible, 666 is NOT the mark of the Devil but rather of man (i.e. the “beast” is nothing more than a totalitarian government which forces compliance upon the world)! Look around. Is it Satan or man that is actually destroying the earth (and has been doing it for almost 100 years)?

I hope this clarifies my position a little. I just don't like "quick and dirty" answers because I have seen the harm they often cause.

reply

[–] nagorskimb 14 years ago

There have been a lot of preachers over the years since the Rapture was first theorized. They have studied the Bible over ad over again. People still do. It's not something they thought of and then left alone. Why do you believe they are constantly misinterpreting it? Isn't it possible they have it right?

As for the Anti-Christ bit...the term Anti-Christ refers to someone both LIKE Christ and AGAINST Christ. Meaning this person will have powers similar to Christ, yet be devoted to destroying anyone who is allied with Him.

1. Okay. What does that have to do with me?

2. Early Christians combined the Pagan holiday for the Winter Solstice and the celebration of Christ's birth so as to make the transition more appealing to the Pagans in Rome. I don't imagine there are any Pastors who believe Jesus was really born on December 25.

3. What difference would that be?

4. Levi and Dan were sons of Jacob, called Israel. Any descendant of Jacob is called a Jew. They're Jewish. In addition, since Christ fulfills all categories of the elect of Israel (King, Priest, Prophet), He is also a Levite.

5. We've been destroying the world for a lot longer than 100 years. Try since the dawn of time. And is it so unreasonable to think that Satan has indeed been influencing some important men in history to make some very poor choices?

reply

[–] julielb67 14 years ago

Any descendant of Jacob is called a Jew

Only those from the tribe of Judah are Jews. Even though people mistakenly call them Jews. There are 11 other tribes, even though the 10 scattered. (think of that number today!) But Christ is of Judah (the king line) and the Levites (priest line) yes. Perfect isn't it? King of Kings, Lord of Lords.

Why do you believe they are constantly misinterpreting it? Isn't it possible they have it right?

I think it comes down to what Paul says. They would rather believe a lie than accept the love of the truth. The rapture is like a security blanket for most. That way they don't have to worry about the end times and the preachers have a comforting message to preach to the masses.

Although there are many people that still don't teach a rapture. This is still relatively new 1800's or so- and mainly a protestant view if I'm mistaken.

And the reason they don't have it right is because it goes against both Christ and Paul's teaching. Both gave out very specific warnings to not be deceived about this. (Matthew 24 and 2nd Thes chapter 2) Meaning it's something we need to be very careful about and that it's not meant to be unclear. God is not the author of confusion. Haven't you ever wondered why we really needed to put the gospel armor on?

I chose to believe what I was fed in church many years about a rapture but it was only when I saw a post very much like mine some years ago that I actually sat up and took notice and read and saw the truth for myself. The disciples ask Christ's for signs about the end of the world and his coming and he gives them, pure and simple. He lays it out perfectly and Paul continues this message in 2nd Thes. Not once in Matthew 24 did Christ say he would come before the tribulation and in fact, says just the opposite, he says "immediately after". How can anyone misunderstand this?? It still boggles me but perhaps it has something to do with the blinding in Esphesians.

I think one great example of a pastor taught at college who finally saw the truth for himself was Jim Bakker. Do you know when he first actually read the bible? In jail- he saw the truth of what Christ said in Matthew 24 and converted his previous beliefs about a rapture. All that time in college and the years to follow (this has nothing to do with this personal troubles etc, just an example how some college taught pastors are pretty much like us, fed by other so called bible teachers, etc.) he just went on believing what he was taught instead of actually checking out to see if it was really true or not.

Christ says he comes at an hour most do not expect, that's because most think he comes first and that's where the apostasy comes in. The son of perdition (Satan himself) comes in peacefully and playing at being God and people are going to eat it up. Christ says, if they say he is here or there, believe them NOT. But people will because they chose to believe the lie instead of the love of the truth and for this God will send them strong delusion. He looks like the lamb of God, only he's the fake, the anti, meaning instead of Christ.
And when Christ comes back there will be gnashing of teeth because instead of him, they worshipped antichrist. I'm not really trying to debate but to very earnestly plant seeds because we are in the generation of the fig tree. It's time to really get into the word. In Amos, it's said that the famine for the end times is for hearing the word of God and how true that is. Please take care!

It really is up to "us" to seek out the scriptures for ourselves and show ourselves approved. We can't rely on men, this is told to us over and over in the Bible. I'm not saying all pastors are bad but it is on us to check them out.

reply

[–] nagorskimb 14 years ago

Are you sure that when Jesus said He would come after He isn't referring to the second time He actually TOUCHES the earth? Because when the saints are taken up He never touches down. It says He meets them in the air. His return at the unknown time can't refer to after the Tribulation because His sign will appear in the air as a...well...sign.

But, in the case of the Rapture, His coming like a thief in the night, at the unknown hour, makes sense. There will be no warnings or signs when the saints are taken up.

I did a bible study on the Revelation.

reply

[–] life4all 14 years ago

Study Matthew 24. The disciples ask Jesus when he is returning and when the world would end. He tells them clearly that all Hell breaks loose on earth BEFORE he returns in the air (only once). He tells them that the days of GREAT tribulation will have to be shortened to prevent the annihilation of everyone on earth:

Matt 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Matt 24:21-2
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Matt 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Many people claim 1st Thessalonians 4:13-18 as proof of the Rapture but it was actually written to console believers about loved ones who have already died:

1st Thes 4:13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

So how come no one ever sees that part?

reply

[–] nagorskimb 14 years ago

I still don't see anything that disproves the idea of the Rapture. I see things that can interpreted either way.

21: There's gonna be some serious stuff going on.

22:The days will be short, not to save anyone, but for the believers.

30: A sign will appear that signals that Jesus is returning, everyone will mourn, and they'll see Jesus coming down with great power.

None of that is any proof that the Rapture won't happen. In fact, I take it as proof it WILL happen.

Jesus won't touch down when they're taken up, so no one will see Him. There's gonna be some bad stuff happening on earth. The days will be shortened for the Tribulation Saints (I've been rereading the Left Behind series and that term has become stuck in my brain). Then the sign of Jesus will appear and He'll judge the land. All of that fits in with those verses.

I've never read that verse before. I don't see what it has to do with anything here.

reply

[–] life4all 14 years ago

Matthew 24 is the key. Study it carefully and follow the chronology of it in detail. It shows what is to happen in sequence. Even Jack Van Impe has got this part all wrong! Avoid the temptation of oversimplifying what you are reading and just let the Bible interpret itself. Remember; this is in part why most people don’t realize the difference between the Jews and the House of Israel.

He returns only once, in the air, at the end, to stop mankind from destroying itself!

Good luck to you.

reply

[–] julielb67 14 years ago

Are you sure that when Jesus said He would come after He isn't referring to the second time He actually TOUCHES the earth? Because when the saints are taken up He never touches down. It says He meets them in the air

The disciples as for signs of his coming, singular. When you start to make this into more than one, you are changing God's word. Not once does Christ mention coming before. Why wouldn't he? The disciples have asked for the signs. There's not one mention of him coming back for his bride before the tribulation. This is Matthew, the beginning of the NT. If a rapture is true, where's the very first verse that mentions such an event? I'd actually love to see it. Because in 1st Thes chapter 4 and 5 Paul names the event he's describing.

In 4:17 Yes, he meets them in the air, but we are not going anywhere. And you see in this verse 16, he comes with a shout and the voice of the archangel and the trump of God. People will obviously see and hear this. It's not some quiet event.

Read into chapter 5 after we meet him in the air. Paul (who always teaches on 3 levels, so everyone is included) says in verse one, "But of the times and seasons, brethen, ye have no need that I write unto you. 2) For yourselves know that the day of the Lord (he names this very event he just spoke of in 4:17) comes as a thief in the night. 3) Peace and safety, and then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child and they shall not escape. (God's wrath) 4) But, ye, brethen are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief" He tells us to watch.

Peace and safety and then sudden destruction? I thought a thief in the night was about a rapture? Well Paul has just told us about a thief in the night and apparently not.
So you see, he "only" comes like a thief in the night to those "not" expecting him, so there are signs and seasons to watch for. And speaking of that same thief, Christ also used the same analogy in Matthew 24. So Matthew 24 and both Thes are giving the same warnings, same message.

And then again, like I said because of with even the Thessalonians being confused, Paul wrote a second letter to clear up that confusion and he does with 2nd Thes chapter two

"Now we beseech you, brethern, by the coming (one) of our Lord Jesus and our gathering back together unto Him. That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us (talking about 1st Thes) that the day (there's that day again, and still singular) of Christ is at hand."

Here's the most important one 3) Let no man deceive you by any means (same warning as Christ) for that day shall not happen (in itallics for emphasis)except there come a falling away (translated apostasy) and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition."

So to me, both Christ and Paul are very clear and precise about and both give very stern warnings so that we won't be deceived. Not once does either of them say he comes before, don't worry, etc. Just the exact opposite.

I was like you, I believed in the rapture. But when someone mentioned it wasn't true, instead of trying to prove one way or the other, I took it upon myself to actually read the Bible with an open mind. (not just a verse here and there, etc) something I'm ashamed to say after reading many books in my lifetime had never done. And after 7 years, I'm still reading, still studying things. But the one thing that is very clear to me is that the more you study and read, the more things flow and gell together. People constantly debate this subject and yet, if we take on the subject with a fresh and open mind, it all flows together. And why would someone like me and many others who once believed change our views? I read for myself and saw it wasn't true. And I would rather accept the love of the truth as God would have it than believe a lie. (2nd Thes 2:10) Christ is the ultimate teacher on this subject and Paul a perfect second witness. Why would we choose to believe anyone else?

reply

[–] ncvp 11 years ago

I encourage you to read THING TO COME by J. Dwight Pentecost for answers to many of your contentions. You say read only the Word, commendable, but surely, just as you try to "teach" here with your words, there are outstanding Bible teachers we can also learn from. No?

reply

[–] life4all 14 years ago

1) Not necessarily you but most people, in general. There are over 1 billion Muslims in the world yet they all believe that alcohol is forbidden to them (yet according to their own Qu'ran, it is NOT forbidden). This suggests something very casual about the way human beings tend to interpret information. That is why there are sects within most religions (a text, out-of-context becomes the pretext for error).

2) True but most Christians (some with Master's Degrees) believe that Jesus was actually born on December 25th. It just further demonstrates human gullibility.

3) Unfortunately, understanding the difference is critical to understanding the Bible! Most or the prophecies about Israel, the Jews, Israelites, the Children of Abraham, the House of Israel, the Hebrews, the 12 tribes of Israel or the Children of Israel simply cannot be properly understood without seeing the distinction between the two! Julie has tried to explain it to you but I don’t think you are ready to understand. The sad thing is that it is right there in your Bible! It is a little like math (most people simply don’t get it). You see, it has far more to do with biology than faith! Most Christians and even most Jews do not realize that the Jews are but a subset of the House of Israel! The two terms (Jew, House of Israel) are NOT interchangeable! The House of Israel is defined as the biological descendants of Jacob (who’s name was changed to Israel). It is quite literally, the House of Jacob! His descendants are also called the Children of Israel. The 12 sons of Jacob are Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Zebulun, Issachar, Dan, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Joseph, and Benjamin. By this reckoning, many of the Bible’s greatest people/prophets were NOT Jewish at all! Moses was of the tribe of Levi, Samson was of the tribe of Dan, Paul descends from Benjamin, and so forth. A Jew is a biological descendant of Judah. There is no other biblical definition for what a Jew is than that. Today we tend to think of Jews as a faith rather than a people but the Bible ALWAYS views them as a biological tribe and never as anything else than that! Judaism is the faith practiced today by modern Jews but the Jews themselves comprise only 1/12 of the House of Israel! So why do we neglect the other 11 tribes when the Bible says God knows exactly where they are today? Christians are NOT of the House of Israel but rather followers of Jesus (by which all people might gain eternal life). In truth, most Christians have never really looked at the chronological history of the Hebrew people. They usually go straight from Adam to Noah to Abraham to Moses to David to Jesus! They skip everything in between and that is why they believe things about the Bible that are not in the Bible at all! The tunnel vision most Christians have with Jesus blinds them to Hebrew history and causes them to misinterpret the prophecies. That is why most people think Ezekiel 37 is about the Jews reoccupying the land of Israel (Son of man, can these bones live?). It is really about something much larger than that which according to the Bible, has not happened yet! So homogenizing these terms is merely another example of our quick, cursory, oversimplification of what is written in the Bible.

4) See my answer to #3. Jesus might easily have some Levite blood running through his veins but that too is a biological designation rather than an exclusively a spiritual one.

5) The destruction of the earth is a very contemporary event that really began with the Industrial Revolution. All of the most sophisticated inventions occurred within the last 100 years. Without modern technology, the plagues mentioned in the Book of Revelations could not be fulfilled. Nothing invented before the automobile even comes close to enabling massive destruction of the delicate balance needed for the earth to support organic life. Macro-agriculture is what allowed man’s numbers quadruple to almost 7 billion within the last 100 years. One statistic says there are more people alive today than have ever died! In 1945, Joel 3:10 was fulfilled by the Atomic Bomb (let the weak say, I am strong) and we have been facing annihilation (by our own hand) ever since. Weapons of Mass Destruction combined with massive resource depletion (including substantial reductions of fish, ocean dwellers, petroleum, soil erosion: precious crop-growing top-soil) and a noticeable breakdown in the ecosystems (ozone, polluted air, melting ice/Global Warming, radioactive and toxic wastes, etc.) has magnified the carbon footprint of man to unprecedented levels! Almost every aspect of the 20th century was defined by man’s use of oil and without it; very few items in your home would even exist at all! Considering that WW1 began in 1914 and our ever-increasing demand for oil, December 21, 2012 almost seems like a plausible target date for WW3! Control of the earth’s declining oil deposits has been a major factor in the last 2 World Wars, Kuwait and of course, Iraq to name a few. Bush said we were addicted to oil and he spoke the truth! As we import nearly 75% of our oil and our oil reserves are almost exhausted, do you really think our government (an others) will simply rollover and permit the supply to dry up without starting another war to get more? Open your eyes.

reply

[–] SpiltPersonality 13 years ago

The main reason people believe in the rapture is because they won’t take the time to apply context verses to the verses they read

Actually, I think the reason most people believe in the rapture is because they are arrogant and want it to happen on their watch. I say arrogant because to believe that 'our time' (as you pointed out) is any more important to an omnipotent God than any 'previous time'.

I'm truly sick of it.

I wish everyone would stop worrying about homosexual legalisation as being a sign of the end times and worry more about feeding starving kids.

Sure, if you're opposed to homosexuality do your thing, but honestly it's not a sign on the end of time... nor is war... nor is famine... nor is lots of other stuff:

Jesus said the time will be "As it was in the days of Noah", and everyone thinks 'Oh, yeah, things were really bad then... so bad God had to destroy the planet'. But Jesus goes on to clarify "For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage". In other words, everything that people do today.

Everything is normal. Everything is as it's been for thousands of years. Some things are bad, some things are worse, many things are better. Stop panic merchantising and start giving some GOOD news to people.

Lastly, if even JESUS doesn't know when it is, how arogant are you to assume YOU do? (life4all - I know you're not on that team, I dind't mean "you" I meant the millions of "you's" who have "inside knowledge".

SpiltPersonality

reply

[–] nagorskimb 14 years ago

Christ doesn't touch down on the earth, nor does it say He will be SEEN at all, during the taking up of the Saints, what most people refer to as the Rapture. By the by, all the arguing about the term "Rapture" is moot. The term means that it's a joyous occasion. That's it. Like the term, "Oh joy, oh rapture". Secondly, anyone with an "innocent" soul, either by the covering of their sins or being unable to actually sin consciously, is taken up. This means children and people who honestly do NOT understand their actions.

These are some pretty easy questions. And they aren't "major theological" problems. At most they are how one chooses to view the passage.

reply

[–] tekbarrier 14 years ago

The term rapture when used by Christians does not mean a joyous occasion. It refers to the second coming of Jesus when all living believers are "caught up" with him in the sky. That's what the word rapture means: to be caught up. Second, as far as "innocent people" being taken directly to heaven, I believe the bible clearly says that ALL humans are born with "original sin" from Adam and Eve, and that only those who have consciously accepted Jesus are saved. John 3:16 says "whosoever believeth in him shall not perish but have everlasting life." Many people don't like the thought of unconverted infants and children being sent to hell, so they invented the concept of the "age of accontability" to make themselves feel better, but I believe the bible clearly teaches that because of original sin, all unsaved people go to hell when they die. That is why the catholic church baptizes infants.

I should point out that although I am a diehard atheist, I study Christianity extensively so I do know what I'm talking about.

Zozo? Never heard of it.

reply

[–] julielb67 14 years ago

And once again, any kind of rapture or second coming before the tribulation of antichrist is completely unbiblical as stated in Matthew 24 and 2nd Thes chapter 2 verse 3. That again makes the entire movie one big error. If people would read past 1st Thes chapter 4 into chapter 5 (most people don't when trying to prove a rapture, but you wouldn't read any other book any other way) Paul calls this event the Day of the Lord, and when read further into the 2nd book he says that day shall not happen until the son of perdition sits on the throne proclaiming to be God.

And the irony of debating a pretrib rapture to a diehard athiest is not lost on me lol.

Most of us know 1st Thes chapter 4 but do you even know the subject? Paul is talking about where the dead are and so explains but because of the confusion of those last verses, even though he named this event in chapter 5, he had to provide another letter to explain the the timing of the second coming.

Also, on the subject of infants, what is sin? It's simply to break God's law, Jesus died for those sins and upon repentance salvation is for all. But since an infant cannot break God's law, it therefore has nothing to be saved from. God is not looking out every day to zap someone to hell, especially innocent babies. And the bible does state that the sins of a father cannot be put on a child. So it is up to the individual. Plus there's still the millinium before judgement day.

"The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him" (Ezek. 18:20).

reply

[–] stitch-99 14 years ago

Well, what do you expect from a movie based on a book based on a theological system that arose in the 19th century and never really took roots anywhere else but the U.S?

I'm an amillennialist (amillennarian?) who was raised dispensationalist and currently attends a university that is officially and predominantly dispy. It's a strange experience.

From what I've noticed, the crux of dispensationalism's argument seems to center around the claim that said system is the only one to interpret the Bible literally (which was a big selling point when it originated in the wake of the Enlightenment and the rise of liberal theology). What they mean is that they are the system that interprets the Bible literalistically, which is subtly but importantly different. "Literally" denotes finding the actual intention of the words themselves, even if that means recognizing that the words themselves might be symbolic of something else. "Literalistically" denotes taking every, single word in its plain sense (though they are quick to add, "unless the plain sense very clearly does not apply").

The thing that is often overlooked by dispies with regards to the Rapture is that the "proof text," 1 Thessalonians 4:17, contains no indicator that Paul is speaking of a new idea. There is nothing that shows he is not speaking of the Second Coming proper.

Dispies tend to be fond of pointing out that Jesus' coming will be as "a thief in the night," whereas the Second Coming proper is often described as being accompanied by a shout and preceded by certain events. Clearly, these cannot be the same event (did my sarcasm translate?). The comparison to a thief is simply to indicate that people will not expect Jesus' return, rendering the "shout of an archangel" argument moot because, by that time, the Coming will already be underway.

As for the preceding events, these events happen all the time during the interadvent period. Consider Revelation 12. John sees a woman who gives birth to 'a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.” And her child was snatched up to God and to his throne.' This is quite clearly a reference to Jesus' first coming and his subsequent ascension. The devil is defeated, "by the blood of the Lamb," indicating that this is still within the time-frame of the first advent. Upon being cast down to the earth, the devil "went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring—those who keep God’s commands and hold fast their testimony about Jesus." The tribulation described by Jesus in Matthew 24 and by John throughout much of Revelation takes place from Jesus' departure all the way until his big comeback tour.

A common criticism of this position is that it robs these prophecies of their placing within history. However, there are still specific prophecies (such as much of the Olivet Discourse) that are specifically fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and there are still specific prophecies that will be fulfilled in the activities of the final antichrist (such as the Battle of Armeggedon).

With all of this going on from one advent to another, it is still reasonable to say that we will have no idea when Jesus will return and it can thus be described as like a thief in the night.

"I'm the RA, and as the RA, I'm supposed to be the fun-sucker. I *beep* the sun."
-Abe Christiansen

reply

[–] Rapturegal 14 years ago

The early church looked forward to the Rapture so it is not a myth or recent belief. Cults and false Christian groups have made every effort to deny/distort this truth but they have failed to destroy what God has proclaimed.

People tend to forget the huge prophetic importance of Israel's rebirth in 1948....this is the key to the fulfillment of all End times events.

The church or Bride of Christ {all born again believers, consisting both Jews & Gentiles} are commanded to WATCH and expect the Groom to come at any moment when He will snatch her out of the world in the blink of an eye. This ends the church age. God will then turn His attention back to His Chosen People who, as a nation, call upon their Savior as they suffer great persecution under the AC's satanic reign.

It will be a horrific 7 year period as judgments are poured out on a
Christ-hating world. The good news is that anyone can still be saved during this time by putting faith in Jesus but the price for being left behind will be high: Execution. But the victory over death has already been won! A glorious eternity awaits those who accepted Christ and refused to worship the AC during the tribulation.

The church will return to the Mt of Olives with the Lord as He sets up His kingdom.

It's all coming together very quickly now.

reply

[–] julielb67 14 years ago

The church or Bride of Christ {all born again believers, consisting both Jews & Gentiles} are commanded to WATCH and expect the Groom to come at any moment when He will snatch her out of the world in the blink of an eye. This ends the church age. God will then turn His attention back to His Chosen People who, as a nation, call upon their Savior as they suffer great persecution under the AC's satanic reign

This is totally unbiblical. Christians are commanded to watch because if the watchman had known when the thief would come, his house wouldn't have been broken up. Meaning we are to know the times. And he only comes as a thief to those not expecting him. Please provide scripture where it says we are to watch and expect the Groom at any moment when he will snatch her out of the world in a blink of an eye. As I've have stated before in other threads- Paul even told the Thessalonians to not be confused or shaken in mind that the day of Christ was at hand. He goes on to say that day shall "not" happen until certain things unfold. That certain things had to happen first (great apostasy and son of perdition proclaiming to be God) and for people not to be deceived on this subject.
And we aren't snatched out of the world in a blink of an eye (please provide scripture too when making statements like this) We are "changed" in a twinkling of an eye" And at the last trump, which is the seventh. Antichrist will be here at the 6th. Big difference. You have got this completely turned around and will not have enough oil in your lamp if you continue to believe this false teaching.

People tend to forget the huge prophetic importance of Israel's rebirth in 1948....this is the key to the fulfillment of all End times events

This is important as all prophecy will be fufilled before the generation of the fig tree passes away.

And you mentioned born again Christians, both Jews and Gentiles. Have you forgotten there are 10 other tribes other than Judah? (Benjamin of course stayed with Judah) And born again means born from "above". Because as John 3:13 states no man can ascend up to heaven that did not first descend from heaven.

reply

[–] stitch-99 14 years ago

I never denied the Rapture, as it were. I simply denied the pretribulational, "secret" rapture, because I don't see it supported in the bible. Although, I wouldn't put it past you to claim that I'm "distorting" the doctrine.

Israel's reemergence as a nation only has prophetic significance because dispensationalists assigned such significance to it. The event itself was partially the product of Zionism, of which dispensationalism makes up a sizable portion. Thus, what we have is a self-fulfilling prophecy of someone's rather weak biblical interpretation.

For argument's sake, let's say you're right. There is an imminent rapture of the church to precede a seven-year tribulation *and* Israel's return to the land has prophetic significance. Don't see the contradiction there? Allow me to explain. If, as you and I both believe, the rapture is imminent (setting aside the question of its distinction from the Second Coming) then wouldn't it have had to have been imminent throughout all of the church age? Then what do you make of the centuries between Israel's expulsion from the land and her return? Were the Christians of those ages just mistaken to believe in an imminent Second Coming, but now we are in the clear in believing it? By that line of reasoning, who's to say we have the whole picture? Maybe there's something else that has to happen which we don't realize and thus we would be mistaken in saying that the rapture is imminent.

Also, I've another question. If the pretribulational rapture brings the Church Age to a close, what of all of the people who would supposedly become saved during those seven years? Would they not be the Church? Even if that's not exactly your belief, the Jews who would be saved would have to have faith in Jesus, which would still qualify them for membership in the Church. The book of Revelation is filled with references to those who have placed their faith in Jesus Christ and all those who believe in Jesus are part of the Church. This one is more of a nitpick, but it's something that just occurred to me and I felt the need to comment on it.

Just as a humourous side-note, I was briefly confused when reading your paragraph about the tribulation. I thought you were saying that people were going to worship air-conditioning. Then again, I'm just not familiar with that abbreviation being applied to the Antichrist.

"I'm the RA, and as the RA, I'm supposed to be the fun-sucker. I *beep* the sun."
-Abe Christiansen

reply

[–] roswell_iv 10 years ago

Amillennists pick and choose the parts of the Bible to believe. Had one come to a class I took at a Christian College. He was arrogant; he said there was a problem with a certain page in the Schofield Bible. I pulled mine out and he couldn't tell me what the problem was~!

reply

[–] roswell_iv 10 years ago

Harold Camping was another arrogant amillennialist~! Will find out more about Revelation next fall in B.S.F.

reply