Do you believe in the Rapture?

[Mannyfit75]

Do you believe in the Rapture?

Origin of the Rapture

John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), who was the leader of the Brethren movement and the “father of modern Dispensationalism,” took Margaret Macdonald’s new teaching on the rapture, made some changes (she taught a partial rapture of believers while he taught that all believers would be raptured) and incorporated it into his Dispensational understanding of Scripture and prophecy. Darby would spend the rest of his life speaking, writing and traveling, spreading the new rapture theory. The Plymouth Brethren openly admitted and were even proud of the fact that among their teachings were totally new ones which had never been taught by the church fathers, medieval scholastics, Protestant Reformers or the many commentators.
The person most responsible for the rather widespread acceptance of Pretribulationalism and Dispensationalism among Evangelicals is Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843-1921). C. I. Scofield published his Scofield Reference Bible in 1909. This Bible, which espoused the doctrines of Darby in its notes, became very popular in Fundamentalist circles. In the minds of many a Bible teacher, fundamentalist pastor and multitudes of professing Christians, Scofield’s notes were practically equated with the word of God itself. If a person did not adhere to the Dispensational, Pretribulational scheme he or she would almost automatically be labeled a modernist.
Today there is a whole plethora of books advocating the pretribulation rapture theory and the Dispensational understanding of the end times. Given the fact that among professing Christians the pre-trib rapture is still wildly popular, a comparison of this theory with scriptural teaching is warranted. We will see that the typical arguments offered in favor of this theory are in conflict with the Bible.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Manny: Shouldn’t we define terms here? Isn’t the rapture the catching up of the living and the dead faithful into the “air” to meet the Lord at His coming (according to Saint Paul)? I only believe in one Second Advent, I’ve no idea when it’s going down, I don’t think I’m supposed to spend much time at all worrying about it, and I don’t believe that the Church will be spared any tribulation (She hasn’t yet, at any rate). But I do believe in the “Rapture” insofar as I believe what Saint Paul said.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Manny: Shouldn’t we define terms here? Isn’t the rapture the catching up of the living and the dead faithful into the “air” to meet the Lord at His coming (according to Saint Paul)? I only believe in one Second Advent, I’ve no idea when it’s going down, I don’t think I’m supposed to spend much time at all worrying about it, and I don’t believe that the Church will be spared any tribulation (She hasn’t yet, at any rate). But I do believe in the “Rapture” insofar as I believe what Saint Paul said.

Feel free to add.

 

[kage_ar]

For those of us converts who grew up with this teaching, I STRONGLY suggest reading:

David Currie - Rapture, the End Times Myth that Leaves the Bible Behind

and

Carl Olsen - Will Catholics be Left Behind

 

[mozart-250]

Manny: Shouldn’t we define terms here? Isn’t the rapture the catching up of the living and the dead faithful into the “air” to meet the Lord at His coming (according to Saint Paul)? I only believe in one Second Advent, I’ve no idea when it’s going down, I don’t think I’m supposed to spend much time at all worrying about it, and I don’t believe that the Church will be spared any tribulation (She hasn’t yet, at any rate). But I do believe in the “Rapture” insofar as I believe what Saint Paul said.

Absolutely.

If you believe St. Paul’s words in 1 Thess. 4:13-18, then you believe in the rapture.

What you may not believe in is the premillenialist, pretribulationalist, “Darbyist” interpretation of the rapture. That is ok…I don’t either.

I did not vote in this poll because the meaning seemed ambiguous.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Hi,

Im not sure yet. I have not studied it enough biblically to make a decision either way. I just know Christ is coming back and I better be right with God when it happens.

 

[deb1]

Hi,

Im not sure yet. I have not studied it enough biblically to make a decision either way. I just know Christ is coming back and I better be right with God when it happens.

I think that this is all the a Christian is required to believe. If you are a Christian obedient to God then it won’t matter how exactly the end times occur.

My own belief is that we will be caught up in the air as Christ is returning to earth. I don’t believe that there will be a third coming nor do I think that we will be spared tribulation. So, I voted yes because I suppose that in a sense I do believe in the Rapture.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Manny: Shouldn’t we define terms here? Isn’t the rapture the catching up of the living and the dead faithful into the “air” to meet the Lord at His coming (according to Saint Paul)? I only believe in one Second Advent, I’ve no idea when it’s going down, I don’t think I’m supposed to spend much time at all worrying about it, and I don’t believe that the Church will be spared any tribulation (She hasn’t yet, at any rate). But I do believe in the “Rapture” insofar as I believe what Saint Paul said.

I agree. And in the context that JKirkLVNV noted above, I said yes. But I don’t believe in the evangelical ideas concerning this same phenomena.

 

[flameburns623]

Absolutely.

If you believe St. Paul’s words in 1 Thess. 4:13-18, then you believe in the rapture.

What you may not believe in is the premillenialist, pretribulationalist, “Darbyist” interpretation of the rapture. That is ok…I don’t either.

I did not vote in this poll because the meaning seemed ambiguous.

Ditto.

 

[lak611]

Absolutely.

If you believe St. Paul’s words in 1 Thess. 4:13-18, then you believe in the rapture.

I agree. I voted yes based on this.

What you may not believe in is the premillenialist, pretribulationalist, “Darbyist” interpretation of the rapture. That is ok…I don’t either.

Agree here too. There probably should be more choices in the poll to distinguish the dispensationalists from the traditional beliefs.

 

[happygal]

I never officially hear it from the church, but i my ex BF did told me about what Rapture is!!! Whether one believe it anot, i guess is up to you

 

[bigsarge05]

What about Revelation Chapter 20? Where does the first resurrection fit in with this?

I don’t believe that God will rapture up Christians so they won’t have to face the great tribulation, while the rest of the world does. It doesn’t add up to me Can someone explain?

 

[siothrun]

i voted yes for the rapture. the 1 Thess. 4:13-18 reference is exactly why i believe it will happen.

from what i’ve heard, the church will get whisked away & then the tribulation begins for several years( i can’t remember specificsoff-hand). then just as things are looking really grim, Christ will return with the rest of us to sort things out(matt 24:1-31). i think revelation 20 comes in after that - the 1000 years of peace etc.

ps. happygal, i’ve never heard it mentioned by the catholic church either.

 

[juno24]

i voted yes for the rapture. the 1 Thess. 4:13-18 reference is exactly why i believe it will happen.

from what i’ve heard, the church will get whisked away & then the tribulation begins for several years( i can’t remember specificsoff-hand). then just as things are looking really grim, Christ will return with the rest of us to sort things out(matt 24:1-31). i think revelation 20 comes in after that - the 1000 years of peace etc.

Where does 1 Thessalonians, or any other book of the Bible, say that Jesus will return 2 more times? In order to say that Christians will be taken away by Jesus before He comes at the end of time, you have to show where you get that belief. Nowhere does the Bible say that Jesus will come in secret (and even 1Thess 4:13-18 states He will return rather loudly) and then at the end come for good, nor that His people will ever be spared tribulation before the end.

ps. happygal, i’ve never heard it mentioned by the catholic church either.

The reason you’ve never heard the Rapture taught by the Church as you described it above is because it is not part of the Deposit of Faith. The Catholic Church has very little definitive teachings on the end other than Jesus will come only one more time, and at that time the world as we know it will end and the Final Judgement will begin.

 

[happygal]

The reason you’ve never heard the Rapture taught by the Church as you described it above is because it is not part of the Deposit of Faith. The Catholic Church has very little definitive teachings on the end other than Jesus will come only one more time, and at that time the world as we know it will end and the Final Judgement will begin.

Yup it is not the deposit of faith, thus explain why it is not an official teaching in the church, only those who attend bible school will know what Rapture about!!

 

[carol_marie]

Hi,

Im not sure yet. I have not studied it enough biblically to make a decision either way. I just know Christ is coming back and I better be right with God when it happens.

This is what I believe also.

 

[deb1]

i voted yes for the rapture. the 1 Thess. 4:13-18 reference is exactly why i believe it will happen.

from what i’ve heard, the church will get whisked away & then the tribulation begins for several years( i can’t remember specificsoff-hand). then just as things are looking really grim, Christ will return with the rest of us to sort things out(matt 24:1-31). i think revelation 20 comes in after that - the 1000 years of peace etc.

ps. happygal, i’ve never heard it mentioned by the catholic church either.

It isn’t mentioned in the church because the Catholic church doesn’t use the word “Rapture.” I don’t think that the bible does either.

Still Catholics believe that we will be taken up with the dead *as *Jesus is returning to earth.

I think that the belief that Christians will be sparred the tribulations is due to western influence. Most American Christians do not suffer persecution for their faith in the same way that Christians from other nations have had to. This can make some falsely believe that we, westerners, are somehow divinely favored and are not meant to suffer. This is why I always worry that many American and European Christians will fall away during times of persecution. They don’t believe that it will happen to them so they will be unable to cope.

There is something also offensive about the fact that American Christians know that God has not spared Christians from other countries and ages from tremendous suffering and yet he would spare us.

 

[juno24]

Yup it is not the deposit of faith, thus explain why it is not an official teaching in the church, only those who attend bible school will know what Rapture about!!

So, only those who attend bible schools which teach something that Jesus and the Apostles themselves did not teach would know what the Rapture is about?
If something is not a part of the Deposit of Faith, that means it is not something that was left to us by Jesus and the Apostles.

For a more complete explanation of what the Deposit of Faith is, click the link.

 

[Bishopite]

So, only those who attend bible schools which teach something that Jesus and the Apostles themselves did not teach would know what the Rapture is about?
If something is not a part of the Deposit of Faith, that means it is not something that was left to us by Jesus and the Apostles.

For a more complete explanation of what the Deposit of Faith is, click the link.

I think what she is saying is tongue and cheek; that in “bible schools” (which supposedly teach all truth) are where one learns what the “bible” actually teaches i.e, the rapture. Both of you are correct that the rapture is NOT part of the fedei depositum it was never part of the early Church (even the reformers new nothing of it) and is a theological novum.
1 Thess 4:15-17 is strictly speaking of the second coming of Christ not of Jesus coming down to earth going back to heaven, then returning again for a third time, otherwise why would we call it the “second” coming?
Also Matthew 24:37-41…
“For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so will the coming of the Son of Man be. Then there will be two men in the field; one will be taken and one will be left. Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one will be left.”

Dispensationalists insert in their interpretation of verses 40 and 41…“one will be left [behind]” when it actually means in context…“one will be left [out]” since in the days of Noah who was left? The good guys were, so left out is much more plausible to the context.

 

[juno24]

I think what she is saying is tongue and cheek; that in “bible schools” (which supposedly teach all truth) are where one learns what the “bible” actually teaches i.e, the rapture.

You may be right; it so hard sometimes to discern what someone else means in writing. If that is indeed what she meant, then I am glad we are on the same page.

Bishopite:

Both of you are correct that the rapture is NOT part of the fedei depositum it was never part of the early Church (even the reformers new nothing of it) and is a theological novum.
1 Thess 4:15-17 is strictly speaking of the second coming of Christ not of Jesus coming down to earth going back to heaven, then returning again for a third time, otherwise why would we call it the “second” coming?
Also Matthew 24:37-41…
“For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so will the coming of the Son of Man be. Then there will be two men in the field; one will be taken and one will be left. Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one will be left.”

Dispensationalists insert in their interpretation of verses 40 and 41…“one will be left [behind]” when it actually means in context…“one will be left [out]” since in the days of Noah who was left? The good guys were, so left out is much more plausible to the context.

Thanks for the further explanation!