Rapture theology in 2013

[Texsain]

10 years ago I became Catholic, and at that time, the Baptist church I had attened before was deep into the theology of the Rapture and the Left Behind books. How popular is this theology today? Is it still very popular, or has it declined now that the series has ended?

Please don’t be offended by my thinking that some Protestants may be so fickle that their beliefs change so quickly. But I do think this is much the case of society at large these days, Protestants, Catholics, and secularists alike. As an example-unrelated to the rapture theology-look at homosexuality. A decade ago it one state after another was banning gay “marraige” - now being gay or gay-friendly is very “in.”

 

[robwar]

Isn’t it still alive and well in fundamentalist Churches that teach dispensationalism? Maybe it’s not on the forefront because the Left Behind series is done.

 

[Joe_5859]

It is interesting how things ebb and flow. I have no reason to think subscribers to this theory have abandoned it wholesale simply because LaHaye and Jenkins wrapped up the series. It’s probably just not as close to the forefront of many people’s minds anymore.

 

[andrewstx]

10 years ago I became Catholic, and at that time, the Baptist church I had attened before was deep into the theology of the Rapture and the Left Behind books. How popular is this theology today? Is it still very popular, or has it declined now that the series has ended?

Please don’t be offended by my thinking that some Protestants may be so fickle that their beliefs change so quickly. But I do think this is much the case of society at large these days, Protestants, Catholics, and secularists alike. As an example-unrelated to the rapture theology-look at homosexuality. A decade ago it one state after another was banning gay “marraige” - now being gay or gay-friendly is very “in.”

I don’t think you are far from the mark with your fickle comment. I do think that Evangelicals have their changing “theological fads de jour”, and those fads are continually changing.

FE when I was a freshman “the late, great, planet earth” had just been released but was far from popular, it was just one idea that was out there. It took years to popularize.

What concerns me now is the trend towards “non denominational” denominations. All the ND churches I know of are either Baptist or Pentecostal Guess what those are both denominations!

I know personally of local churches that changed nothing but their names and kept all the doctrine from their original denominations. How is this “non denominational”?

What it really is those congregations think they are the only valid churches with their sola-scriptura teachings and their supposed “superiority”. This is an insult to Catholics.

I was raised in a similar denomination that claimed to be the only Christians in the only church. They called themselves “the church” and all others were in “the denominations”, and all others were bound for hell. The only difference was they called themselves “un-denominational”.

And this is not a tiny insignificant church. In the south and south west they are just barely behind Southern Baptists in terms of numbers.

 

[Filioque]

It is an interesting phenomina which goes in cycles and fits. As The Late Great Planet Earth has been brought up, the author still publishes and changes his prognosis for the world, After the first book he published, “Will the Earth end in 198?” He learned not to give a specific date.

The Left behind are an interesting twist, as they like the Da Vinci Code were published as Novels, even though they were promoted as historical and biblical treaties which contained “facts” that people were expected to incorporate into their knowledge base or spiritual/theological beliefs.

 

[Texsain]

What concerns me now is the trend towards “non denominational” denominations. All the ND churches I know of are either Baptist or Pentecostal Guess what those are both denominations!

I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but a good Baptist would say that all Baptist churches, being locally and individually autonomous, are “non-denominational.” But some choose to affiliate with a non-binding convention/synod and/or use the label “Baptist” and some don’t.

 

[Adamski]

I know a lot of fundementalist and they all believe it

 

[andrewstx]

I don’t necessarily disagree with you, but a good Baptist would say that all Baptist churches, being locally and individually autonomous, are “non-denominational.” But some choose to affiliate with a non-binding convention/synod and/or use the label “Baptist” and some don’t.

Yes I am well aware of that. To me it implies that Baptists consider them selves as the “only Christians” as well.

My father was churches of Christ, and my mother Baptist, here in texas it is practically a law that you must belong to one or the other.

Baptists like to talk about “Baptist distinctives” like “getting saved” baptism for beleivers only by submersion only and it is only symbolic. Sola scriptura, priesthood of all believers symbolic only Lord’s Supper and etc.

To me a church that has those distinctives is Baptist regardless of what the sign says. Most of the congregations that label themselves “non-denominational” fit that exactly and so I consider them Baptist.

In this part of texas there are “cowboy churches” that call themselves “non-denominational” but it fact they are part of the Southern Baptist Convention.

 

[PJM]

=Texsain;10725808]10 years ago I became Catholic, and at that time, the Baptist church I had attened before was deep into the theology of the Rapture and the Left Behind books. How popular is this theology today? Is it still very popular, or has it declined now that the series has ended?

Please don’t be offended by my thinking that some Protestants may be so fickle that their beliefs change so quickly. But I do think this is much the case of society at large these days, Protestants, Catholics, and secularists alike. As an example-unrelated to the rapture theology-look at homosexuality. A decade ago it one state after another was banning gay “marraige” - now being gay or gay-friendly is very “in.”

The Catholic Church teaches and has ALWAYS taught in line with Christ and the Bible.

There is NO; None; Zip; Zerro third comming.

John 14:3 “And if I shall go, and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and will take you to myself; that where I am, you also may be.”

Mt. 24: 28-33 " And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all tribes of the earth mourn: and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with much power and majesty. Wheresoever: The coming of Christ shall be sudden, and manifest to all the world, like lightning: and wheresoever he shall come, thither shall all mankind be gathered to him, as eagles are gathered about a dead body.
And he shall send his angels with a trumpet, and a great voice: and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the farthest parts of the heavens to the utmost bounds of them. And from the fig tree learn a parable: When the branch thereof is now tender, and the leaves come forth, you know that summer is nigh. So you also, when you shall see all these things, know ye that it is nigh, even at the doors"

Mt. 25: 31-35 “] And when the Son of man shall come in his majesty, and all the angels with him, then shall he sit upon the seat of his majesty. And all nations shall be gathered together before him, and he shall separate them one from another, as the shepherd separateth the sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on his left. Then shall the king say to them that shall be on his right hand: Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess you the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and you gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me to drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in …”

The Rapture is a Fundalmentalist fable

God Bless you,
pat/PJM

 

[Porknpie]

The Rapture is a Fundalmentalist fable

God Bless you,
pat/PJM

PJM,

Frankly, it’s worse than a fable. It’s a new gospel invented just a few years ago (literally). It’s such an irony that bible believing Christians could invent something that goes so strongly against scripture and has ZERO…no history supporting it for 2,000 years.

[BIBLEDRB]Galatians 1:8[/BIBLEDRB]

Below is pic of the person who came up with the new gospel thought of the rapture in 1830…John Darby.

So again, we’re left with where is the Truth:
a) with the Catholic Church established by Christ…the Pillar and Foundation of Truth?
or
b) John Darby…his man-make invention, 1800 years after the death of Christ.

Who do you want to believe ? And what was it about the 1800’s that produced so many…nutty characters?

Pork

 

[Holly3278]

I am not sure what evangelical Christians in general believe about it anymore but I do have a friend and neighbor who is an evangelical/fundamentalist Pentecostal and she wholeheartedly believes in the “rapture”. I have tried to explain to her why it is a false doctrine before but I am not sure how effective my explanations were.

 

[just_came_back]

I am not sure what evangelical Christians in general believe about it anymore but I do have a friend and neighbor who is an evangelical/fundamentalist Pentecostal and she wholeheartedly believes in the “rapture”. I have tried to explain to her why it is a false doctrine before but I am not sure how effective my explanations were.

I have tried to explain to my folks as well how flawed it is. They won’t budge. Oh well…

 

[Porknpie]

I am not sure what evangelical Christians in general believe about it anymore but I do have a friend and neighbor who is an evangelical/fundamentalist Pentecostal and she wholeheartedly believes in the “rapture”. I have tried to explain to her why it is a false doctrine before but I am not sure how effective my explanations were.

Holly…this may or may not work. Print out a picture of Darby and hand it to them. Tell them this is the person who invented the Rapture as she understands it and he did so in 1830.

The question is still a good one…who to believe…

a) the Church founded by Jesus…that he is leading to all Truth (that is scripture)
or
b) someone from 1830 who has a new thought, unheard of in Christianity until that time.

The real issue here is about Authority though. What is the nature of “Church” that Christ established. Ask your friend how do they know that the bible they are using is inerrant and inspired? Answering that will help them to understand the answer of which is true above…A) or B).

Pork.

 

[just_came_back]

Believe it or not, I have read that Darby only expanded on it but it was 1st “promoted” by a Jesuit.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francisco_Ribera

 

[cajunhillbilly]

I gave up the Rapture doctrine in the 70s. Any Reformed type will not believe in it. I am solidly amillenial and have studied all the views. I still get people who think I am a heretic for not believeing in it, but am in good company. LOL

 

[PJM]

=Porknpie;10729042]PJM,

Frankly, it’s worse than a fable. It’s a new gospel invented just a few years ago (literally). It’s such an irony that bible believing Christians could invent something that goes so strongly against scripture and has ZERO…no history supporting it for 2,000 years.

[BIBLEDRB]Galatians 1:8[/BIBLEDRB]

Below is pic of the person who came up with the new gospel thought of the rapture in 1830…John Darby.

So again, we’re left with where is the Truth:
a) with the Catholic Church established by Christ…the Pillar and Foundation of Truth?
or
b) John Darby…his man-make invention, 1800 years after the death of Christ.

Who do you want to believe ? And what was it about the 1800’s that produced so many…nutty characters?

Pork

Thanks:thumbsup:

I’m REALLY trying to be Cristian chairitable

 

[just_came_back]

I gave up the Rapture doctrine in the 70s. Any Reformed type will not believe in it. I am solidly amillenial and have studied all the views. I still get people who think I am a heretic for not believeing in it, but am in good company. LOL

I know the RCC is amillenial, and I can go with that, but I don’t think for 1 minute that Satan is bound. For God’s sake, look at all the **** in the world. I guess the bound term comes from the fact that once Christ died and rose, grace has been available for all, unlike before the Christian Era.

 

[PJM]

=just came back;10732423]I know the RCC is amillenial, and I can go with that, but I don’t think for 1 minute that Satan is bound. For God’s sake, look at all the **** in the world. I guess the bound term comes from the fact that once Christ died and rose, grace has been available for all, unlike before the Christian Era.

“Bound”

Heck he’s in HIS glory! [a temporary situation: God’s In Charge]

 

[just_came_back]

“Bound”

Heck he’s in HIS glory! [a temporary situation: God’s In Charge]

I do know this but doesn’t make it easier. God bless!