Issues with "the Rapture"

  • Thread starter Thread starter CWBetts
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
My ultimate desire is to know the truth (regardless of any preconceived notions). However, I always treat matters of faith very seriously and put a lot of thought into them before making any commitments. This is why I’m still struggling with this particular matter - as I’ve not fully convinced myself of it yet.

It is not an entirely easy thing to turn most everything I believed in for so long upside-down (or should I say right side-up). To do so would indicate to me that I may not have really thought out my original beliefs as well as I should have. And if that is true, I don’t want to repeat that mistake again.

In short, I’m still working on it. 🙂
It is just very diffcult me to help wothout you articulationg specifically what you are struggling with. I can direct you to a website with a free mp3 you can download that discusses the rapture at length

biblechristiansociety.com
 
This is a very interesting topic, and I must beg everyone’s indulgence here as I propose this question.

I am currently a Baptist who is leaning very heavily towards Catholicism. For over a quarter of a century after my Christian conversion (no laughing from you younger folks 😉), I was brought up in the belief of the rapture as an inevitable truth. This philosophy was a comfort to me for many years.

However, I have been more than a little persuaded by some of the arguments in this thread.

I guess the biggest question I have at this point is whether a point of contention such as this should hold someone (me, specifically) back from making a decision about converting to Catholicism realizing that in the larger scheme of things this subject isn’t all that significant (or is it?). Can someone still have doubts about this and be considered a Catholic?

While I’m not proclaiming that I will never accept the Catholic view on this issue, I’m just curious as to your thoughts about someone who is still struggling with this particular belief.
It is my personal opinion that you should not let doubts about the rapture keep you from converting to the Catholic faith. Knowing how hard it is to turn your belief system around, I sympathize with your situation. Believe me, you won’t regret it. I look foward to welcoming you to the family! 🙂
 
Thanks, MarysGirls for your thoughts!

CWBetts, I apologize for not getting to the point. I would have to say that my biggest obstacle is in the area of dispensationalism. I read all of Clarence Larkin’s books shortly after my conversion, and being a Baptist too, this line of reasoning was always reinforced. This is the issue that I’m still wrestling with.
 
Thanks, MarysGirls for your thoughts!

CWBetts, I apologize for not getting to the point. I would have to say that my biggest obstacle is in the area of dispensationalism. I read all of Clarence Larkin’s books shortly after my conversion, and being a Baptist too, this line of reasoning was always reinforced. This is the issue that I’m still wrestling with.
Something to remember is that the “Kingdom of God” alluded to in the Gospels is not the final reward. It is the Church. In the Parable of the Tares among the Wheat, Jesus describes the Kingom of God being a wheat field with weeds. This cannot possibly be the end…but it fits the Church perfectly! Let me reccomend a CD to you. It is available form St. Joseph Media. (www.lighthousecatholicmedia.com) the title is “The Four Marks of the Church, Part 2” It is a talk given by Dr. Scott Hahn. Hi is a professor of theology at Franciscan University of Steubenville in Ohio, and is himself a convert. He is a fromer Presbyterian Minister and Seminary teacher. Or, you can find out if this CD is available at your local parish. That is where I found my copy. I am really not prepared to get into the theoogy of “the Kingdom of God”, but Dr. Hahn does an excellent job. I just wish I had a stronger grasp of the theology myself, but I, too am trying to learn.
 
Something to remember is that the “Kingdom of God” alluded to in the Gospels is not the final reward. It is the Church. In the Parable of the Tares among the Wheat, Jesus describes the Kingom of God being a wheat field with weeds. This cannot possibly be the end…but it fits the Church perfectly! Let me reccomend a CD to you. It is available form St. Joseph Media. (www.lighthousecatholicmedia.com) the title is “The Four Marks of the Church, Part 2” It is a talk given by Dr. Scott Hahn. Hi is a professor of theology at Franciscan University of Steubenville in Ohio, and is himself a convert. He is a fromer Presbyterian Minister and Seminary teacher. Or, you can find out if this CD is available at your local parish. That is where I found my copy. I am really not prepared to get into the theoogy of “the Kingdom of God”, but Dr. Hahn does an excellent job. I just wish I had a stronger grasp of the theology myself, but I, too am trying to learn.
Thank you, CWBetts. I will look into this. 🙂
 
Unfortunately, the way the “rapture” is taught among Evangelicals is an invented doctrine that no one had heard of before Darby. To believe in this to accept the kind of “traditions of man” that Jesus condemned–the ones than turn the Scriptures into a lie. If I am wrong, do not spout your own words, but rather show me wrong, usng Scripture, Holy tradition, Magestertial teaching, the ECFs, something. If I am wrong, show me. DOn’t just spout opinion, which is all you have offered. Where is something you have with authority?
CW,
Jesus will come back once. At the end times. 🙂
Are you ready? No one knows when this will occur. There are signs of the End Times, but there have always been wars and rumors of wars, and sin
Lets be ready. 🙂

jean
 
Reading all this is interesting. I am Catholic-turned Protestant-turned Catholic again. I did believe in the ‘left behind’ version of events. I realize now that the writers of the Bible, such as Paul, talking about being caught up in the air, believed that Christ was returning in their lifetime.

The ‘left behind’ version is the idea that it is the non-Christians who must be saved. The tribulation is for them and also to punish those who will not believe. But I, too, started to wonder why God would put Chinese, N.Koreans, and so on, Christians through a tribulation and not the rest of us. That’s what veered me from the LaHaye idea.

There is only one thing that does confuse me. There is talk about reign on earth for 1,000 years. The explanation about 1,000 meaning many makes sense. We do it in everyday speech - ‘there were a bezillion people there!’. Just like ‘everyone in Judea’ does not mean every single soul.

I guess the one thing which confuses me is that Scripture does seem to point to a reign of Christ on earth and time in which there is peace. The interpretation that the thousand years represents a long time in which Satan cannot stop the spread of the Gospel makes sense. However there is also a mention of him being set loose again for a short while.

I’m not saying I believe the aforementioned. Just that I can’t find a way to explain that verse. One theologian said that he wasn’t going to worry about one little verse as opposed to all the other verses in the Bible. But I don’t think he can say that. One verse is one verse of God’s holy word.

So how do we explain this image of people living peacefully on earth, coming to Jerusalem to bring gifts and we having beaten our swords into plowshares? If someone could explain this I’d be most gratified.

Mind you, I believe the Church’s interpretation, not the CHICK one or the LaHaye one. But I don’t know how to explain that idea of peace on earth with Christ reigning. Mind you, I don’t have to understand everything there is to know about God and His ways - I realize that much of what Scripture has to say is hidden behind a veil, as the angel told Daniel, until the right time. Until we have a need to know, we don’t know and that’s the whole idea - live as though He is coming (or as one person said, as though we might be dying) tonight.

Help anyone please?

God bless.

byrdele
 
I can recommend two books dealing with the “Rapture”.

“The Rapture Trap” by Paul Thigpen; A very well written refutation…

“The Miracle of the Illumination of All Consciences” by Thomas W. Petrisko

I enjoyed this book of the End-times as well. All sources are Biblical or from authentic mystics or Saints.
 
My step-dad and mom are REALLY into this whole rapture thing. I had a conversation with my step-dad a couple of weeks back and he brought up the rapture. He went through the whole theory with me which I was already familiar with from reading Olson’s book Will Catholics Be Left Behind?. I tried telling him about how the teachings of the rapture were roughly 200 years old and no one for the first 1800 years of Christianity, not even the reformers (whom he holds in great esteem) did not teach it. He was speechless for about 5 seconds, but then he responded with, “Well even if no one taught it for 1800 years, the idea is as old as the Bible because it’s in the Bible.” I just kind of thought to myself “Are you kidding me?” This “theology” of his was a clear demonstration of what happens when someone is far removed from the concepts of Tradition and Deposit of Faith.

One thing he said to me that I hadn’t heard of was that one of those rapture fortune-teller people (that’s what I like to call them) was saying that the next Pope would be the one who gives way to the anti-christ. Once again, I shook my head in an “you’re kidding, right?” type of manner. Anyone heard of this idea and if so, would you mind explaining it?
 
It is very difficult if not impossible to argue with people when they can say almost anything in rebuttal even if the source is a false prophet. Perhaps you could gift your parents a copy of Thigpen’s book. I too had embraced the “Rapture” theries of the sixties and seventies until it was carefully explained to me in this book. Thigpen also uses Bible sources and points out that the rapture as presented by some are a mis-reading of the event where "one was left and the other taken.
 
It also helps that I used to be a CHICKlet Fundamentalist. I know their doctrines. So its less for me to study and learn anew.
You, too? Maybe we should all write Jack Chick a letter thanking him for his vile warnings against his fictional caricature and tell him that, Praise God, we’ve now found the Fullness of Faith in the real Catholic Church, which is nothing like his comics. :cool:
 
Thank you, Orthodox1047, for the book recommendation. I got the Rapture Trap.

What everyone is saying about the Chick tracts interests me. I stopped using them (as an Evangelical Protestant) when my geology professor pointed out, kindly (he knew I meant well) how horribly they show the ‘other person’. It was an anti-evolution one and the evolutionist had a painting in his office entitled “Our Father”, which showed a smiling gorilla eating a banana. As they get into the discussion, the Christian never, ever loses his cool and is smiling throughout. The professor goes ballistic - tears his hair out and whatnot. When he said that, I remembered that Jesus preached humility and compassion. The only people He really raked over the coals like that were people who knew the law and were using it to their own ends (Pharisees, Saducees). That was the last time I ever used his material (of course, I never would now!). You don’t act as a witness for Christ by degrading someone, you know, you get more flies with honey than vinegar.

That said, as far as Evangelical. I know that a certain group of people in Christianity have hijacked the word, and I sort of resent it. Because we all are Evangelical. If you are walking with Christ and other can tell, you are evangelizing and thus are Evangelical (I heard an ‘Evangelical’ Protestant minister say that). I know the meaning has been distorted to mean a group of people, but as a Catholic/Christian I still consider myself an Evangelical, personally.

Off the subject - prayer request

There is a church called the Parish of the Nativity. A friend of mine is a nun there. It is in Magadan, Russia. The church and sisters are not just there to staff a Catholic church, but to work among the poor and, indeed, there are many of those there. They make a point to say that they are not trying to take people away from Russian Orthodoxy - Russians very much identify nationally with the Orthodox Church and can be suspicious of others trying to lure people away. This is as very important matter which many ‘church planters’ seem to not recognize - that they should work WITH the Orthodox Church.

Anyway, it’s called Parish of the Nativity. If God leads you to do so, please pray for it and its mission.

I hope it was ok to put this here. Thanks.

God bless everyone. Again, thanks for the book recommendation.

byrdele
 
My ultimate desire is to know the truth (regardless of any preconceived notions). However, I always treat matters of faith very seriously and put a lot of thought into them before making any commitments. This is why I’m still struggling with this particular matter - as I’ve not fully convinced myself of it yet.

It is not an entirely easy thing to turn most everything I believed in for so long upside-down (or should I say right side-up). To do so would indicate to me that I may not have really thought out my original beliefs as well as I should have. And if that is true, I don’t want to repeat that mistake again.

In short, I’m still working on it. 🙂
As a current Baptist myself (by membership only- no longer by belief), I can commiserate. I only recently started questioning the so-called “secret” rapture. One of the young teens in my Sunday school class started asking questions about the rapture and so I started investigating it myself. I looked into all of the verses my church uses to justify that belief and none of them definitively prove anything of the sort.

One of the biggies:
**1 Thess 4:13-18 **“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. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not preventd them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comforte one another with these words.”
(How “secret” could a loud shout and trumpet blast be?)

2 Thess 2:8- "And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:" (Again, I think this event would be a little obvious as well.)

**Rev 20:4-6 **“And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.”
(I would think this verse would be avoided because of all the criteria in the first sentance, but my church believes that sentance confirms that all saved people will judge everyone else. This is the only verse(s) I found that give any kind of credence to the pre-millenial belief at all and the book of Revelation is notoriously difficult to interpret. I’m sure virtually every Catholic has heard who the Whore of Babylon is supposed to be.)

There is a remarkable paucity of evidence to support what is supposed to be such an important event. My pastor said that his entire faith in the Lord is that he will not have to go through the tribulation. (He received a lot of loud amens to that) I was appalled by that statement. I may be naive but shouldn’t our faith and trust be in the existance of Jesus Christ and what He did for us, not whether we are going to avoid being in the Tribulation?
 
As I have gotten much older and back into my Catholic roots i see the "Left Behind " stuff and rapture theology as mere propaganda and a smoke screen to get people away from actually living the Gospel message of Jesus. I remember attending churches where you’d think the only book was Revelations and about the only stuff from Jesus you heard was the apocalyptic stuff.
Nice bullseye. One of the biggest differences between Catholicism (well, Orthodoxy) and evangelical Protestantism is the focus. Evangelical theology overdoes the “personal” in Jesus and makes Christianity about the believer, their personal salvation, their personal walk with Christ, their personal calling. This permeates their escatology, because the Rapture is a personal salvation and a personal rescue from Tribulation.

I don’t think it’s just the intense individualism of American culture, although that contributes.
 
I guess the one thing which confuses me is that Scripture does seem to point to a reign of Christ on earth and time in which there is peace. The interpretation that the thousand years represents a long time in which Satan cannot stop the spread of the Gospel makes sense. However there is also a mention of him being set loose again for a short while.

Is it possible as indicated in Ezekiel that the Holy Spirit will change our hearts of stone to hearts of flesh (A new Pentecost - as referred to by Jean-Paul the Great?) That this purification will remove the wicked from among us and that a Period of Peace will be given to the world (Fatima) - Then as has happened many times in the Old Testament, we will turn away from God and the Anti-Christ will be loosed upon us?
 
Nice bullseye. One of the biggest differences between Catholicism (well, Orthodoxy) and evangelical Protestantism is the focus. Evangelical theology overdoes the “personal” in Jesus and makes Christianity about the believer, their personal salvation, their personal walk with Christ, their personal calling. This permeates their escatology, because the Rapture is a personal salvation and a personal rescue from Tribulation.

I don’t think it’s just the intense individualism of American culture, although that contributes.
At the same time, too many Catholics all but ignore the fact that we do need a personal walk with God. There is our community walk with God (Mass, Church ministries) but we also need personal time with the Lord (Prayer, Bible Study)
 
Perfect timing…here are some questions that tie into the rapture that someone should clarify - Catholic or not:
  1. Does God punish the wicked?
  2. Does God deliver the righteous?
 
The Rapture is a claim that Jesus Christ is coming back to earth, not once more, but twice, a total of three times… One of those times, this teaching asserts that He will come SECRETELY to take away true believers from the world so they can escape the great tribulation – a time of natural catastrophes, and the brutal persecutions of the Antichrist.

Then according to this scenario, after several years of horror, Christ will return one last time in glory to judge the living and the dead. This secret “taking away” has been dubbed the Rapture from a Latin verb that means “caught up or snatched.”

This scenario of the Rapture is alien to both sacred Scripture and sacred Apostolic Tradition (Tradition as handed down from the Apostles).

It’s important to note that this isn’t a Catholic-Protestant disagreement. Most Protestants throughout history, and most Protestants today, have rejected the notion of a SECRET Rapture. None of the major leaders of the Protestant Reformation ever taught such a doctrine. But there are still some Protestant faiths that believe in this Rapture.

The “plain sense of Scripture” that some Christian leaders claim as support for the Rapture was not discovered until well after the Protestant Reformation, and it didn’t gain popularity until the late 19th and 20th centuries. This “plain sense” of Scripture escaped the attention of the worldwide Christian community, Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant —for a millennium and a half.

The Rapture, as it is currently taught in some Christian circles, seems to have evolved in the 19th century. At that time, two British preachers began circulating the idea, and it spread to America through several popular revival preachers and a best-selling Bible whose commentary promoted it.

Later books also pushed the doctrine, such as the 1970s best-seller by Hal Lindsey, “The Late Great Planet Earth (1970). The story line of the current “Left Behind” series of novels, then, is only the latest incarnation of an old, non-biblical idea.

The single scriptural detail that most excites Rapture believers is found in St. Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians: “For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord” (1 Thes. 4:16-17

As we examine this text, first we must ask how being “caught up” to Christ could possibly be a SECRET occurrence. The apostle gives enough details to make it clear that he is talking about a glorious and public event

According to a long line of biblical commentators, in this passage, St. Paul uses imagery reflecting a custom of ancient culture. State dignitaries often made grand public visits to a city. Such an appearance was called an "“arousia”, the same Greek term that St. Paul and other biblical writers often used to describe Christ’s glorious arrival at the close of the age.

As illustrious visitors approached a city with an entourage, citizens came out to welcome them and accompany them back into the city. When we find that the Greek word translated here as “meet” or “meeting (apantesis)” is the same term used for the gathering of citizens to meet a celebrity, the passage makes perfect sense. Those still alive on Earth when Jesus returns will have a great privilege. They will be caught up in clouds of glory to meet the approaching King of Kings, accompanying Christ as He enters the world in triumph.

Another text commonly quoted by Rapture believers as evidence of a secret snatching comes from the Gospel. Jesus said: “As were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. For as in those days…the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. Then two men will be in the field; one is taken and one is left. Two women will be grinding at the mill; one is taken and one is left” (Mt. 24:37-41).

These words have been cited countless times in sermons on the end times. The assumption is that the man taken from the field and the woman taken from the mill were true believers caught up at the SECRET Rapture; the two left behind were not.

Many Christians believe this text applies to the destruction of Jerusalem by Roman armies in the first century. But even if we grant that it refers to the end times, we need only read the words introducing this scenario to see the flaw in a Rapture interpretation. “As were the days of Noah…the flood came and swept them all away” (Mt 24:37,39). In the days of Noah, the wicked were taken by flood waters and the righteous (Noah and his family) were left behind in safety. If the Rapture teachers are correct in thinking that this passage applies to the close of the age, then it would seem to prove the opposite of what they teach about who gets taken (i.e. the wicked were taken) and who gets left behind (i.e. the righteous – Noah and his family, were left behind).

But even if we should allow that Jesus is saying the righteous will be the ones taken and the wicked will be left, then the passage still fits the Second Coming scenario we have described: When Christ returns, publicly and in clouds of glory, the righteous will be caught up to meet Him as He descends to Earth, while the wicked remain to await imminent judgment. No SECRET, invisible, extra coming of Christ is depicted here

Now, what is the danger of the Rapture teaching? It can lead Christians to give up on trying to improve society. If the world is headed to destruction, and God’s plan for God’s soldiers is to escape rather than fight the enemy, then why bother?

But the larger issue, of course, is the possibility of redemptive suffering. Rapture teachers often imply that Christians are exempt from suffering God’s punishment in this life. They fail to understand that suffering can become a channel of God’s cleansing grace; that even when we’re innocent, our suffering at the hands of evildoers can be joined to Christ’s own suffering, thus cooperating with his redemptive work in the world. For all these reasons, God has no plan to snatch humankind out of the world when the Antichrist comes. (continued on next posting)
 
Continued from last posting.

Summery of last posting.
  1. Jesus will return to the Earth in a glorious triumph that is universally visible and undeniable --not invisible and SECRET.
  2. First, however, the Antichrists will appear to persecute the Church.
  3. The Church will suffer the great tribulation prophesied by her Lord.
  4. The final victory of Christ on Earth will not come through a gradual improvement in the world’s spiritual condition, nor by a special period of his earthly reign before judgment day. It will take place not within history, but beyond it, after Christ has brought an end to history in a glorious Second Coming.
  5. The dead will be raised.
  6. Christ will judge the living and the dead, and the Devil will at last be utterly overthrown.
  7. At the end of time, God’s kingdom will come in fullness, and all things will be renewed. The entire universe will be perfected.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top