Myth of the Pre-Tribulational Rapture

[MaggieOH]

Ozzie:

Those are your words, not mine. If I argued from that point of view I would be like you, leaning on the words of men, not God.

You see, you start with a faulty premise.

:nope: You are not leaning on the words of men? I find that hard to believe. Who showed you the verses in the first place? Where did you learn such names as premillenarianism and chiliasm? These are words that you have used and they are the words of men :yup:

… methinks there is some doubletalk going on here.

Maggie

 

[MaggieOH]

The Cub:

Maggie,

The citation of Mat 24 that you quoted refers to the future. It is discussed here:

call2holiness.org/RefugesonWings/RefugesonWings.htm

God bless,

cub

Cub,

there is always more than one meaning or sense in the Scriptures. Jesus did speak of the future, which also includes the sacking of Jerusalem and also of another time.

Now I propose that Jesus could also be speaking of the building of the Mosque on the Temple Mount.

How well do you know the Books of the Maccabees? For it is an historical fact that when the Hellenes had control over Jerusalem they placed their own gods in the Temple. When the Hellenes were defeated and the Temple was rededicated, a new festival was promulgated - Chanukah.

What we see happening is that Islam has claimed the Temple Mount as their holy place, but this site does not belong to them.

The other side of the coin is that the disastrous abomination is in fact the sacking and destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. It must be remembered that yes, there was great distress during the Jewish Wars when the Romans crushed the Jews. Also it was the Jews who suffered immensely and the Christians did not suffer at all. A prophecy of what was to occur to the Jews who had condemned Him to death, if they did not repent and accept the Truth.

MaggieOH

postscript: I went to the suggested website only to discover that it displayed messages from a bunch of alleged American visionaries including John Leary, Louise Starr Tomkiel, and Carol Ameche. I am familiar with their writings and have long ago determined that this material is false. John Leary does not have the support of his Bishop and Louise Starr Tomkiel either spends too much time watching T.V. or surfing the Internet.

 

[Ozzie]

Robert in SD:

The Church does not “spiritualize” the kingdom. The Church is the seed, the beginning of the Kingdom of God. And the Church is not just a spiritualized abstraction. The Church exists on a physical level as well.

This is spiritualizing the Kingdom, my friend. Obviously you have never done an Old Testament prophetic study on the anticipated Messianic/Davidic Kingdom. Are you familiar at all with the four unconditional covenants God made with national Israel? The Kingdom is spiritual (not spiritualized), physical, political and very Jewish.

It’s not “silly” to suggest that you cannot pick and choose from the ECFs to support your own “silly” doctrine. My point is that if you are going to argue from history that your view of dispensational premillenialism was taught by the early Church, then you cannot ignore the host of distinctly Catholic doctrines that were also taught by that early Church.

Yes, it’s a very silly thing to suggest. Because by that suggestion you’re implying the so-called ECFs were infallible. Not even the RCC will agree with you on that point.

 

[Ozzie]

MaggieOH:

Cub, there is always more than one meaning or sense in the Scriptures. Jesus did speak of the future, which also includes the sacking of Jerusalem and also of another time.

Now I propose that Jesus could also be speaking of the building of the Mosque on the Temple Mount.

You could “suppose” such an absurd thing but your supposition would be false.

 

[Ozzie]

:nope: You are not leaning on the words of men? I find that hard to believe. Who showed you the verses in the first place? Where did you learn such names as premillenarianism and chiliasm? These are words that you have used and they are the words of men :yup:

… methinks there is some doubletalk going on here.

Did you at least feel the wind on your forehead when what we were talking about went right over your head?

 

[Ozzie]

MaggieOH:

Ozzie it is an error to deny the historical setting of the Gospels. There is a lot of out of context quoting going on here. I have deleted the majority of what you wrote because of the limits that we have on posts.

First of all, there was an historical end of the age at that particular time. In fact the end of the age began with the birth of Jesus Christ. That is what was happening was the end of the Old Covenant and the continuing need for animal sacrifices.
The prophecies of Daniel, Jeremiah, Isaiah and others all point to the coming of Jesus Christ as the Messiah. They do not point to our own time, neither do they point to some time in the distant future.

In order to respond to the points that you made:

false Messiahs: yes at that time there were others who claimed to be the Christ and they were captured and killed. These false Messiahs believed as most believe today that the Messiah who is to come will be a great leader who will lead the people into battle against the oppressors (the Romans). These false Messiahs led the people into revolt and this culminated in the crushing of the Jews and the sacking of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

“wars and rumours of wars”: there has not been an age when there has not been wars and rumours of wars. Our time is no different than the period in which France and England fought their wars, or when Mohammed struck terror throughout the European nations with the sword - convert or else philosophy.
The sacking of Jerusalem comes under the heading of “wars and rumours of wars”.

nation rise up against nation: this has been happening for centuries

Now, for the words of Jesus, I would say that with the sacking of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple there truly was a “Great Tribulation”, and there have been many such “Great Tribulations” since the sacking of Jerusalem. So again there is nothing that points to our own time in particular.

When you take Scripture out of its context it is easy to concoct all of these notions. However, in the end most of these false doctrines die when people begin to realise that what they have been told is not true.Maggie

It is you who utterly fail to understand the context, Maggie. If you wouldn’t be so quick to cut off my posts and make a hurried response you would have seen I covered this issue. Verse 28 of Matt. 24 puts the events listed in their proper context:

MAT 24:29-30 “But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken, and then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory.”

Can you give me the day and the month of 70 A.D. when the whole world saw the return of Christ?

 

[Ozzie]

Little Mary:

You are pulling out of here what you choose to see and editing when it is advantagous to your point. And when did you talk to Paul anyway??

There will be a second and final coming. Not a Coming 1.5.

1Thes 4:14-18 - hmmm nope, don’t see it
1 COR 15:51-52 - not here either
this one actually says the LAST trumpet. Did you miss that?

Phil 3:20-21 - still looking
Zech 14:5 - not yet
Jude 1:14 - :yawn: still can’t find it

Merely listing bible verses just to list bible verses does not a case make. None of the above say anything about Jesus coming down from heaven to get people then doing a 180 and motoring back up to heaven.

Weak, weak, weak.

You really didn’t add anything worthwhile to the debate Little Mary. Have you ever done any real study on the issues at hand? Your sarasm doesn’t say a lot toward your character, either. I notice those who don’t have much to say on this thread gravitate to shallow sarcasm and funny pictures. But then I guess I don’t know the ages of all these people, so I must not judge too harshly. And you yourself go by the name of “Little Mary.”

 

[MaggieOH]

“Research” on the internet, Maggie??? Tell me, PLEASE, what books have you read by credible scholars? Anyone can look up articles on the internet and learn to cut and paste.

On what do you base your assertion that you’ve done more “reseach” than I? Do you know me? Have you been to my house? Have you seen my library? Do you know my schooling?

Who are these so called credible scholars? I bet that they are into big time historical revisionism.

What makes you so certain that I do not have a library of books. I get my information the best way that I can and since I am broke I use Internet resources. The sites that I visit are very scholarly and the research whether it is Catholic or legitimate Protestant are always of the highest calibre. The remainder are good for a laugh only.

Maggie

 

[MaggieOH]

Ozzie:

You really didn’t add anything worthwhile to the debate Little Mary. Have you ever done any real study on the issues at hand? Your sarasm doesn’t say a lot toward your character, either. I notice those who don’t have much to say on this thread gravitate to shallow sarcasm and funny pictures. But then I guess I don’t know the ages of all these people, so I must not judge too harshly. And you yourself go by the name of “Little Mary.”

By what authority do you judge others. Mary did the research based upon what you provided and she said outright that there was nothing in the verses that supported your case. Is that a crime?

Maggie

 

[MaggieOH]

Ozzie:

It is you who utterly fail to understand the context, Maggie. If you wouldn’t be so quick to cut off my posts and make a hurried response you would have seen I covered this issue. Verse 28 of Matt. 24 puts the events listed in their proper context:

MAT 24:29-30 "But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken, and then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory."

Can you give me the day and the month of 70 A.D. when the whole world saw the return of Christ?

Are you seeking a literal translation of the Scripture here?

sounds to me like there is an attempt of one-upmanship going on. It might explain the anger in the posts complete with the ad hominem attacks not just upon myself but also upon LittleMary.

I will respond with a new reply, using as my source one of the most scholarly theologians alive today, Dr. Scott Hahn.

 

[MaggieOH]

The Mt. Olivet Discourse - Was it a prediction for the end of the world? (extracted from the Ignatius Bible Study on the Gospel of Matthew p 60)

In this discourse Jesus speaks extensively about cosmic catastrophes, heavenly signs, and the future judgement of God. This has led some to think that Jesus was predicting his Second Coming and the end of the visible world. This has led to some taking Jesus words seriously and at face value.

There is a problem with this interpretation. Jesus expected these world-shaking events to occur soon after his Ascension for he said:

“Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away till all these things take place” (Mt 24:34)

How could Jesus get it so wrong? More than one generation has passed and we are still here.

However, when these words are interpreted in the light of ancient Judaism, a better interpretation is revealed, that is Jesus is speaking of the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem - that is the **architechural symbol of the Old Covenant. **At the literal-historical level, Jesus’ entire discourse is an extension of his cryptic comment about the Temple:

“There will not be left here one stone upon another, that will not be thrown down.” (Mt 24:2)

Hearing this, the disciples were probably reminded of a similar event in the OT when God allowed the Temple to be destroyed in 586 BC as punishment for Israel’s sins (see 2Kings 25:8-10) Interpreting Jesus’ words in this way does more adequate justice to the symbolism of his language and the testimony of history. Ancient sources confirm his prophecy: **the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in A.D. 70, a tragedy that claimed the lives of more than 1 million Jews. **From this perspective Jesus stands vindicated, since his words did come to pass within the lifetime of his contemporaries.

(to be cont)

 

[MaggieOH]

Ozzie:

Did you at least feel the wind on your forehead when what we were talking about went right over your head?

… was that the hot air that came wafting into my house with a somewhat vile odour?

 

[MaggieOH]

Ozzie:

You could “suppose” such an absurd thing but your supposition would be false.

I did not say my supposition was true, but pointing to the facts as they are at the moment. The Temple Mount has a big Mosque on top of it and that means for the Jews at least there is an abomination upon that hallowed ground.

Maggie

 

[MaggieOH]

(cont)

How are the details of Jesus’ strange language to be understood? Could he expect us to associate cosmic upheavals like national warfare (Mt 24:6-7) earthly catastrophes (Mt 24:7-8), the darkening of the sun and the moon (Mt 24: 6-7) and stars falling out of the sky (Mt 24: 29) with the collapse of a sacred building? The answer lies in biblical and traditional views of the Temple.

**Like many religions of the East, the Israelites regarded their Temple as a miniature replica or microcosm of the world; it was an architechural model of the universe fashioned by God. Conversely the universe itself was a macrotemple where God also dwells with his people.

“He built his sanctuary like the high heavens, like the earth, which he has founded for ever” (Ps 78:69)

**Other indications of Temple theology include:

(1) the Place of God’s Rest.
“God rested from all his work which he had done in creation” (Gen 2:3)
When God established order He gave the Israelites rest from their enemies (2Sam 7:1)
He commissioned the building ot the Temple by Solomon as his resting place for ever. (refer Ps 132:14, 2 Chron 6:41; Sir 24:11; Is 66:1)

(2) Symbolism of Seven
God’s creation of the world is described as the construction of a Temple (Job 38:4-6); Amos 9:6) that is completed and blessed on the seventh day (Gen 2:2-3). Solomon built the Jerusalem Temple in 7 years (1 Kings 6:38) and dedicated it in the seventh month (1Kings 8:2) during the seven-day Feast of Booths (1Kings 8:65)

(3) A House of Glory
Isaiah’s vision of the Lord (Is 6:1-7) makes an implicit comparison: the Temple and the cosmos are mutually and interchangeably filled with divine glory. As the train of God’s robe “filled the temple” (Is 6:1) and God’s house is “filled with smoke” (Is 6:4), so the angels cry out “the whole earth is full of his glory” (Is 6:3)

(4) Jewish Tradition

Jewish writers of Jesus’ day describe in great deatil the Temple as a model of the universe. Josephus, Philo and later rabbinic writings interpret the Temple’s divisions, furiniture, colours, and architecture as symbols of the cosmos. One tradition links the three divisions of the Temple with three realms of the world: heaven is the most holy place, the land is the holy place, and the sea is the outer courtyard and the bronze laver of water.

These considerations help make sense of Jesus’ words in their historical context. **With the dawning of the New Covenant, God had to clear away the central symbol of the Old Covenant, the Temple. **The Church is God’s new and spiritual Temple, built with the living stones of Christian believers (Matt 16:18); Eph 2:20-22); 1Pet 2:4-5). **In this light, the devastation of the Temple and the judgment of Israel in A.D. 70 can be seen as an overture to greater things. That is the termination of the Old Covenant world prefigures the destruction of the universe, God’s macrotemple, and the judgment of all nations by Christ.

Thus Jesus’ Olivet Discourse is initially fulfilled in the first century as he said (Mt 24:34). But embedded in Christ’s words are spiritual truths that point forward to His Second Coming in glory and the end of the visible world.

**

 

[MaggieOH]

MaggieOH:

I did not say my supposition was true, but pointing to the facts as they are at the moment. The Temple Mount has a big Mosque on top of it and that means for the Jews at least there is an abomination upon that hallowed ground.

Maggie

This is a postscript to my previous point about the Temple. What is the picture that would have been dredged up in the minds of the people when they heard the words “desolating sacrilege” or in some translations “the abomination”?

The answer I believe has a lot to do with the reason that the Romans ended up occupying Jerusalem in the first place and that is the story that is told in the Books of the Maccabees. The wording recalls Dan 9:27, 11:31 when Daniel forsaw the desecration of the Temple at the hands of Antiochus Epiphanes IV (167 B.C.). Antiochus burned Jerusalem, plundered the Temple of its sacred articles, and erected an idol to the Greek god Zeus within its precincts (refer 1 Macc31, 37, 54). Jesus is drawing upon this episode and projects it forward to announce the Temple’s ultimate destruction and desecration by the Roman army in A.D. 70.

Oh my gosh, Jesus did refer to Maccabees !! Why then are the Maccabees excluded via the criteria given by the Fundamentalists?

 

[John_Joseph]

Ozzie:

Ok, but when you get home and do your research, let me know in what month in 70 AD the Jews in Jerusalem actually saw the Lord return and gather His elect. So, evidently, based on your interpretation and events, we no longer have to look forward to Christ’s 2 nd Advent, right?

Nice try. What I described had nothing to do with the second coming. I believe Jesus “will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and his kingdom will have no end”.

Matt 24:29 - You are looking at this verse literally, it wasn’t meant to be taken that way. The Bible is filled with this type of imagery. Check out Isaiah 34:4-10 or Ezekiel 32:7-8. This verse is a continuation of the verses we discussed earlier. Again, it is describing the fall of the political institutions that were attempting to persecute His church.

Matt 24:30 - We can get into this if you would like, but I think Maggie has done a good job already addressing these verses.

Ozzie, I read a book a while back by David Currie titled, “Rapture: The End Times Error that Leaves the Bible Behind”. Everything I have mentioned thus far is covered extensively in that book. I used it as a source for my posts. Even if you disagree with what he has to say, and that is a tall order, it will provide you with an excellent background on Catholic interpretations. I should add that Mr. Currie was the son of a Fundamentalist pastor and studied at Trinity College and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He only became a Catholic in his 40s.

 

[Ozzie]

MaggieOH:

Are you seeking a literal translation of the Scripture here?

sounds to me like there is an attempt of one-upmanship going on. It might explain the anger in the posts complete with the ad hominem attacks not just upon myself but also upon LittleMary.

Me with the ad hominem attacks??? There’s no anger in my posts, just tired of those who have nothing to offer but sarcasm and funny pictures.

I will respond with a new reply, using as my source one of the most scholarly theologians alive today, Dr. Scott Hahn.

But you’re not replying, Maggie. You’re simply cutting and pasting.

I’ll ask you again. Can you give me at least the month in the year 70 A.D. that the world saw the Son of Man coming in the clowds with power and great glory? Jesus did say "immediately after the tribulation of those days…"

Can we visit the site where He set up His glorious throne and all the nations were gathered before Him? Where is He now?

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Ozzie, I think the gist of this whole thread is that you are an unwavering believer in the doctrine of the pretribulational rapture as presented within the dispensational millenialist theological framework. Those of us faithful Catholics reject that proposal out of hand because it is not supported by the entirety of Scripture (taken in context) the Sacred Tradition of the Church, and the Magisterium of the Catholic faith. I know that YOU reject the last two as being unbiblical, but since the Church preceded the bible, it is at least a co-equal teaching authority to it. You will reject this notion, but whatever arguements you may have rejecting the teaching authority of the Church are not supported by Sacred Scripture, taken in context.

Ozzie:

Me with the ad hominem attacks??? There’s no anger in my posts, just tired of those who have nothing to offer but sarcasm and funny pictures.But you’re not replying, Maggie. You’re simply cutting and pasting.

I’ll ask you again. Can you give me at least the month in the year 70 A.D. that the world saw the Son of Man coming in the clowds with power and great glory? Jesus did say "immediately after the tribulation of those days…"

Can we visit the site where He set up His glorious throne and all the nations were gathered before Him? Where is He now?

 

[Ozzie]

John Joseph:

Nice try. What I described had nothing to do with the second coming. I believe Jesus “will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and his kingdom will have no end”.

Matt 24:29 - You are looking at this verse literally, it wasn’t meant to be taken that way. The Bible is filled with this type of imagery. Check out Isaiah 34:4-10 or Ezekiel 32:7-8. This verse is a continuation of the verses we discussed earlier. Again, it is describing the fall of the political institutions that were attempting to persecute His church.

There’s nothing in the context to suggest that Matt. 24:29 isnt to be understood literally. But that’s your problem, you don’t like how it doesn’t fit your preconceived notions (or what you’ve been taught by your church)so you conveniently state that it wasn’t meant to be taken that way. That’s not an honest exegesis.

Matt 24:30 - We can get into this if you would like, but I think Maggie has done a good job already addressing these verses.

Maggie avoids the context and just quotes those who do so as well

Ozzie, I read a book a while back by David Currie titled, “Rapture: The End Times Error that Leaves the Bible Behind”. Everything I have mentioned thus far is covered extensively in that book. I used it as a source for my posts. Even if you disagree with what he has to say, and that is a tall order, it will provide you with an excellent background on Catholic interpretations. I should add that Mr. Currie was the son of a Fundamentalist pastor and studied at Trinity College and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He only became a Catholic in his 40s.

OK, then you really haven’t done a comprehensive study, right? Just this guy’s view, which you seem to have adopted. Why? Because he’s a convert? Why would Mr. Currie being a son of a “Fundamentalist” pastor have anything to do with all of this? Why does that make his view right?

 

[The_Cub]

We have gotten way off target……

Maggie,

Please read the following:

In Chapter 5: “Multiple Fulfillment” of his writing entitled: “Free From All Error: Authorship, Inerrancy, Historicity of Scripture, Church Teaching, and Modern Scripture Scholars”. In it he states:

“A remarkable phenomenon appears in a number of places in Scripture. Oddly, it has been little noticed by scholars. It seems that prophecies can have more than one fulfillment…”

A specially interesting probable case of multiple fulfillment comes in the mysterious chapter 24 of St. Matthew. At the start, the disciples ask Jesus for the signs of two things: the fall of Jerusalem, and of the end of the world. Commentators are far from agreement on interpreting the rest of the chapter. Some have tried to divide it so as to have some parts refer to one question, others to the other. But a careful analysis reveals that practically all of the signs given were actually fulfilled before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D…"

http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/most/getchap.cfm?WorkNum=216&ChapNum=6

The Late Fr. William G. Most was one of the most premier theologians of our time. He held doctorates in Theology as well as both classical languages.

http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/most/start.cfm

Yes, I agree with Fr. Most’s conclusion that we are referring to a case of multiple fulfillment prophecy……and the next realization will occur as delineated here (please read):

http://www.call2holiness.org/RefugesonWings/RefugesonWings.htm

---

The Temple Mount — I did not read all of the posts……a bit long and a bit too angry for me "(

The Temple Mount has nothing to do with the Myth of the Pre-Trib Rapture……or of Our Lord’s Refuges. The building of the 4th Jewish Temple is a Non-event. It is moot as far as eschatology is concerned.

Please read the follow to see why:

http://www.call2holiness.org/ReconstructionoftheTemple/ReconstructionoftheTemple.htm

Those who hold that Jesus’ Second Coming will not occur until the Temple of Jerusalem is rebuilt are sadly mistaken……and are at risk of not preparing properly beforehand.

To Others,

Also, note that the Church teaches that it is the New Israel (Gal 4:28-31; Mat 21:33-46 and CCC 877).** When studying eschatology, one must make sure that he is looking towards the correct “Israel” in the context of each citation.

**Ozzie,

Here is your “rapture”:

http://www.call2holiness.org/RefugesonWings/RefugesonWings.htm

****http://www.call2holiness.org/mythofrapture/MythofRaptureHTML.htm

**

God bless you and your families,

cub

**