Is the rapture a relatively new idea of christians?

[xdisciplex]

I heard that the idea of the rapture has not been believed in for a very long time and that it's a relatively new doctrine, is this true?
This would seriously affect my belief in the rapture because if the rapture is a modern phenomenon then it's most likely not biblical. If it's real then christians would have believed in it from the beginning on.

 

[Brother Bob]

The Newness of the Doctrine
It may come as a surprise to many Christians, but the doctrine of the Rapture is not mentioned in any Christian writings, of which we have knowledge, until after the year 1830 A.D. Whether the early writers were Greek or Latin, Armenian or Coptic, Syrian or Ethiopian, English or German, orthodox or heretic, no one mentioned a syllable about it. Of course, those who feel the origin of the teaching is in the Bible would say that it only ceased being taught (for some unknown reason) at the close of the apostolic age only to reappear in 1830 A.D. But if the doctrine were so clearly stated in Scripture, it seems incredible that no one should have referred to it before the 19th century. This does not necessarily show that the teaching is wrong, but it does mean that thousands of eminent scholars who lived over a span of seventeen centuries (including some of the most astute of the "Christian Fathers" and those of the Reformation and post-Reformation periods) must be considered as prophetic dunces for not having understood so fundamental a teaching. We are not denigrating the doctrine in mentioning these historical facts. That is not our intention. But we do feel that the Foundation should show the historical problems associated with the teaching. This lapse of seventeen centuries when no one mentioned anything about it must be a serious obstacle to its reliability.

http://askelm.com/doctrine/d760201.htm

 

[LeBuick]

Bro Bob, is that you speaking against the rapture or just showing us an article you found?

 

[Brother Bob]

Showing an article. I don't use the word rapture though. I use "resurrection". My understanding of "rapture" is there will be two more comings of Christ and I believe in the "second" coming only.

I believe it the way Jesus taught:

John 5:
"28": Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

"29": And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

 

[donnA]

The rapture does not teach 2 comings of Christ, when Christ returns He will be on the earth, in the rapture He is in the sky only, He has not come to earth, He does not come to us, we go to Him.

 

[Brother Bob]

I really don't know Donna since I follow "resurrection" but here is were someone said He would come in two phases.
The word "Rapture" is not found in the Bible. There is also no single word used by the biblical authors to describe the prophetic factors which comprise the doctrine. Its formulation has come about by means of induction. Certain biblical passages concerning the second coming (and the role that Christians will play in that event) have been inductively blended together to establish the teaching. The modern expression "Rapture" was then invented to explain the overall teaching and the term suits the subject well. The basic tenets of the doctrine are uninvolved. Simply put, it purports that Christ will come back to this earth in two phases. He will first return invisibly to rapture His church away from this world so that they might escape (or partially escape the prophetical tribulation to occur near the end of the age, then later Christ will return in a visible advent to dispense His wrath on the world's nations. This is the general teaching. (by Ernest L. Martin)

http://askelm.com/doctrine/d760201.htm

Of course he is a supporter of Herbert Armstrong so that certainly clouds the issue for me.

 

[Jim1999]

I am in rapture when listening to some music, especially the classics by Bev Shea.

Other than that, I am looking forward to the second advent of my Lord Jesus.

Then, I did hear one group say they needed television so that "every eye could see Him" during that so called "rapture".

Sorry, I don't see any dispensational type rapture in scripture.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[LeBuick]

Bro's Bob and Jim, so you each believe the Church will endure the period of tribulation? I say this because the last coming is clearly after the period of trib.

Me, I have no conclusion in this area. I know I'm saved and will spend eternity with the Lord. When will I get there? After I die.

I have always had trouble with this portion of the rapture theory;

Revelation 4:1 After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.

This is supposedly where the Church is raptured but it really appears this is when John was taken to heaven.

 

[TaterTot]

It is true that the early church did not teach our modern day concept of "the rapture". Darby promoted this belief in the early 1800's in England. Scofield popularized it.

This was a discussion we had over lunch today with some friends. The main problem I have with what most people call "the rapture" is that there are 2 second comings. Christ has already come once, then there will be the second coming (which most call the rapture, or "calling away") where some will be left to endure the tribulation and some will be taken on to heaven at the sound of the trumpet. Then He will come again to reign.

My personal belief is that Christ will come again and call His children home, wrapping up all things. Period. That is the second coming. Call it what you will, but please dont add to scripture. :saint:

(...Now throw some 'maters, boys...)

 

[Brother Bob]

Sure we will endure the tribulations and except those days be shortened no flesh would be saved but for the elects sake those days were shortened.
Now the "wrath of God" is another matter which is 7 vials filled with the wrath of God which John the Baptist came preaching and said: "who hath warned thee to flee the wrath of God which is to come", so the believers will escape the "wrath" but not the tribulations. The "wrath" is reserved for the devil and his angels and the unbelievers and those who make a lie and those who worketh abomination.
The Lord will do a quick work when He comes, He will redeem His church and pass judgement on the world.

 

[BobRyan]

Showing an article. I don't use the word rapture though. I use "resurrection". My understanding of "rapture" is there will be two more comings of Christ and I believe in the "second" coming only.

I believe it the way Jesus taught:

John 5:
"28": Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

"29": And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

True enough.


CHrist said "I will come again" for the church (in 1John 14:1-3) not "again and again". He returns and then the wicked are destroyed and the saints raptured to "His Father's house".

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Jim1999]

LeBuick, a very good book covering all four viewpoints is The Meaning of the Millemmium, edited by Robert Clouse. It was published in the 70's by InterVarsity Press, and is available online at their site. There were the four best proponents of the various viewpoints at that time.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[LeBuick]

Thanks Jim, I'll keep an eye out for it but I'm on a book diet since my wife recently lost her job. But I know the Lord will provide. He has till now and I refuse to believe he's gonna leave me here.

EDIT... Whoops! I spoke too soon, I found it at Amazon for $1.33 so I guess she'll just have to be mad. The Lord provided.

 

[Brother Bob]

He won't leave you LeBuick, and I will offer up a prayer on you and your wife's behalf.

 

[BobRyan]

Thanks Jim, I'll keep an eye out for it but I'm on a book diet since my wife recently lost her job. But I know the Lord will provide. He has till now and I refuse to believe he's gonna leave me here.

EDIT... Whoops! I spoke too soon, I found it at Amazon for $1.33 so I guess she'll just have to be mad. The Lord provided.

Take a shot at the Word of God on this one - let the Bible "Speak" it is very clear.

Take a close look at the sequence Christ gives BOTH in Matt 24 AND in Rev 19 and 20.

Postrib pre-mill outline:

0. church age continues -- you are here
1. Tribulation time Matthew 24:21-28
2. Second Advent of Jesus event (1Thess 4, Rev 19, Matthew 24:29-30)
2.A The FIRST resurrection (Rev 20) event Matthew 24:31-44, Rev 20:4-5
of the blessed and holy at Christ's appearing in Rev 19 –
Is the same as the resurrection at Christ's return in 1Thess 4.
2.B. Saints taken to heaven as promised in John 14 (1 Thess 4)
3. literal millennium spent in heaven with Christ (Rev 20)
4. Second Resurrection (Rev 20)
5. Lake of Fire destruction of the wicked (Rev 20)
6. new heaven & new earth (Rev 21)

In this view the First Resurrection John sees (Rev 20) which is at Christ's Rev 19 appearing is the SAME resurrection that Paul describes at Christ's appearing in 1Thess 4. The resurrection of the righteous.

In this view the sequence of Rev 19, 20 and 21 is literal and plain. No gimmicks!

Ask youself a few very easy questions.

#1. Is the resurrection in 1Thess 4 "the Dead in Christ" the resurrection of the righteous or the wicked?

#2. Is the FIRST resurrection Rev 20:4-5 of the "holy and blessed" the resurrection of the righteous or the wicked???

Obviously these two chapters both deal with the resurrection of the people of God at the coming of Christ and it is important that the FIRST resurrection is that resurrection.

THEN comes the 1000 years for it is the separation BETWEEN the two resurrections (the one of the righteous being the FIRST and the one of the wicked being the SECOND) that is the actual-real (as in no trick language) 1000 years.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Brother Bob]

I accept a lot of what Bob has posted but not all. It is a great debate and ever how it will be will be alright for the children of God. I will only say this: Jesus said that both the good and the bad will be resurrected at the same time.

 

[BobRyan]

I thought you agreed that the saints of Rev 20:4-5 are the "blessed and holy ones" that are raised in the first resurrection "over these the 2nd death has NO power".

"The resurrection of the righteous = the first resurrection = the Resurrection of the dead in Christ in 1Thess 4"

I thought you agreed that this starts the 1000 years.

And I thought you also agreed that the second resurrection does not take place until the 1000 years are completed since "The REST of the dead did not come to life until after the 1000 years were completed".

Did I miss something?

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Ed Edwards]

Brother Bob quoting someone else: //the doctrine of the Rapture
is not mentioned in any Christian writings, of which
we have knowledge, until after the year 1830 A.D.
Whether the early writers were Greek or Latin,
Armenian or Coptic, Syrian or Ethiopian,
English or German, orthodox or heretic,
no one mentioned a syllable about it.//

This statement is incorrect.


1 Thessalonians 4:17 (The Latin Vulgate):
deinde nos qui vivimus qui relinquimur simul rapiemur cum
illis in nubibus obviam Domino in aera et sic semper cum Domino erimus

As best my memory serves me this verse from the
Latin Vulgate was first written in 480AD, some 1,526 years
ago.

1 Thessalonians 4:17 (KJV1611 Edition):
Then we which are aliue, and remaine, shalbe caught vp together
with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the aire:
and so shall wee euer bee with the Lord.

The idea of the rapture and it's name is at least 1,526 years old.
While this is recent compared to the age of the dinosauurs,
aledged to have been 62 Million years ago, I dare say most
people on this board will say IT IS NOT a new idea.

I beleive it is necessary that those who contend that
the 'rapture' is a new idea tell us what 'rapture' means that
is the new idea. Hello, can anybody spell 'definition'?

Brother Bob: //My understanding of "rapture" is there will
be two more comings of Christ and I believe in the "second" coming only.//

That isn't the only meaning of rapture.
Come on, tell us what you are against. Thank you.

The rapture does not teach 2 comings of Christ, when Christ returns He will be on the earth, in the rapture He is in the sky only, He has not come to earth, He does not come to us, we go to Him.

Amen, Sister DonnA -- you are so RIGHT ON!

Brother Bob: //The word "Rapture" is not found in the Bible.//

Tis found in the Latin Vulgate in 1 Thess 4:17.
In English it would be called the "CAUGHT UP".

 

[Ed Edwards]

Pretrib pre-mill outline of time forward:

0. church age continues <== you are here!
1. rapture/resurrection event
2. Tribulation time
3. Second Advent of Jesus event
4. literal MK=millennial kingdom
5. new heaven & new earth

The time line according to Matthew 24
(Mount Olivet Discourse, also Matthew 25,
Mark 13, Luke 21):

0. church age continues <== you are here!
Matthew 24:4-15

1. rapture/resurrection event
Matthew 24:31-44

2. Tribulation time
Matthew 24:21-28

3. Second Advent of Jesus event
Matthew 24:29-30)

Not mentioned in Matthew 24:
(4. literal MK=millennial kingdom)
(5. new heaven & new earth)

The time line according to Revelation:

0. church age continues - Rev 2-3 <== you are here!
1. rapture/resurrection event - Rev 4:1 (type)
2. Tribulation time - Rev 4:2-19:10
3. Second Advent of Jesus event - Rev 19:11-21
4. literal MK=millennial kingdom - Rev 20:1-6
5. new heaven & new earth - Rev 20:7-22:5

The time line according to 2 Thessalonians 2:

0. church age continues <== you are here!
(implied, until the falling away)

1. rapture/resurrection
v.1 - gathering together unto him
v.3 - falling away

2. Tribulation time
(time of the man of sin)

3. Second Advent of Jesus event
v.1 - coming of our Lord Jesus Christ
v.8

Not mentioned:
(4. literal MK=millennial kingdom)
(5. new heaven & new earth)

BTW, I believed in the pre-tribulation rapture/resurrection
before i saw these three scriptures as pretrib.
So even if you can prove all three of these scriptures
in error, I'll still hope in the pre-tribulation rapture
as will 90% of Baptists and kindred Christians.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Brother BobRyan, you have argued the 'one and only one
resurrection of both the just and the unjust' doctrine under
the table. They don't understand the oneness of
resurrection is in Christ Jesus and His Resurrection;
the twoness of resurreciton
is in the resurrection of the just and the unjust, the
threeness of resurrrection is in the Blessed Trinity; etc.

But yet, My 7th-Day-Adventist Brother, you mistake
FIRST with FIRST AND ONLY. FIRST means FIRST
but not FIRST AND ONLY. First is not always associated
with oneness. In fact, the FIRST RESURRECTION mentioned
in Revelation 20:5 is preceeded by TWO resurrected groups
of people in Revelation 20:4.

I went to College, but FIRST i went to GRADE SCHOOL.
Grade School is NOT one and only one grade. In fact,
the Grade School I went to had twelve grades.