The Rapture

[sauce]

John’s revelation is about the end of the world, and about the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70, and about Nero, and about the Mass. This is not an either/or situation. And all the current state of Israel has in common with the Israel of the OT is a name. The Kingdom has been restored for a long time. It was the reason for the baptism of Jesus. It was the reason for the 12. The restoration of Israel came with the establishment of the Church.

Have you been studying with Scott Hawn? He’s out there in Steubenville teaching at the Franciscan university out there, University of Steubenville. As soon as you mention the Mass, it all clicks in. The Mass is heaven on earth. His teaching on Revelation is available in a series called: “THE END.” It’s hard to keep up with him, he moves very quickly and covers all the territory.

 

[ryanoneil]

Yes, the 12 Apostles … representing the 12 tribes. Nonetheless, we are discussing John’s Revelation … in 80-90’s AD. Are you suggesting that the majority of his Vision was just an explanation of PRIOR events ? The Early Church didn’t view it this way … why should we ?

If you date the book between 80-90, the majority of the visions are explanations of prior events. Daniel wrote after the fact as well. Please prove that the early Church didn’t view it that way.

 

[CWBetts]

Have you been studying with Scott Hawn? He’s out there in Steubenville teaching at the Franciscan university out there, University of Steubenville. As soon as you mention the Mass, it all clicks in. The Mass is heaven on earth. His teaching on Revelation is available in a series called: “THE END.” It’s hard to keep up with him, he moves very quickly and covers all the territory.

I have read The Lamb’s Supper, but I have yet to take a class from Dr. Hahn. Another professor, Dr. John Bergsma, provided the information regarding the Church as the full restoration of Israel.

 

[sauce]

I have read The Lamb’s Supper, but I have yet to take a class from Dr. Hahn. Another professor, Dr. John Bergsma, provided the information regarding the Church as the full restoration of Israel.

A priest I know took a bible study in his basement. Said he was great.
His series on THE END is quite different. Lots of historical backup is used.
He wouldn’t be agreeing with modern rapture theories. I think he approaches Revelation as a love letter to the Church.

Thank you for responding.

 

[JustaServant]

The problem with the ‘rapture’ is not what people believe about the ‘catching away’, it’s what they believe about those ‘left behind’. There is a strange and sick satisfaction people have in ‘knowing’ those ‘not like us’ are going to be tortured for seven years. It gives them a feeling of ‘justice’.
It reflects a lack of compassion, hope, and love. It feeds into a person’s bitterness toward others. In dehumanizing them with the curse of “They’re going to be left behind,” it relieves them of any responsibility.

 

[CWBetts]

The problem with the ‘rapture’ is not what people believe about the ‘catching away’, it’s what they believe about those ‘left behind’. There is a strange and sick satisfaction people have in ‘knowing’ those ‘not like us’ are going to be tortured for seven years. It gives them a feeling of ‘justice’.
It reflects a lack of compassion, hope, and love. It feeds into a person’s bitterness toward others. In dehumanizing them with the curse of “They’re going to be left behind,” it relieves them of any responsibility.

Another problem is that for a pre or mid tribulation rapture, they have to discard what Jesus says about the resurrection of the dead in John 6: the resurrection is clearly stated to happen on the last day, not 7 years before the last day

 

[crazzeto]

So did anyone respond to my question about multiple resurrections? I saw the OP make that claim, but if he responded to my request for scripture which supports that claim I must have missed it.

 

[mgoforth]

Two contributers to this thread have inspired me to write my first post on CAF.

Louemma,

Thank you for not only raising this interesting topic, but also for sticking with that original topic (a rarity on any internet forum). I’m really struck by the way you seem to be approaching this forum and its members with respect and a genuine hunger for the truth. I regret that not all Catholics present a unified front, but unfortunately that is the imperfect nature of humanity. I’m especially sorry if some of their responses have indicated that since you are not Catholic (with a big C) you will not go to heaven. It is my understanding that this is not consistent with official Catholic dogma.

On the other hand, as I have committed myself to the belief that the Catholic Church and its teachings contain the Fullness of Truth, I pray that in time you will re-join the original Christian community from which, through no fault of your own (I’m assuming you were not born and baptized into the Catholic Church), you have become separated. I was baptized as a child into the Methodist church, but I’ve been called “back” to communion with the successors of St Peter that CentralFLJames has repeatedly referenced. CFJ is the other inspiration for my post, BTW.

CFJ seems to have presented his responses in keeping with Catholic tradition, and I like the way he takes care to identify which ideas are his personal thoughts and which are explicit teachings of the Church. As I read the dialogue between you and CFJ, there are agreements and disagreements in interpretation of scripture and fortunately for this thread, both of you have managed to stay fairly consistent in your respective interpretations. No Catholic, I hope, would argue with you, Louemma, when you say that the Bible is the divinely inspired Word of God because we also hold that belief.

However, the argument that CFJ has made several times which I would like to reiterate, is that the interpretation is, at times, vastly different between Catholic and Protestant and our interpretation is handed down to us through the Apostolic Tradition. Not only do many Protestants operate in a mindset that Catholics refer to as “sola scriptura”, but they often take it a step further and practice SOLO sola scriptura. What I mean by that is, you are 1) not taking advantage of the past 2000 years of direct oral and sacramental heritage (not to mention research, studying, praying and personal revelations) that Catholics refer to as our Apostolic Tradition. And not only that, but 2) since Protestants, by definition, do not choose to acknowledge many parts of the Apostolic heritage and hence cannot draw on it as a valuable resource, their denominations often advise each average lay person to seek out a personal interpretation of scripture that has meaning for them. With no offense intended at all I call this the Burger King approach (“Have it your way”) and it is strongly discouraged in the Catholic Church on MOST issues. Why? Because the Church leadership has always believed that is a dangerous way to operate. When the Catholic Church encourages me to study scripture, they do NOT mean go off and put my own personal spin on what I’m reading. That’s especially tempting with anything symbolic like Revelations, but the Church is very clear that THEY (meaning the leaders and ECFs) have already agreed on an interpretation. It is my job as a layperson to understand THAT interpretation as fully as I can through study.

And the good news is that as a Catholic, I have it fairly easy in one sense. I can draw on a Tradition of Apostolic succession which has spent over 2000 years going over Scripture (and the Tradition itself) with a fine-tooth comb, deeping the understanding of that Scripture, and to which some of the greatest minds in history have applied themselves. The ECFs have already done SO MUCH of the thinking for me, and I get to stand on the shoulders of giants and try to comprehend the way THEY interpretted the passages you’re quoting in this thread. This is perhaps the reason you have unfortunately received some sarcastic replies from Catholics when you say “everyone should know that Paul really meant this or that”. Sarcasm is not the right response, but try to see the irony in what you’re saying from the Catholic viewpoint. It’s saying that your personal studies on the subject of eschatology, which are obviously devout but also obviously limited by your own experiences, come closer to the bullseye than 2000 years of collective wisdom in the Church.

With all that said, I would encourage you to read the Catechism of the Catholic Church side by side with any passages you want to learn more about. The CCC is a great start for understanding the Tradition that is meant to be an equal complement to Scripture.

Good luck and God bless you,

Marty

 

[brb2]

If you date the book between 80-90, the majority of the visions are explanations of prior events. Daniel wrote after the fact as well. Please prove that the early Church didn’t view it that way.

Hello … its time for a reality check

Rev. 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants WHAT MUST SOON TAKE PLACE … Rev. 4:1 After this I looked, an lo, in heaven an open door! And this first voice, which I had heard speaking to me like a trumpet, said, “Come up hither, and I will show you what MUST TAKE PLACE AFTER THIS.”

Chapter 11 … Past or present ? Chp. 13 - 22 … What parts are past / fullfilled prophesy ? Majority of Rev. … explanations of prior events you say ? I :dts:

And, yes the Early Church believed it prophesy of FUTURE events. That is very clear.

Certainly Daniel spoke of both past and future events. But, his future events were Sealed Up … until the End Times, when they could be understood. If his prophesies were not for the Future, and understood by you … please give us Christ’s Rapture date. Its easy to take potshots @ Sir Isaac … he was a great brain, and we own him much respect and admiration.

 

[onenow1]

Another problem is that for a pre or mid tribulation rapture, they have to discard what Jesus says about the resurrection of the dead in John 6: the resurrection is clearly stated to happen on the last day, not 7 years before the last day

Here’s more problems.

John 6: 39, and this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up at the last day.

John 6: 54, he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day

John 11:24, Martha said to him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.”

John 12:.48, He who rejects me and does not receive my sayings has a judge; the word that I have spoken will be his judge on the last day.

No last last days in the above versesonly a last day.

Matt24:37, As were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of man."

38 For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark,

39 and they did not know until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of man.

40 Then two men will be in the field; one is taken and one is left.

41 Two women will be grinding at the mill; one is taken and one is left.

42 Watch therefore, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming.

43 But know this, that if the householder had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would have watched and would not have let his house be broken into

Seems the taken didn’t make it only Noah and his family; same with Sodom and Gomorrah.

Peace, onenow1opcorn:

 

[brb2]

Here’s more problems.

John 6: 39, and this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up at the last day.

John 6: 54, he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day

John 11:24, Martha said to him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.”

John 12:.48, He who rejects me and does not receive my sayings has a judge; the word that I have spoken will be his judge on the last day.

Matt24:37, As were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of man."

38 For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark,

39 and they did not know until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of man.

40 Then two men will be in the field; one is taken and one is left.

41 Two women will be grinding at the mill; one is taken and one is left.

42 Watch therefore, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming.

43 But know this, that if the householder had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would have watched and would not have let his house be broken into

The ‘last day’ … would seem to indicate the last day of the Church on earth. All the above scriptures would fit into this understanding. The question is … whether the Rapture occurs before or at the final end of the Trib period.

"One taken [raptured up to Christ in Heavens above] … one LEFT BEHIND [on earth to face the Trib.] For the ones left behind … its not the ‘last day’ for them, it would appear. Well perhaps the ‘last day’ on a secular earth with the holy Church.

 

[onenow1]

The ‘last day’ … would seem to indicate the last day of the Church on earth. All the above scriptures would fit into this understanding. The question is … whether the Rapture occurs before or at the final end of the Trib period.

"One taken [raptured up to Christ in Heavens above] … one LEFT BEHIND [on earth to face the Trib.] For the ones left behind … its not the ‘last day’ for them, it would appear. Well perhaps the ‘last day’ on a secular earth with the holy Church.

Jesus likens the last day to the flood and Sodom, the taken died in the flood, the taken in Sodom died in fire. In the verses I posted never a mention of two events. Jesus reigns in His Church now in heaven and on earth He has conqured, the last day is the last day for all.

Peace and God Bless.

 

[crazzeto]

Just a few comments on an excellent post, since I’ve been on and off following this thread.

Two contributers to this thread have inspired me to write my first post on CAF.

Louemma,

Thank you for not only raising this interesting topic, but also for sticking with that original topic (a rarity on any internet forum). I’m really struck by the way you seem to be approaching this forum and its members with respect and a genuine hunger for the truth. I regret that not all Catholics present a unified front, but unfortunately that is the imperfect nature of humanity. I’m especially sorry if some of their responses have indicated that since you are not Catholic (with a big C) you will not go to heaven. It is my understanding that this is not consistent with official Catholic dogma.

Since it’s suggested here that some Catholics have tried suggesting that non-Catholics will not go to heaven I would like to Join Mary in my most sincere personal appologies for those suggestions. This is, in fact directly contrary to Church teaching, and I would like to take this oppertunity to remind any posters making this invalid claim of that fact, as well as to exhort them to go back and study what the Church really teaches regarding salvation.

Particularly with regard to our protestant brothers and sisters, I would like to say that the Church recognizes their baptisms (more than likly anyway, there are some exceptions where improper form is used) as valid and there for recognize them as being validly attached to the Body of Christ.

More over, it’s worth mentioning that we also teach that persons who are not exposed to Christ will automatically go to hell. So natives of some remote pacific island which has never seen a Christian mission is not automatically damned, and in fact further we as Catholics should be humble enough to admit that ultimatly God is the Judge.

<snip some good stuff on Sola/Solo scriptura>

And the good news is that as a Catholic, I have it fairly easy in one sense. I can draw on a Tradition of Apostolic succession which has spent over 2000 years going over Scripture (and the Tradition itself) with a fine-tooth comb, deeping the understanding of that Scripture, and to which some of the greatest minds in history have applied themselves. The ECFs have already done SO MUCH of the thinking for me, and I get to stand on the shoulders of giants and try to comprehend the way THEY interpretted the passages you’re quoting in this thread. This is perhaps the reason you have unfortunately received some sarcastic replies from Catholics when you say “everyone should know that Paul really meant this or that”. Sarcasm is not the right response, but try to see the irony in what you’re saying from the Catholic viewpoint. It’s saying that your personal studies on the subject of eschatology, which are obviously devout but also obviously limited by your own experiences, come closer to the bullseye than 2000 years of collective wisdom in the Church.

With all that said, I would encourage you to read the Catechism of the Catholic Church side by side with any passages you want to learn more about. The CCC is a great start for understanding the Tradition that is meant to be an equal complement to Scripture.

Good luck and God bless you,

Marty

I’m sure Marty already knows this, and probably wasn’t suggesting otherwise but I wanted to comment only because it’s possible to take other meaning from what’s posted here. But I do want to state clearly that the CC does not fully and completely define the bible. That is to say, there is no single reference in some database some where for each and every verse of the bible, or even passage/chapter etc. The Chruch does derive certain doctrinal beliefs from the bible, but out side of that there tends to be some leway as far as interpetations go provided you follow the model laid out for good scripture study.

One example for instance is the interpetation of “who is the wounded beast in rev 13”. Today it’s quite hip to suggest (in both scholarly and theological ciricles) that this is a reference to Nero, but having the notes in my Haydock edition Douay Rheims bible you find a who bunch of possiblities, one interesting one is Constantine, who was healed by Julian the Apostate.

Who does 666 refer to? Again it’s hip to say Nero, but St. Ireanus (I beleive) suggested that it should be the numeric name in the Greek, in which case there are very very many possibilities. Revelation in particular is a book not defined in absolute terms by the Chruch, however the Church does provide us a very solid foundation for starting a study of the book.

Personally, I beleive Revelation is in essense, Salvation History passing before our eyes. I.e. a snapshot of the whole of salvation history starting with the fall of the serpant, through the Garden => exodus => Israelie Kingdom finally to the victory of the Lamb over the serpant and ending with… The End, i.e. the second comming. Unfortunetly since the Lamb of God hasn’t come again a second time we lack, I beleive a certain basis for fully understanding the story.

At least that’s my own take

 

[davidhansom123]

I was wondering.What do catholics think about children during the tribulation.Do u think that god will make u choose between salvation or having to protect your children.I was just wondering because i have 3 young children and i am really concerned.

 

[CentralFLJames]

I was wondering.What do catholics think about children during the tribulation.Do u think that god will make u choose between salvation or having to protect your children.I was just wondering because i have 3 young children and i am really concerned.

There is no specific teaching here on tribulation. But the general Catholic belief is that God will never permit us to be tempted beyond our strength to resist and fall into despair. We can be assured that He will give those faithful in the times of tribulation a superabundance of grace to persevere and to suffer whatever must be endured. All Christians are called to lay down their lives for Christ if so called to. That is not a thing to fear and is an opportunity to attain a high heavenly reward. Protection of one’s children is God’s providence. During the tribulation some parents may find it a better thing for God to take their children early on to save them a prolonged suffering and as complete innocents facing the horrors that will be unleashed. Many Christians will die and their suffering will benefit the Church and help bring non-believers into repentance through common human empathy and inspiration of their steadfastness. We read of this a lot in the early Church were Roman soldiers who were assigned to torturing Catholics converted when they saw their bravery and their faith and elected to suffer the same fate with their captors.

We facing this horror already in the form of abortion on the innocents who are the most defenseless and innocent in the human race. They die for us and few come to their aid. Many area already choosing the evil culture of death over the culture of life. The scenario you are worried about is already in motion to the tune of 10-20 million new terminated babies a year on the secular altar of freedom.

James

 

[mgoforth]

I’m sure Marty already knows this, and probably wasn’t suggesting otherwise but I wanted to comment only because it’s possible to take other meaning from what’s posted here. But I do want to state clearly that the CC does not fully and completely define the bible. That is to say, there is no single reference in some database some where for each and every verse of the bible, or even passage/chapter etc. The Chruch does derive certain doctrinal beliefs from the bible, but out side of that there tends to be some leway as far as interpetations go provided you follow the model laid out for good scripture study…

At least that’s my own take

Yes, I would agree with that. The Catechism is a good starting point and is my primary reference if I have a doctrinal question, but it is not a verse-by-verse interpretation. I think crazzeto says it well…there is some wiggle room allowed by the Church when interpretting certain parts of the Bible as long as the interpretation doesn’t violate any other explicit Church teachings. So rather than going at it sola scriptura, we have a guide to make sure we get the major points correct.

 

[crazzeto]

I was wondering.What do catholics think about children during the tribulation.Do u think that god will make u choose between salvation or having to protect your children.I was just wondering because i have 3 young children and i am really concerned.

I like CFL’s answer, but I’ll add just one more note. Ultimiatly if you really love your childeren, then you will worry more about their soul than anything else. I can assure you this is God’s mentality as well, so by choosing to protect your childs soul, you’re offering them the best protection that can be afforded. Make sense?

 

[Louemma]

For those of you who have been with this thread from the start must realize that God certainly works in mysterious ways.For instance,let’s look at the amount of veiws this thread has had.Receiving a three star rating.
Now when I started the thread I had assumed that all Christians were aware of the Rapture.I soon found out that the word Rapture was associated with the Left Behind series and most here believed it to be a new and false teaching.So to lessen the confusion I switched to the word Paul used which is “The Catching Away”! With the use of the word Catching Away I still had die hard Catholics and a couple of Protestants call the Catching away a new and false teaching.One poster called it Fortune telling another stated it came from a woman who was a seer(witch)
Alas I stood firm on the word of God patiently trying to show the ones here that are closed minded where the word of God teaches on the Catching Away.After much explaining some finally understood that the Rapture the Bible speaks of is not a new or a false teaching.
So I feel like the subject of the Catching away may have opened up some to the understanding of The Catching Away and this is a true teaching straight out of God’s word.For those who see it as a Left Behind Movie then shame on you for confusing God’s word with an Holly Wood movie and shame on those who claim it to be a false and new teaching.
The time may or may not be at hand but as Jesus tells us in his word to look for the signs and lift up our eyes and know that our redeemer is near.
So maybe the subject of the Rapture has brought new understanding to those who believe “They Know It All” in God’s word.We all need to keep an open mind and we need to continue to let the Holy Spirit teach us in the word of God.When folks become puffed up,believing they know God’s word better then others,watch out because the narrow minded folks will not be able to continue to grow in God’s word for the Holy Spirit can not teach a prideful know it all.
I hope the catching away has enlightened some on the wonder of God’s word and how and whom he reveals to those who are willing to accept the truth.
At the least the Catching Away has been exposed as the true word of God and not a new or false teaching.

 

[ryanoneil]

Hello … its time for a reality check

Rev. 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants WHAT MUST SOON TAKE PLACE … Rev. 4:1 After this I looked, an lo, in heaven an open door! And this first voice, which I had heard speaking to me like a trumpet, said, “Come up hither, and I will show you what MUST TAKE PLACE AFTER THIS.”

So it was written before 70 AD or was meant to appear that way. Daniel wrote about Antiochus as though he was hundreds of years in the future, even though it already happened.

The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him, to show his servants what must happen soon. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John (Rev 1:1)

“Soon” does not only equal 2,000 years in the future.

Chapter 11 … Past or present ? Chp. 13 - 22 … What parts are past / fullfilled prophesy ? Majority of Rev. … explanations of prior events you say ? I :dts:

All of it was fulfilled in the past except Rev 20:7 and later. History certainly could repeat itself in verses 20:8-10 but it might not.

And, yes the Early Church believed it prophesy of FUTURE events. That is very clear.

Of course, but they understood it in relation to what had been fulfilled.

Certainly Daniel spoke of both past and future events. But, his future events were Sealed Up … until the End Times, when they could be understood. If his prophesies were not for the Future, and understood by you … please give us Christ’s Rapture date. Its easy to take potshots @ Sir Isaac … he was a great brain, and we own him much respect and admiration.

The End Times of Daniel concerns the Coming of the Messiah and the establishment of His kingdom.

(Dan 7:13-14) for example, talk about Christ Ascending to heaven in 32 AD.

What part of Daniel talks about Rapture dates, in your opinion?

 

[CWBetts]

For those of you who have been with this thread from the start must realize that God certainly works in mysterious ways.For instance,let’s look at the amount of veiws this thread has had.Receiving a three star rating.
Now when I started the thread I had assumed that all Christians were aware of the Rapture.I soon found out that the word Rapture was associated with the Left Behind series and most here believed it to be a new and false teaching.So to lessen the confusion I switched to the word Paul used which is “The Catching Away”! With the use of the word Catching Away I still had die hard Catholics and a couple of Protestants call the Catching away a new and false teaching.One poster called it Fortune telling another stated it came from a woman who was a seer(witch)
Alas I stood firm on the word of God patiently trying to show the ones here that are closed minded where the word of God teaches on the Catching Away.After much explaining some finally understood that the Rapture the Bible speaks of is not a new or a false teaching.
So I feel like the subject of the Catching away may have opened up some to the understanding of The Catching Away and this is a true teaching straight out of God’s word.For those who see it as a Left Behind Movie then shame on you for confusing God’s word with an Holly Wood movie and shame on those who claim it to be a false and new teaching.
The time may or may not be at hand but as Jesus tells us in his word to look for the signs and lift up our eyes and know that our redeemer is near.
So maybe the subject of the Rapture has brought new understanding to those who believe “They Know It All” in God’s word.We all need to keep an open mind and we need to continue to let the Holy Spirit teach us in the word of God.When folks become puffed up,believing they know God’s word better then others,watch out because the narrow minded folks will not be able to continue to grow in God’s word for the Holy Spirit can not teach a prideful know it all.
I hope the catching away has enlightened some on the wonder of God’s word and how and whom he reveals to those who are willing to accept the truth.
At the least the Catching Away has been exposed as the true word of God and not a new or false teaching.

The “Catching Away” as you call it, is true insomuch as when Jesus returns, the faithful will meet him to accompany him to earth in preparation for the final battle of Armageddon and the descent of the New Jerusalem