Rapture vs NONE rapture (dialogue to all christians)

reply to post by NOTurTypical

All right, let me offer you something very clear cut;
The clear description laid out in 1 Thessalonians of how we shall be "caught up" at the Return of Christ, after the very public events of the archangel's call etc, and the raising of the "dead in Christ".
Is there any clear statement to be found, without ingenious detective work on the text, suggesting a Rapture at any other time?

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

All right, let me offer you something very clear cut;
The clear description laid out in 1 Thessalonians of how we shall be "caught up" at the Return of Christ, after the very public events of the archangel's call etc, and the raising of the "dead in Christ".
Is there any clear statement to be found, without ingenious detective work on the text, suggesting a Rapture at any other time?

Are you going to address anything I said? That's not very loving in a brotherly manner. You can never get your iron sharpened if you don't strike it with mine. And the Bible is FULL of things that need detailed study to "unlock":

"It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter."

"And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth."

Originally posted by swan001
What about: out of your sight? Underground, maybe? Ever heard of D.U.M.B. military bases?

Give me a location. I work with military personnel. I'll find out if it's true.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Careful.. You're getting into dangerous territory, even for a conspiracy website. Fair warning.

D.U.M.B.s are talked about all the time on this site....

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Are you going to address anything I said?

That complaint is a double-edged sword. It works in both directions.
I drew attention to the 1 Thessalonians passage back on the first page of this thread. You didn't address it at the time, you haven't addressed it since, and you're still not addressing it now. In fact, ironically, making that complaint works out as another way of evading the need to address the Thessalonians passage.

Nor do I accept an obligation to address everything you might say. I refuse to fall into the classic ATS trap of trying to answer each and every comment that the other party chooses to make, and thus getting piskie-led into the wild moorlands beyond the main track of the discussion. I reserve the right to keep my focus on the points which seem pertinent to the matter in hand.

Anyway, what am I supposed to address?
The remark about the need for fine distinctions? But this is a generalisation which hasn't been applied to the specific case. It doesn't offer a reason why we should make a fine distinction between the servants of God mentioned in Revelation ch7 and the saints mentioned in ch13 (which is what I wasn't doing).

The comment about passages which require study? But, again, this is a generalisation which hasn't been applied to the specific case. It doesn't offer a reason why the abstruse speculation which created the Rapture doctrine should be allowed to contradict and set aside the clear teaching about the timing of the event which Paul offers in 1 Thessalonians ch4.

The comments about my ecclesiology and Israelology and the innuendo about "I know your issue"? But all this is too vague to be addressable, so I'm not going to bother.

Let's get back to the matter in hand.
The main planks of my case are;
1) There is clear teaching in 1 Thessalonians ch4 that the saints will be "taken up" when Christ returns.
2) There are no clear statements elsewhere that the saints will be Raptured at an earlier time than Paul indicated.
3) If we don't make the assumption that the saints disappear from the scene at an early stage, there is no need to explain away the saints who appear in Revelation as a completely different group.
The theory becomes an unnecessary and artificial construction.

reply to post by Hydroman

...and that be the problem. It depends on how the "holy spirit" leads you to interpret things.

Yes, and that is what bother me a lot. If the "Holy Spirit" tells one to do this, and this, then I am left to wonder just what kind of Spirit this "Holy Spirit" really is?

To be a "Witch" one must study for one year, and one day, and be very well schooled in the Craft, the Rituals, and the tools of the Art.
No "child" would be capable of this.
Any person who claims a child to be a Witch is mentally ill, and needs professional help, not a license to preach, and kill kids.

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by swan001
What about: out of your sight? Underground, maybe? Ever heard of D.U.M.B. military bases?

Give me a location. I work with military personnel. I'll find out if it's true.

I will provide some links, perhaps you are not alone in wanting information on DUMBs?

Phil Schneider's lecture of 1995

Secret Underground Bases and Facilities

DEEP UNDERGROUND MILITARY BASES IN AMERICA

Nuclear powered tunnelling machines

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by swan001
What about: out of your sight? Underground, maybe? Ever heard of D.U.M.B. military bases?

Give me a location. I work with military personnel. I'll find out if it's true.

Wow that's absurd, if you knew anything about how security clearances work if they don't have one high enough they won't know, if they do have one high enough to know they will not tell you.

reply to post by DISRAELI

That complaint is a double-edged sword. It works in both directions.
I drew attention to the 1 Thessalonians passage back on the first page of this thread. You didn't address it at the time, you haven't addressed it since, and you're still not addressing it now.

I thought you were talking about his "last trump" statement in 1 Thessalonians and I answered that pointedly and succinctly with a brief instruction of the Jewish feast cycles and Hebraisms. If you meant something else from 1 Thessalonians please specify. I'm not immune from missing something or do I shy from rebuke or reproof if I'm in error, in fact I enjoy it. If I didn't address what you meant then please be a little more specific and I will.

And calm-down, this isn't primary saving Theology of Christian Doctrine, it's not a reason whatsoever to divide the body of Christ, it's just fun to debate.

reply to post by DISRAELI

Nor do I accept an obligation to address everything you might say.

Okay, then you must afford everyone else the same right you arbitrarily invoke for yourself. If not that's a "special pleading" fallacy of logic. So now which is it? Am I obligated to respond to every question you ask or not?

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Careful.. You're getting into dangerous territory, even for a conspiracy website. Fair warning.

D.U.M.B.s are talked about all the time on this site....

Not with the spiritual aspect that exists behind it, funds and fuels it. Luciferians don't care what you talk about as long as their real intent and purposes are never discussed. They couldn't care less until you mess with their "master" and his ultimate agenda.

reply to post by DISRAELI

Let's get back to the matter in hand.
The main planks of my case are;
1) There is clear teaching in 1 Thessalonians ch4 that the saints will be "taken up" when Christ returns.
2) There are no clear statements elsewhere that the saints will be Raptured at an earlier time than Paul indicated.
3) If we don't make the assumption that the saints disappear from the scene at an early stage, there is no need to explain away the saints who appear in Revelation as a completely different group.
The theory becomes an unnecessary and artificial construction.

And without clear and distinct Systematic Theological doctrines of Israel and the church super fuzziness is the result. I'm trying to unfuzzy it and clear up the mangling of the two together. That is of course if you give me the opportunity with Acts 17:11 in mind.

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by Hydroman

 

...and that be the problem. It depends on how the "holy spirit" leads you to interpret things.

Yes, and that is what bother me a lot. If the "Holy Spirit" tells one to do this, and this, then I am left to wonder just what kind of Spirit this "Holy Spirit" really is?

To be a "Witch" one must study for one year, and one day, and be very well schooled in the Craft, the Rituals, and the tools of the Art.
No "child" would be capable of this.
Any person who claims a child to be a Witch is mentally ill, and needs professional help, not a license to preach, and kill kids.

Children can be possessed by demons. Go on a mission trip sometime.

reply to post by DISRAELI


Sorry for the interjection Disraeli but if I may, maybe we can sharpen one another. I need your take on a couple of verses (not by Paul minus Titus) that would otherwise lead me believe that I should watch for the coming of the Lord in order to escape that which is coming upon the world. I do understand that the word "Harpazo" is only written once, but per the coming of Christ:

Titus 2:13 "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our saviour Jesus Christ."

Hebrews 9:28 "...and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation."

James 5: 7-8 "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. Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh."

1 Peter 1:7 " That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ:"

1 Peter 1:13 "Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ;"

1 Peter 4:7 "But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer."

Revelation 2:25 "But that which ye have already hold fast til I come.

Revelation 3:3 "Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.

Matthew 24 - particularly all of it but noting verse 40+
Matthew 25 - Parable of Virgins - v13 "watch"

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."

*I have not included Jesus stories/parables of the bridegroom feast but which are of much importance when considering the harpazo and the gift received by those wise virgins looking for and prepared for his coming in the midnight hour.

Nevertheless, I understand you may not find all or any of the above to be relevant but for me, there is too much evidence for there being a special gift awarded to those whom the Master finds in faith at his coming described as being quick like the flashing of lightning as from the east to the west.

In the days when the sun does not shine and the moon does not give off her light, when the son of perdition is revealed unto the world, when the abomination that causes desolation is set up in the temple of God (imo the image of beast 1 by beast 2), when I see these things begin to come to pass, then I must look up, and lift up my head; for I know our redemption draweth nigh.

I cannot deny what I read with my own two eyes. I believe the Harpazo is a very real and very special gift for those who are watching.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
I thought you were talking about his "last trump" statement in 1 Thessalonians and I answered that pointedly and succinctly with a brief instruction of the Jewish feast cycles and Hebraisms.

No, you're misremembering. That post responded to my casual remark about date-setting being a symptom of impatience. I did a recent thread on "the futility of date-setting", and didn't want to get entangled in the subject again, so I left it.

The point about 1 Thessalonians ch4 is that being "caught up" is clearly placed in the context of the Return of Christ.
The relevant passage begins in v15, when he talks about those who are left until "the coming of the Lord".
In the next verse, we come to "The Lord himself will descend from heaven"- a very public event, to be compared with Matthew ch24 v30- "The Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory".
In terms of Revelation, this is the event predicted in ch1 v7; "He is coming with clouds and every eye will see him", and it is the event described in the grand climax of chs 19-20.

Then, according to Paul, the "dead in Christ" will rise.
THEN we shall be caught up together...and so we shall be always with the Lord".

So when Paul describes a "rapture", he describes it as an event AT the public Return of Christ.
The popular Rapture doctrine regards it as an event BEFORE the Return of Christ.
I don't see how the contrast and contradiction can be clearer. One of them must be wrong.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Am I obligated to respond to every question you ask or not?

No, of course not.
You brought up the issue of "not addressing what I say", so I responded in kind to show that you were guilty of the same thing.
I don't mind at all if you leave my case unanswered, because it usefully demonstrates the point that the case is unanswerable. As you've just done in the case of my three "main planks".

On the point of not responding to everything, I stand by my story. I've seen it happen too often. Two people debating, one of them fills a post with various comments bringing in red herrings and side issues, the other person tries to respond to all them,debate continues on some of the less relevant, and a few posts later the discussion has lost all sense of direction and wandered far from the original point. It's one way that discussions get de-railed.

And which specific, important points did you raise for me to respond to?

reply to post by HeFrippedMeOff

Yes, all these passages refer to the Return of Christ.
And the Return of Christ comes at "the end of the age".
That is where Paul places the "being caught up".
As I've been saying all along, the debate is about the timing.
The doctrine which I'm disputing is that the saints will be caught up BEFORE the Return of Christ.
So I'm not denying the hope you express at the end of your post.
Yes, we look forward to seeing the coming of Christ, but we expect to see it at the same time as everybody else does- at the end of Revelation, not at the beginning.

reply to post by DISRAELI

The point about 1 Thessalonians ch4 is that being "caught up" is clearly placed in the context of the Return of Christ.

Yes, the Greek term is the "harpazo" which implies 'someone grabbing someone by the hair and yanking them out of harm's way', think like a child who is about to run out in traffic. And there are numerous verses detailing Christ's return where only the bride will see and hear Him, and other verses detailing how every eye will see Him and will come in the clouds with glory and power. Some verses where He only comes in the air, and yet others where He comes to Earth to rule and reign. Some verses where He comes FOR His bride, and yet others where He comes WITH His bride.

How do you reconcile these very distinct differences?

reply to post by HeFrippedMeOff


Exactly, to deny the pre-trib catching away of the body of Christ one has to immediately deny the "Doctrine of Immanency". If the harpazo was mid or post-trib there are specific events which must first happen.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

I would wait for specific examples.
At the moment, I see no reason to understand 1 Thessalonians as anything other than the public event.
Paul does not mention a later one.