The Rapture (is it even mentioned in the bible?)

[parishminister]

Agreed. The Left Behind series is a work of fiction that many people will, unfortunately, take to heart. I have read the entire series though, because so many people read it and think “wow, it could really happen like this”. I felt I needed to know what was being presented as “Truth”. The anti-Catholic rhetoric is oh so subtle, but it is there!
The last installment Glorious Appearing, is awful. The way the Second Coming is depicted made me want to cry…Jesus is not a peaceful being, in fact he is portrayed as vengeful, bloodthirsty and distant. Additionally, from a critical viewpoint, readers could have skipped the prior 3-4 books :bible1: and used this Book instead .Jerry Jenkins and Tim LeHaye have gotten a lot of mileage out of one passage taken out of context and a totally warped interpretation of the book of Revelation (in my humble opinion as a literary consumer), not counting the movie versions .

As a Catholic, I don’t discount some type of rapture, or even begin to pretend to know when and how the end will come. I just know who will come and that I want to be ready when He does. That’s all that really matters to me.

Maranatha!

 

[Kinsman]

LuigiColetta:

What you write is true, and the Church doesn’t teach contrary to this, but the problem is the term “Rapture” by itself. In these last few generations, and especially now, the term has been corrupted.

I disagree with our analysis that the term has been corrupted. Based on what I’ve read on this thread, all of you are only familiar with this term based on a novel called “Left Behind.” That’s like saying we believe in Christ based on a novel written about Him last year.

You will get some catholics to be totally against the term “Rapture” because of its current implications of a private Rapture. The problem lies in the teaching of the “Rapture” weather it is consistent with the written Word of God and the Word of God that was passed on orally that we are supposed to keep intact as well.

The doctrine is rooted in the Premillennial eschatological view. It is well documented that the dominant view of the Church was Premillennial. That Christ would bodily return to this earth and subsequently set up His Kingdom, ruling over Israel and the Gentile nations from literal Jerusalem for one thousand years. Justin Martyr writes, “But I and whatsoever Christians are orthodox in all things do know that there will be a resurrection of the flesh, and a thousand years in the city of Jerusalem, built, adorned and enlarged, according as Ezekiel, Isaiah, and other prophets have promised…”

For at least the first three hundred years the Premillennialists were considered the orthodox believers, until Romanism adopted the non-literal view of the Kingdom presented by Augustine, who in his literary work, The City of God, envisioned a universal Christian empire. This had vast influence in molding opinion favorable to a universal church hierarchy under one Head, and Premillennialism was suppressed.

But based on the Scriptures, Christ will return to set up His literal, Messianic, Kingdom on this present earth for a 1000 years. It’s not Scripture that changed, but the teachings of men. Premillennialism has risen again because men have gone back to study the Scriptures rather than just accept the traditions of men. The doctrine of the Rapture has come about as a result of that study.

 

[parishminister]

Point is, many people will read the Left Behind series of novels and accept that this depiction of “end times” is true. The authors did not merely set out to write a novelization of their dearly held doctine of the Rapture, but to use it as an evangelization tool…to bring people to Christ before it’s too late and they get “left behind”. Many of us on this forum have not had much chance to study ecclesial escathology in great detail, and some maybe not at all. Their (name removed by moderator)ut and opinions are no less valuable, just because they state simply and from the heart, what their beliefs are. You obviously hold very strong, well-educated positions on this topic and congratulations for being a good student. Education is never wasted. Neither is charity.

Peace…

 

[Kinsman]

Parishminister:

Point is, many people will read the Left Behind series of novels and accept that this depiction of “end times” is true. The authors did not merely set out to write a novelization of their dearly held doctine of the Rapture, but to use it as an evangelization tool…to bring people to Christ before it’s too late and they get “left behind”.

What kind of problem would you have with people turning from unbelief in Jesus Christ to belief in Him for the forgiveness of sins and the free gift of eternal life?

Although in reality, no one can be saved out of fear that they’ll be “left behind.” That’s not the content of salvation faith. The blessed hope of being caught up to meet the Lord in the air and be with Him forever is for those who have already personally received Christ as Savior and Lord - not for those who simply fear they’ll be left behind. The message of the cross, the historical fact of Christ’s substitutionary sacrifice on behalf of all sinful men, is the message for the unsaved that they may turn from their unbelief to belief (Jn. 20:27; 1 Cor. 15:1-8). The Biblical hope of the Rapture, however, is addressed to the saved since only true believers will experience it.

Many of us on this forum have not had much chance to study ecclesial escathology in great detail, and some maybe not at all. Their (name removed by moderator)ut and opinions are no less valuable, just because they state simply and from the heart, what their beliefs are.

What I tried to point out in my previous message is that the doctrine of the Rapture does not originate from a series of stories written by men, but the inspired, written Word of God. Certainly one may have opinions about a novel they’ve read, but one must not form opinions about a Biblical doctrine based on an extrabiblical source. Nor is it fair to express one’s opinion if he or she has not actually studied the Bible in regards to the doctrine in question. Is that not fair?

 

[LuigiColetta]

Based on what I’ve read on this thread, all of you are only familiar with this term based on a novel called “Left Behind.” That’s like saying we believe in Christ based on a novel written about Him last year.

I don’t think you can imply this statement based on what I wrote in this thread.

The “Left Behind” series is one of the many ways people are corrupting the truth to serve their father. Our Father gives us the truth, uncomprimised, unchanged, free from error guided by the Holy Spirit, true yesterday, today and tomorrow…

The doctrine is rooted in the Premillennial eschatological view. It is well documented that the dominant view of the Church was Premillennial. That Christ would bodily return to this earth and subsequently set up His Kingdom, ruling over Israel and the Gentile nations from literal Jerusalem for one thousand years. Justin Martyr writes, "But I and whatsoever Christians are orthodox in all things do know that there will be a resurrection of the flesh, and a thousand years in the city of Jerusalem, built, adorned and enlarged, according as Ezekiel, Isaiah, and other prophets have promised…
For at least the first three hundred years the Premillennialists were considered the orthodox believers, until Romanism adopted the non-literal view of the Kingdom presented by Augustine, who in his literary work, The City of God, envisioned a universal Christian empire. This had vast influence in molding opinion favorable to a universal church hierarchy under one Head, and Premillennialism was suppressed. ."

This is your view. My view is that when false messiahs have come in Jesus’ name and private understanding of scripture caused chaos and illusion (as Eon the Breton, the Taborites, Thomas Muentzer, the Muensterites, Millerites, etc.) there the Church stood firm in truth…

continued next post…

 

[LuigiColetta]

But based on the Scriptures, Christ will return to set up His literal, Messianic, Kingdom on this present earth for a 1000 years. It’s not Scripture that changed, but the teachings of men. Premillennialism has risen again because men have gone back to study the Scriptures rather than just accept the traditions of men. The doctrine of the Rapture has come about as a result of that study."

This isn’t fully a true statement on a couple accounts. St. Justin Martyr had millenanian views, but he wrote himself that many christians of his time disagreed with his position. Read Dialog with Trypho. (others like Papias, a second century bishop, St. Irenaeus, and Tertullian (who eventually joined the Montanism movement which was a schismatic movementa sect that taught the kingdom of God was going to descend physically from heaven to the region of Phrygia in Asia Minor and which the church later condemned for various reasons
Furthermore, the reigning of a “thousand years” was viewed by some physically as you mentioned, but by others spiritually - two very distinct scenarios.
Some other christians would insist that not all these writers were truly millenarian., arguing that some were speaking/writing more figuratively then literally, and that although they believed in a millenia “golden age” didn’t believe Jesus would rule the world visibly.
The “thousand years” has been debated as well, to literally mean 1000 years, or a long time, as any person that reads the Holy Scriptures often knows that 1000 is a very symbolic number (12x12x1000, etc.)

to continue in next post…

 

[LuigiColetta]

To go back to the main topic of the Rapture…The rapture exists,the rapture will happen, but it won’t be a private rapture. To preach this doctrine is going against the written Word of God and the Word passed down orally, and the Word of God the Holy Spirit keeps pure. It is very difficult to explain how a private rapture makes sense with the direct words of Jesus in Mark 13:26-27 and Matthew 23:30-31. Following these verses in Matthews, Jesus give examples to how one would know the time of His coming and the action of His people. The fig tree, the faithful and unfaithful, ten virgins, ten talents…then…He will sit upon His throne and all the nations will sit before Him. He will seperate the sheeps (His saints which did good deeds) and the goats (companions of the Devil in the Eternal Fire which didn’t do good deeds)

I choose to believe, not the teaching of men, but rather the teaching of Jesus, His body the Church…
I believe that “He (JESUS) will come again after the great tribulation in glory as He had ascended, in a cloud. During this descension, the trumpet will sound, the angels will call His elect (the dead first, then the elected saints who are alive 1 Thes. 4:16-18,) He will sit in His throne to judge the living and the dead…and His Kingdom will have NO END!!!”
“Marana tha!!!”

May the Lord bless your mind, lips and heart.
Your brother in the Christ Jesus,
Luigi

 

[Kinsman]

LuigiColetta:

This isn’t fully a true statement on a couple accounts. St. Justin Martyr had millenanian views, but he wrote himself that many christians of his time disagreed with his position. Read Dialog with Trypho.

My quote is from Dialog with Trypho. I quoted him because (1) he specifically mentions the 1000 years, (2) that the Millennarian view was considered orthodox at the time, (3) he’s a close link to the Apostolic age. Yes, he definitely states that many did not share his opinion but, nevertheless, considered the Millennial view as orthodox and linked it to Apostolic teaching. Barnabas expressly taught a pre-millennial reign of Christ on earth and even presented the “Millennial-sabbath” theory. Papias entertained some quaint and extravagant notions of the happiness of the future, Millennial reign and appealed also to Apostolic tradition. Irenaeus taught, based on tradition from the Apostle John and his disciples, that after the destruction of the Roman empire, and the brief raging of antichrist (lasting 1260 days, or, three and one-half years) Christ will visible appear, bind Satan, reign from the earthly, rebuilt city of Jerusalem during the Millenium, followed by a temporary liberation of Satan, final victory, a general resurrection, judgment of the world, and finally the consummation of the new heaven and new earth. Tertullian was himself an enthusiastic Millenarian. Millenarianism was mostly opposed by Origin and the school of Alexandria, notorious for its allegorical approach to interpreting the Scriptures. It wasn’t until the time of Constantine and Augustin that Millenarianism took its place among the heresies. Subsequently the church of Rome adopted Augustinian Amillennialism (i.e., no literal, earthly, 1000 year reign of Christ on earth). But the claim that this idea is rooted in “Apostolic tradition” must be rendered false.

 

[Kinsman]

LuigiColletta:

The rapture exists,the rapture will happen…It is very difficult to explain how a private rapture makes sense with the direct words of Jesus in Mark 13:26-27 and Matthew 24:30-31.

In the early Church (by this I don’t mean the Roman or Latin Church) Millenarianism (or, Chiliasm) was not a doctrine embodied in any creed or form of devotion, but it was widely the current opinion of that day’s distinguished teachers. Nevertheless, for an accurate understanding of what God has revealed concerning this doctrine, and the events surrounding it, we must turn to the Scriptures themselves, and by these Scriptures the opinions of men must be tested. Eschatology had never been a serious Biblical study until recently. Maybe because of what was said to Daniel in his prophetic word: "Go your way Daniel, for these words are concealed and sealed up until the end time" (Dan. 12:9).

You yourself admit that the doctrine of a rapture is Biblical. However, you place it at the time of Christ’s return to this earth, referencing the Matthew and Mark passages above which describe conditions on this earth just prior to His reappearance at the end of the age. But the fact that no rapture is mentioned within the context of these passages should give you a clue that the rapture of the saints does not take place at that time.

In fact, Matthew explicitly puts the events described in chapters 24 and 25 a Jewish context: (1) Jesus says in Matt. 24:14 that the “gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world for a witness to all the nations and then the end shall come (i.e., the end of the age, Gr. aion - not the end of this present world system, Gr. cosmos, vs. 3). Jesus was born “King of the Jews” (Matt. 2:2), rightful heir to the Davidic throne and Kingdom (see, Lk. 1:32-33). It is the message of the nearness of this, earthly, Messianic Kingdom, promised by divine covenant, that will be preached throughout the world at that time; (2) the Abomination of Desolation standing in the “Holy Place” refers to a rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem (vs. 15) and, (3) Christ instructs those who are in Judea to flee to the mountains (vs. 16). Obviously none of this has anything to do with believers today who make up the “Body of Christ” during this Church age and who live all over the world; (4) He goes on to say that "there will be a great tribulation which has not occurred since the beginning of the world, nor ever shall” (vs. 21). This being in direct reference to what was written by the Hebrew prophet Joel (and other O.T. prophets as well) in reference to the *“Day of the Lord” *(Joel 2:1-2, 11, 31; 3:14), and what the Apostle Paul calls “the wrath to come.” A “wrath,” Paul says, Jesus “delivers us from” (1 Thess. 1:10; 5:9). Hence, the Rapture must take place before the “Day of the Lord” occurs. Continued…

 

[Kinsman]

Exegetically the gathering together of Christ’s “elect” in Matt. 24:31 has no reference at all to the Rapture of believers during this Church age. There is no mention of a general resurrection at this time, nor a translation of living saints, which is how the Rapture is described. The*“elect” *in this context (and context always determines the meaning of a word) are the believing Jewish remnant who survived the great Tribulation (24:21; 29). Christ has returned to set up His Messianic Kingdom and this involves national Israel (ref. Acts 15:16-18; Rom.11:25-29). Subsequently, when He sits upon His glorious throne He gathers all the Gentile nations before Him, separates the sheep (believers) from the goats (unbelievers). Believers are ushered into the Kingdom, unbelievers are cast off (Matt. 25:31-40). But these believers are ushered in not with glorified bodies, but as mortals.

Augustinian Amillennialism asserts without any Biblical authority that God is finished, forever, with national Israel and spiritualizes the Kingdom. But this is far from the truth according to God’s literal, prophetic Word. Jesus was born King of the Jews (Matt. 2:2) and as their King He will return and reign over Israel and the Gentile nations from Jerusalem, according to His literal Word (see. Zech. 14:9, 16).

The “thousand years” has been debated as well, to literally mean 1000 years, or a long time, as any person that reads the Holy Scriptures often knows that 1000 is a very symbolic number (12x12x1000, etc.)

The context always determines whether or not it is used symbolically. In Rev. 20 it is used six times and definitely not symbolically. The only ones who reject its literalness here are those who approach the text already rejecting a literal, earthly, Millennial Kingdom.

 

[Oska2]

I know that the RAPTURE is a protestant thing about the end times.

I guess my question is that is the Rapture mentioned in the Bible?
and where do I find scriptures regarding this subject.

I researched and found out the following.
Luke:17:26-27: And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
Luke:17:28-29: Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.

Luke:17:30: Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

Luke:17:34-36: I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
Luke:17:37: And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord? And he said unto them, Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together.

Jesus talked about a time of secret separation. Even His disciples did not understand, and when they questioned him, He gave an answer that most likely was not fully understood

The passages below shows a different scenario.
Matt:25:31: When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
Matt:25:32: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
Matt:25:33: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.