Rapture

[guanophore]

The opening posts from this thread seem to indicate that Catholics do NOT believe in the Rapture: Did I mis-understand those posts?

We just understand it differently.

so you don’t believe in a pre-tribulation, or mid-tribulation rapture, but you believe in in a post-tribulation rapture?

Not really, no.

First I'm told that the rapture was an invention: yet Catholicisms believe that "Then we ho are alive and remain will be** caught up (RAPTURED)** together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air,"

Now I’m told that “Tribulation” is a 20th century invention
yet
Matthew 24:20 Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a Sabbath. 21** For then there will be great tribulation,** such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. 22 And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short

Mark 13
24 “But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, 25 and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken.

Revelation 7:
14 I said to him, “Sir, you know.” And he said to me, “These are the ones coming out of the great tribulation. They have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
**
How can you say that “Tribulation” is a 20th century invention ?**

It would be more accurate to say that the whole “Left Behind” conception of the tribulation and rapture is the 20th century invention.

""With respect to the rapture,** Catholics certainly believe that the event of our gathering together to be with Christ will take place,** though they do not generally use the word "rapture" to refer to this event (somewhat ironically, since the term "rapture" is derived from the text of the Latin Vulgate of 1 Thess. 4:17—"we will be caught up," [Latin: rapiemur]).  "

so Catholics do believe in a rapture: they just don’t like the word; Even though the word can be traced to the Latin Vulgate…

It would be more accurate to say that Catholics don’t have a need for the wild speculation, fantasy, fiction, etc, that has emerged around the word.

We consider it to be the parusia.

IOW a rapture is not a “modern day invention” and the “gathering together to be with Christ” was taught prior to the 1800s

The common current meanings of it certainly are. It has become a wide spread evangelical phenomena.

We are not dispensationalists.

???
I quoted Scripture without any commentary:shrug:

please explain what is it you disagree with

All of these scriptures are written by, for, and about Catholics. What we disagree with is the dispensationalist interpretation of them.

It is even possible that the reference in Revelation has already taken place with the persecution of Christians by early Roman Emperors

I did not interpret it

I quoted Scripture

Let’s be practical, alwayswill. We interpret everything we read and hear. This is how the human mind functions.

Catholics interpret through the lens of Sacred Tradition (the teaching that was handed down by the Apostles.

You are interpreting it through the Calvanistic lens that was created at the Reformation.

Re : Tribulation> the quote was "Catholic theology has no "Tribulation". That is a 20th century invention of C.I. Schofield and dispensationalism"

Yes the way the term is currently used in Evangelical circles. Catholics do not understand the scripture referenced to “Tribulation” according to the dispensationalist model.

 regarding rapture> the quote was>

It also was not taught by anybody prior to the 1800s.

Not the way it is commonly taught now and understood in the Left Behind series.

  **No where in this thread have I interpreted anything:**:shrug:

Asking the question “do Catholics believe in…” requires certain meaning be assigned to the words. The meaning we assign to them is different than yours.

Lets get straight to the point

Do Catholics believe in a future tribulation?

Even though I think the book of Revelation may refer to persecution that has already occurred, I don’ t see the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem meeting the criteria specified by Christ. I know many of those who have lived in war torn countries, though, that would say it describes their experience well. Your mention of the Jewish holocaust spared only a few of the Jews left in Europe.

Do Catholics believe that believers will be caught up (raptured)  in the clouds with the Lord?

Yes. At least, those who are still alive and remain when He comes.

 

[JustaServant]

Lets stick to the facts:
Can you show me anywhere in this thread where I interpreted or provided any commentary on the verses I posted?

I know you can’t , because I haven’t , not even once.
I posted Scripture.

I hope you can please answer the questions I asked about Catholic beliefs in post #56
thank you

AW, quoting Scripture is not the end-all. How the quotes are arranged, taken out of context and used to ‘prove’ a modern belief is commentary whether you like it or not. I understood that even when I was a Baptist.
I will use a Protestant word for what you are doing, it is called “eisegesis”. That is interpreting of a passage of Scripture based on a subjective, non-analytical reading. That is, the person ‘quoting Scripture’ injects his own ideas into the text, making it mean whatever he wants, more often than not, misinterpretation.
SON brings up an important point. Your questions HAVE been answered.
I think you are simply looking for a different answer.

 

[JustaServant]

IOW a rapture is not a “modern day invention” and the “gathering together to be with Christ” was taught prior to the 1800s

Wrong.
The “Rapture” was first taught by a J.N. Darby in the Plymouth Brethren Church in the 19th century.
Somewhere you claimed to be studying Reformed theology. Well, Reformed Christians are Amillennial and do not believe in a ‘rapture’ either. Some of the best critiques of Dispensationalism and ‘Rapture’ philosophy come from Reformed theologians.

 

[Simca]

There is a really, really good book on the market, which I very highly recommend.
It’s called

“Revelation
Four Views
A Parallel Commentary”

Edited by Steve Gregg

It presents the Book of Revelation verse by verse and explains how and why the Four main Viewpoints are interpreted the way they are.

The editor says in the beginning of the book, that at one time or another he has believed all of these viewpoints because they all make sense.

It really is good to expand our knowledge and to understand how and why others think the way they do.

 

[ajcstr]

First I’m told that the rapture was an invention: yet Catholicisms believe that “Then we ho are alive and remain will be** caught up (RAPTURED)** together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air,”

Now I’m told that “Tribulation” is a 20th century invention
yet
Matthew 24:20 Pray that your flight may not be in winter or on a Sabbath. 21** For then there will be great tribulation,** such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be. 22 And if those days had not been cut short, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short

Mark 13
24 “But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, 25 and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken.

Revelation 7:
14 I said to him, “Sir, you know.” And he said to me, “These are the ones coming out of the great tribulation. They have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
**
How can you say that “Tribulation” is a 20th century invention ?**

I think there is confusion on “words” and “what words mean to us”

Believing in a rapture where we are caught up in the air with the Lord is different than believing in a rapture where all the true Christians suddenly disappear from the planet as they are caught up in the air before, during or after a literal 7 year tribulation period.

In the same manner, my belief in the Trinity is far different than the Mormon belief even though we use the same word.

 

[JustaServant]

AW, two books you might want to get from Reformed Protestants on the subject of the Rapture and Dispensationalism:
Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church By Gary Demar.
“What the Bible Teaches About the Promised Messiah” by James E. Smith (HIGHLY recommended).

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

All:

The Catholic Church has always had Tribulation in its teaching. It didn’t finish in the past.

The Catholic Church doesn’t understand rapture. However the rapture for service (last 21 verses of Proverbs, parable of talents, giving fellow servants their rations on time, if you want a crown you must help the widows and orphans get one first as St Paul gave up his life doing), which is now, will make us more apt to be in the later one (which will not be before the Tribulation).

The calling is no mystery to those who understand spiritual gifts.

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

The opening posts from this thread seem to indicate that Catholics do NOT believe in the Rapture: Did I mis-understand those posts?

Most of the posts near the beginning of this thread were of extreme poor quality and I was appalled at the lack of respect towards the OP’s enquiry.

 

[The_Old_Maid]

All right, everybody take a breath. Emergency Kitten! Emergency Puppy!

There. Feel better?

Speaking as someone who was brought up in rapturist church one year, nonrapturist another year, lather-rinse-repeat (family feud; long story, MYOB) …

I don’t think alwayswill is proselytizing. I also think the regulars here don’t quite “get” it. People know what they’re used to, after all.

I don’t agree with David Currie on everything, but I liked the analogy he used:

Let’s say my teenager asks, *“Hey, can I go to the prom because some friends have got a hotel room for a party afterwards.” *In their minds, that’s all one question. To me, those are two very different questions! And I will definitely break them down and give each their own answer.

(From Rapture: the End-Times error that leaves the Bible behind)

He proposes that that is why the Gospel according to Luke separated the disciples’ questions into two separate chapters (Luke 17 and Luke 21). Between those chapters, everyone went places and did things. This was to make plain that they were separate conversations.

The idea is that:

1. To the disciples, it was hard to imagine that the world would go on after the Second Temple could be destroyed. They thought that if the Temple fell, the world must be ending.
2. Matthew was writing for a Jewish audience but Luke was writing for Gentiles. They (we) could easily imagine the world not coming to an end if the Second Temple fell.

As for hard times, there’s a saying that “sign of the times” is when something bad happens to someone else, and “tribulation” is when it happens to you.

One of the things that modern rapturist teachers did is to add lots of Antichrist activity. The result is that rapturism teaches that a Third Temple has to be built because if it isn’t, then the Antichrist can’t destroy it.

(Trivia: Left Behind actually has four Temples. The Antichrist builds and defiles #3. Jesus blasts it on the 75th day. Then a Fourth Temple is built and He lives in it for 1,000 years. This is all done to account for their interpretation of Temples.)

As for “rapture” the nonrapturist idea is that when Jesus comes, everyone who is happy to see Him will soar to His side (totally forgetting that we can’t fly; we will be so happy that we will). Everyone who does not want to see Him will be trying to get away.

 

[guanophore]

All right, everybody take a breath. Emergency Kitten! Emergency Puppy!

There. Feel better?

Very much, thanks!

 

[Michael_Francis]

Can somebody please explain the rapture to me and what does it mean?

This should help you out.
It is not a Catholic teaching, nor is it actually taught in the New Testament.
The Rapture?

 

[Church_Militant]

Can somebody please explain the rapture to me and what does it mean?

This should help you out.
It is not a Catholic teaching, nor is it actually taught in the New Testament.
The Rapture?

 

[alwayswill]

Wrong.
The “Rapture” was first taught by a J.N. Darby in the Plymouth Brethren Church in the 19th century.
Somewhere you claimed to be studying Reformed theology. Well, Reformed Christians are Amillennial and do not believe in a ‘rapture’ either. Some of the best critiques of Dispensationalism and ‘Rapture’ philosophy come from Reformed theologians.

I respectfully disagree that all Reformed Christians are Amillennial
“Reformed theology, narrowly understood then, has plenty of room for historical premillennialism, amillennialism and postmillennialism.”
rcsprouljr.com/blog/ask-rc/rc-reformed-view-eschatology/

Pre-tribulational Premillennialism
Pre-tribulation educators and preachers include Jimmy Swaggart, J. Dwight Pentecost, Tim LaHaye, J. Vernon McGee, Perry Stone, Chuck Smith, Hal Lindsey, Jack Van Impe, Chuck Missler, Grant Jeffrey, Thomas Ice, David Jeremiah, John F. MacArthur, and John Hagee.[62] While many pre-tribulationists are also dispensationalists, not all pre-tribulationists are dispensationalist

Mid-tribulational Premillennialism
Mid-tribulationist teachers include Harold Ockenga, James O. Buswell (a reformed, Calvinistic Presbyterian), and Norman Harrison.[64] This position is a minority view among premillennialists

Post-tribulational Premillennialism
Authors and teachers who support the post-tribulational view include Pat Robertson, Walter R. Martin, John Piper, George E. Ladd,[74] Robert H. Gundry,[75] and Douglas Moo.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapture

 

[Son_of_Niall]

I respectfully disagree that all Reformed Christians are Amillennial
“Reformed theology, narrowly understood then, has plenty of room for historical premillennialism, amillennialism and postmillennialism.”
rcsprouljr.com/blog/ask-rc/rc-reformed-view-eschatology/

Pre-tribulational Premillennialism
Pre-tribulation educators and preachers include Jimmy Swaggart, J. Dwight Pentecost, Tim LaHaye, J. Vernon McGee, Perry Stone, Chuck Smith, Hal Lindsey, Jack Van Impe, Chuck Missler, Grant Jeffrey, Thomas Ice, David Jeremiah, John F. MacArthur, and John Hagee.[62] While many pre-tribulationists are also dispensationalists, not all pre-tribulationists are dispensationalist

Mid-tribulational Premillennialism
Mid-tribulationist teachers include Harold Ockenga, James O. Buswell (a reformed, Calvinistic Presbyterian), and Norman Harrison.[64] This position is a minority view among premillennialists

Post-tribulational Premillennialism
Authors and teachers who support the post-tribulational view include Pat Robertson, Walter R. Martin, John Piper, George E. Ladd,[74] Robert H. Gundry,[75] and Douglas Moo.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapture

You’re still stuck on the Dispy concept of a ‘Tribulation’.
Historical premillennialism recognizes no ‘Tribulation’ period.

 

[ajcstr]

Catholic Answers tract on the Rapture:

catholic.com/tracts/the-rapture

This article discusses the Tribulation:

people.opposingviews.com/catholic-beliefs-tribulation-2629.html

Bottom line is that the words used are the same but their meaning is different. Catholics don’t generally use the word “rapture” and though we believe in “a” period of tribulation, its not necessarily a 7 year period which is normally what is implies by “The Tribulation”

 

[guanophore]

This should help you out.
It is not a Catholic teaching, nor is it actually taught in the New Testament.
The Rapture?

I think it would be helpful if your article could incorporate this:

Since the word is found in the Catholic Bible, it seems prudent to situate it properly.

 

[guanophore]

** please show me where I interpreted or provided any commentary on the verses I posted**

I just want to compliment you on this alwayswill. I see that you have tried hard not to do any interpreting, and are just seeking the facts, which seem somewhat contradictory. It is not appropriate for a Catholic to deny anything that is written in the NT, so since these words are contained in it, it makes so sense to say we don’t believe it.

But, as has been pointed out, it is a semantics challenge. Even the simple question you ask “do Catholics believe in the Rapture” is loaded, because we have different understandings of what the word means.

Courage, alwayswill!

 

[Darryl_B]

Wrong.
The “Rapture” was first taught by a J.N. Darby in the Plymouth Brethren Church in the 19th century.
Somewhere you claimed to be studying Reformed theology. Well, Reformed Christians are Amillennial and do not believe in a ‘rapture’ either. Some of the best critiques of Dispensationalism and ‘Rapture’ philosophy come from Reformed theologians.

Reformed “changed” from “amillenial” as they recently (not that recent) have been “caught up” as many have been, with “end times millenialism”. I have mp3ed and read Reformed who would like to get back to the “amillenial” because there is a case for it. R C Sproul not among them.

 

[Darryl_B]

Reformed “changed” from “amillenial” as they recently (not that recent) have been “caught up” as many have been, with “end times millenialism”. I have mp3ed and read Reformed who would like to get back to the “amillenial” because there is a case for it. R C Sproul not among them.

I should correct this when I say R C Sproul not among them, I mean R C Sproul seems to be preterist, not “millenilalist”. But I would rather be “preterist” than “millenialist”.

 

[alwayswill]

You’re still stuck on the Dispy concept of a ‘Tribulation’.
Historical premillennialism recognizes no ‘Tribulation’ period.

I have never shared my view on this

And I believe you are mistaken that "Historical premillennialism recognizes no “Tribulation’ period”

Historic premillennialism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historic_premillennialism
“Historic premillennialism is the designation made by premillenialist, now also known as post-tribulational premillennialism”

…“Thus, historic premillennialists see no issue with the church going through the Great Tribulation,”