It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The truth behind "THE RAPTURE"

page: 2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in


posted on May, 22 2008 @ 10:38 AM

Originally posted by Locoman8
The idea of a Pre-trib or Mid-trib rapture never existed until the 19th century.

Not true.
There is a something written by Pseudo-Ephraem (c. 374-627):

All the saints and elect of God are gathered together before the tribulation, which is to come, and are taken to the Lord, in order that they may not see at any time the confusion which overwhelms the world because of our sins.

from here: Pseudo-Ephraem

I do commend your call upon orthodox Christianity, however. This is right in my opinion. But the above quote IS part of Orthodox Christianity, and that makes the "never mentioned until the 19th Century" argument invalid.

Again, I'm no fan of novel ideas. I want my faith to be the same faith as was once delivered unto the Saints:

Jude 3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

Here is a short article that explains the Necessity of an Interval between the Rapture and the 2nd Coming

I do agree with you that the next (extended) phase/age will be the 1000 years of Christ's reign upon the Earth. But there is a marriage (and supper?) described in Revelation as well as Matt 25. Some (myself included) think this marriage supper/feast will be during the tribulation (3 1/2 or 7 years) and that this takes place before Christ's return.

John 14:2-3 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

Again, here is another short article describing the weeding feast and the tribulation

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 10:54 AM

Originally posted by Locoman8
Now as for your take on matthew 29-31, you claim it's not in chronological order, but you fail to realize the word association between the verses.

But I did not claim it WASN'T in chronological order. I only said that

there is no CLEAR words of chronology in verse 31.

That is a fairly big distinction, isn't it? I went on to say that Mark 13 DOES use clear words (in the parallel passage). My point still stands: Matt 24:31 does NOT use CLEAR words of chronology. It may be chronological, but that is an assumption that is not supported by the immediate text (the verse itself).

I still maintain the fact that Matt 24 is not entirely chronological, for verse 32 goes right back to the start again, doesn't it? Verse 37 will happen BEFORE 31, won't it? That's the point I'm trying to make.

That alone defeats your argument on the order of the Olivet Prophecy being mixed in non-chronological order.

The Olivet Discourse includes ALL of Matt 24, not just the 3 verses we are discussing. If you agree with me that verse 37 happens (in time...chronologically) before verse 31, then the Olivet Discourse is NOT completely chronological.

Can we agree on that?

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 11:10 AM

Originally posted by Locoman8
Luke 21:28 is a misunderstanding by your part. When these things begin to come to pass, your redemption draws nigh... "nigh" means "near" which means man's time of rule will be cut short for the "elects sake" otherwise no man would survive the wars they start. 3 1/2 years is a very short time. So when the tribulation starts, if you are saved, your redemption will draw near.

Using your definition of "nigh" (that it equals 3 1/2 years), here are 3 other verses in the same chapter:

Luke 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is 3 1/2 years away.

Luke 21:30 When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now 3 1/2 years away at hand.

Luke 21:31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is 3 1/2 years away at hand.

"Nigh" does not mean 3 1/2 years away. There is nothing in the context of this passage to support such a definition. "Nigh" means near...imminent...very close.

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 11:53 AM
reply to post by PreTribGuy

First off, the course of the olivet prophecy beyond verse 31 speaks of parables and is not tied as a literal part of the prophecy. Jesus simply explains the fact that if you are blind and drunk in those times, that the return of the King will come like a thief in the night. Beyond that, the entire course of Matthew 24 is in order.

Next, about calling "nigh" the same as 3 1/2 years, you are putting words in my mouth. Nigh simply means near. I just made the similarity in 3 1/2 years being a very short time. The person that was directed to claimed that the word "nigh" meant a "pre-tribulation" rapture and he used that passage as his evidence. Your proof on the 19th century deal is correct.... however, it was not a very popular belief until the 19th century. I should have specified that fact. Also, note that the early apostles didn't believe in a pre-trib rapture. I am not one to argue and bicker on matters like this and if you choose to believe it or not is your choice. Either way, if it's true or not, pre or post-trib, you should always be ready. Pre-trib would escape all these things and post-trib would be protected from God's wrath. Either way, you need to be ready. I still maintain that Jesus said it clear as day that "After the tribulation of those days" he would gather "His Elect".

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 12:26 PM

Originally posted by Locoman8
Your proof on the 19th century deal is correct.... however, it was not a very popular belief until the 19th century. I should have specified that fact. Also, note that the early apostles didn't believe in a pre-trib rapture.

I don't understand how you can say "the early apostles didn't believe in a Pre-Trib rapture"? Do you have any scriptural proof of this?

Both Paul and Peter predicted their own demise, so they KNEW they weren't going to live until the rapture. Furthermore, Jesus said:

Matt 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

The early Church fathers were probably aware of this verse and saw no "impending end", because the Gospel hadn't been preached throughout the world, yet.

There were plenty of reasons (scriptural) why nobody taught at great length about was because certain prophecies had to be fulfilled BEFORE the end would come, and they hadn't been fullfilled yet:

2 Thess 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

As the Church age progressed, one by one, the end-time prophecies began to be fulfilled. NOW..the only prophecy left is that the Anti-Christ is to be revealed.

I think the recent (100-200 years or so) surge of teaching on eschatology is the result of people noting that the end is coming. Prior to that, people didn't worry about it because it didn't apply to them.

My own example...made up...from say, 1750AD, "Hey friend, have you been studying about the end time?" "WHY? Israel isn't a nation and they need to be a nation in order for the end to come."

This is why, I believe, Jesus told us to learn the parable of the fig tree in Matt 24. It is told so that when the leaves start coming out...then things are going to happen. Put another way: No end is near.

One single prophecy alone makes the tribulation impossible before, say, the early 1900's:
Rev 11:9-10 And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves.
10 And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth.

Prior to the 1900's, the idea that the whole earth could "see these witnesses bodies in the streets" was impossible. TV changed that.

I just don't think a lot of pastors/teachers looked really hard into eschatology prior to the past couple hundred years because there weren't any signs of the end coming yet.

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 04:10 PM

Originally posted by Locoman8
I still maintain that Jesus said it clear as day that "After the tribulation of those days" he would gather "His Elect".

After studying this most of the morning and doing some research, I am wondering "Who" the "ELECT" are?

While clearly Matt 24 deals with the tribulation, some verses are clearly for/about the Jews ONLY. Verse 20, for example.

If "the elect" are the Jews (only), then this verse does not preclude a pre-trib rapture of the Church.

Furthermore, this gathering of the elect is described in such a way that we know "where they are being gathered FROM", but not where they are gathered TO. There is no indication this is a "rapture".

The Old Testament describes the JEWS as the elect:
Isa 65:9 And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob, and out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains: and mine elect shall inherit it, and my servants shall dwell there

Another set of verses, in the NT:
Romans 11:25-28 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.

These verses, from Romans, are quite interesting. We have three parts: "the fullness of the Gentiles", "ALL Israel shall be saved" and a description of the Jews as being "the ELECTION" (as opposed to the Gentiles).

1. "fullness of Gentiles"
Interestingly, this same type of thought is in Luke 21:24:
And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

2. "all Israel shall be saved" and "ELECTion"
Matt 24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

It sounds to me like "the Elect" is specifically Jews?

This shouldn't surprise me, though. The entire tribulation week (70th week) is a week of punishment of the JEWS that is yet to be fullfilled:
Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy (Note: Jews) people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 06:36 PM
The question of who the "elect" are is a good question.

The Greek word translated into "elect" is Eklektos. It simply means chosen.

The Jews are God's Chosen People, so yes, they are a group of "elect". *there are different groups*

The angels are ALSO "elect". God has chosen them to do certain works. They serve mankind.

1 Timothy 5:21
I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality.

The Church is also "elect" of God. They are a chosen (spiritual) people.

Colossians 3:12
Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering;

Yes, salvation will eventually come to the physical Jews (along with the rest of the desecendents from Israel), for a total of 12 tribes altogether. This happens throughout the millenium.

Now there are two major questions/positions in this thread.

1) Rapture / Return of Christ, is this one event or two events separated in time?

2) Will saints go through the tribulation?

[to be continued]

[edit on 22-5-2008 by SirPaulMuaddib]

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 06:59 PM
Welcome, SirPaul. I was expecting you.

What do you make of this rhetorical question by Jesus:

Luke 18:8 I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

It seems to me that the consensus of scholars (I could find) agree that the answer is, "No". Dr Arnold Fruchtenbaum and I had lunch about 2 years ago and he stated that the answer to this question (by Jesus) was "yes"...the JEWS. He was pretty adamant about it.

This means, by definition, that their isn't a single Saint alive on the Earth when Jesus returns. Jews? Yes. (For they MUST BE here...)
Saints (faith), No.

"The Elect" is the major issue here (that I can surmise).

Now there are two major questions/positions in this thread.

1) Rapture / Return of Christ, is this one event or two events separated in time?

2) Will saints go through the tribulation?

Your desire to frame the debate is noted. The original poster titled this post as: The truth behind "THE RAPTURE"

...and then went on to explain his reasonings. I am willing to debate the merits of the original poster's claims, but if we are now going to "switch the topic a bit", wouldn't your characterization of the questions raised in this thread be worthy of it's own thread?

I'm willing to "stay here" in this thread, but I just want to maintain the existing topic to make sure the thread doesn't get so far "off-topic" that it no longer resembles the original poster's title (and the mods warn us)...

Perhaps we need the original poster's permission to expound on his topic?

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 07:09 PM
I framed the two points that way because I was not 100% sure of the positions being taken.

From what I read (early on)
I took it as simply
1) pre-tribulation Rapture
2) post-tribulation Rapture

Now a pre-tribulation rapture (as most state it) would pre-suppose that there are no saints on earth at all during the Tribulation period.

But then, as you correctly stated, there are Christians who are martyred by the Beast power. So I was trying to ascertain your exact position.

Also the point of whether the "Rapture" / "Second Coming" is one event or not, also plays into the question.

[edit on 22-5-2008 by SirPaulMuaddib]

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 07:17 PM

The subject turned to the rapture and I just want to show all pre-tribulation rapture believers something that proves that the rapture is indeed AFTER the tribulation.

If this is the main premise you want to focus on, I can do that, but the Rapture / Second Coming also plays a very important part in framing my position.

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 07:21 PM
I should also note that "Eschatology" is NOT settled doctrine in the Church. Eschatology is confusing and I believe God made it that way.

Locoman8 has revealed, in other threads, that he/she is a member (or at least taught by) the Church of God which has a quite peculiar view of scripture that I don't subscribe to. In fact, noting the original poster's closeness with this denomination helps me understand "his point of view". For he was TAUGHT the Church of God.

Following RW (you know the guy...Ronald Weinland) around for the past few months has given me some insight into what the CoG teaches. I reject quite a bit of their "theology". (And YES...I think I noted that locoman8 rejects RW, also...but the theology of the CoG is quite similar.)

Their "sabbath day" teaching is a joke. Question: What 'day' did Abraham worship on? Adam? Noah?

There is not a single mention of the Sabbath prior to Exodus.

The commandment to "keep the Sabbath" was given to the Jews to keep another Jew from working himself (or another Jew) to DEATH!. The Sabbath was not a perpetual commandment.

Jesus own words:
Mark 2:27 And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:

Anyway...welcome to the debate!

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 07:24 PM

Originally posted by SirPaulMuaddib
I framed the two points that way because I was not 100% sure of the positions being taken.

Understood. If locoman8 (and the mods) can accept this "slight" switch into another topic, I'm ok with that.

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 07:39 PM
Before getting into the main points, I want to quickly address the word "nigh".

"Nigh" does not mean 3 1/2 years away. There is nothing in the context of this passage to support such a definition. "Nigh" means near...imminent...very close

Nigh, as you've stated, means near, imminent.

So the question then is, what does the bible consider "near", "imminent"?


James 5 (King James Version)
7 Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain.

8 Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.

9 Grudge not one against another, brethren, lest ye be condemned: behold, the judge standeth before the door.

This was (of course) 2000 years ago. So James was referring to the 2nd Coming, as "nigh" and "before the door".

("before" the door, the before here is temporal not positional)

So nigh, simply means imminent, now imminent can be very soon, it could be an hour, a day, a week, 3 1/2 years, 2000 years.

Notice what it says in Revelation as well....

Revelation 1 (King James Version)
1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

The Greek word used here is Tachos which means

A brief space (of time), I.e. (with G1722 prefixed) in haste:--+ quickly, +

Shortly, + speedily.

Now again, this was 2000 years ago, so in terms of "nigh" (again) it could be very quickly, or it could be a few years, or it could be 2000 years.

These frames of reference for "imminent" are in God's frame of reference, from God's point of view, He views time differently, and a thousand years are like a day for Him.

[edit on 22-5-2008 by SirPaulMuaddib]

[edit on 22-5-2008 by SirPaulMuaddib]

[edit on 22-5-2008 by SirPaulMuaddib]

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 07:45 PM

So I was trying to ascertain your exact position.

May I help?

I believe in a pre-trib rapture. Jesus had a warning in Luke 21:36:

Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

This warning seems to imply that SOME aren't watching AND/OR praying always that they be ACCOUNTED worth to escape these things.

This tells me about the rapture.

I agree that there will be people becoming Saints during the Great Tribulation, but they will be martyred for their faith (see Revelation).

Call them "lukewarm" (Rev. 3)? Or call them what you will.

My point is that IF I don't make the rapture...I WILL be killed during the tribulation for my faith.

NOW...if there is NO rapture...then one would be insane to desire the Lord to return (Day of the Lord) before I die a 'natural' death:

Amos 5:18 Woe unto you that desire the day of the LORD! to what end is it for you? the day of the LORD is darkness, and not light.

posted on May, 23 2008 @ 08:55 AM
To answer a few questions.... I don't care if the topic veers away from the title... as long as the rapture and second coming are common points in the subject. Also, in reference to my beliefs with the Church of God, you should note that the original church founded by Jesus and the apostles was called the Church of God. My followings are with the United Church of God and I was not raised up with the beliefs of this church. I was raised up a southern baptist. I just recently started following UCG because I had many questions and many problems with the way traditional christianity did things. Most churches preach as hypocrites because they don't practice what they preach. Also it seems to me that church leaders or followers don't question things when in doubt. It's like you have to take it up the tailpipe weather it sounds right or not. I started researching early christianity and when the churches started to separate and it led me to 2 churches. The first and original being the Church of God. A century or so later being the Catholic church. The two churches are like night and day. Catholics adopted many pagan traditions and changed some of the original laws that the COG followed. Sunday worship was started by the catholics. Easter, christmas, and doing away with God's holy day feasts started with the catholics. Jesus and his apostles, as well as the early COG all followed the same holy days and sabbaths that the Jews followed, only celebrating them with different meanings because of the sacrifice Jesus was to us. Ronald Weinland may have the same core beliefs as I do seeing that he has the origins of the Worldwide Church of God and their teachings but his take on things are completely false as far as his prophecies go. You have to remember that RW is COG (PKG) and I follow the UCG which follows the works of the early apostles. The bible doesn't have to tell us that the apostles celebrated the sabbath and holy day feasts because a little research in history will tell you that. Not to mention, I can list bible passages where Jesus and/or the apostles celebrated these days. I also am able to give you insight on the pagan traditions of other supposed christian holidays such as easter and christmas. That is for another thread but the main subject is the rapture and secondcoming. I just thought I'd clear up some questions you guys had for me. And to sirpaul, thank you for joining in on the conversation.

posted on May, 23 2008 @ 09:26 AM
One point about the Sabbath not being mentioned until Exodus. My understanding is the underpinnings of the Sabbath go back to Genesis 1, "and on the seventh day God rested..."

Also, in determining who the elect are, does predestination come into play?

Romans 8

29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

31 What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?

It seems there are two choices here about who the elect are: the Saints or the Jews. There may be some overlap. I believe those who are truly saved are the elect via predestination, and that would include saved Messianic Jews.

posted on May, 23 2008 @ 09:43 AM
reply to post by Icarus Rising

That's a good point icarus. As it is, sirpaul mentioned the fact that the "elect" is mentioned for Jews in one passage, "gentiles" in another, and "angels" in another. Maybe the "elect" is all of them combined. That's what my understanding was. As it is, most of the english speaking countries are derived from the lost 10 tribes of Israel and were they not God's people before the North and South divided after King Solomon died? The current nation of Israel is nothing more than a modern-day Judea/Judah, which is the Jewish people. The other tribes of Israel were not Jewish, they were Hebrew. All Jewish are Israeli, but not all Israeli are Jewish. Jewish wasn't even used in the bible until the division of the two Kingdoms. My point is that all of Israels tribes were God's chosen people. The United States, Great Britain, New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and Northwest Europe are all parts of the 10 lost tribes of Israel if you really dig deep and research. The U.S. is of the tribe of Joseph.. subtribe Mannasseh. Great Brittain is of the tribe of Joseph... subtribe Ephairm. The two subtribes that make up Joseph are unique in that Mannasseh and Ephairm were sons of Joseph, but Jacob (Joseph's father) adopted the two sons. Read Genesis and you'll read about the separate covenant that God made for these two sub-tribes of Joseph and you'll understand why U.S. and Britain are part of it. That makes us part of the "elect" in my book because all of Israel were God's chosen people.

posted on May, 23 2008 @ 03:15 PM
reply to post by Locoman8

Locoman8, you are correct, we could discuss the Sabbath and the holy days and CoG theology in another thread. (Feel free to start one if you will and "ping me" and I'll join in as I can.)

posted on May, 23 2008 @ 03:20 PM
reply to post by Icarus Rising

Also, in determining who the elect are, does predestination come into play?

Yes, I believe in predestination. The verses you quoted are correct and I think there are a couple of other verses that support this as well. Here is a good one:

John 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

Here we hear Jesus saying that no man is even ABLE to come to Him unless the Father draws him near. That's pretty powerful stuff!

posted on May, 23 2008 @ 03:32 PM
reply to post by PreTribGuy

I'm glad we can agree on some things. I think our disagreement is strictly that of the rapture, which to me is not a big deal because as long as you're right with God, it will work out either way. You should join my thread about God's Holy Day Plan. It's still being worked on but I got some really good posts back from opposition on my christmas conflict. Check it out in this same forum.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4 >>

log in