Featured Rapture Question

My Comment: In prophecy, Dan 12:11 says, “And from the time when the continual sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination unto desolation shall be set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred ninety days.” The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is this “Continual sacrifice”.
Circumstantial evidence, that the perpetual sacrifice was continuing, would include Heb 13:10, 1 Cor 11:23-34, 1 Cor 5:7-8, 1 Cor 10:16-21.

This verse shows the Last Supper is a sacrifice and was instituted into the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass:

Matt 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.

“Shed” is the word Christ used at the last supper which shows it was sacrificial in nature and when he said “do this in commemoration of me” (Luke 22:19), Christ instituted the sacrifice and it was continual. “Commemoration” is a sacrificial word. (Commemoration = Remembrance = Greek – Anamnesis = Strong’s #364) Luke 22:20 (“This is the chalice, the new testament in my blood…”) ties the sacrifice as the sacrifice of the New Testament. There’s so much more.

My Comment: I understand Pentecost was on a Sunday. I don’t know everything about this. During the 40 days between Christ’s resurrection and ascension, He appeared to many people and, I’m sure, every day but it seems that He appeared to his apostles on Sundays.

My Comment: I agree that the “Day of the Lord” is Judgement Day at the very end (2 Pet 3:10, Obad 15-21, Zech 14:11-12). In my minority view, I can also see a Thousand Year Reign in there too although “the day” is the last day or one day and not a thousand and seven years. I also understand that the Lord’s Day is Sunday but, in eternity, every day is the Lord’s Day. What I was trying to show in my previous post (post #19) was that the Sacrifice (Marriage Supper of the Lamb) is continuing here on earth right now and in heaven at the same time and it will go on for eternity. On the Lord’s Day in the Holy Sacrifice and on the Day of the Lord, Christ reveals His Glorfied Body!

My Comment: I answered this above but I have another question to ask you:

2 Pet 3:8 But of this one thing be not ignorant, my beloved, that one day with the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
2 Pet 3:10 But the day of the Lord shall come as a thief, in which the heavens shall pass away with great violence and the elements shall be melted with heat and the earth and the works which are in it shall be burnt up.

Darrell, let me ask you this: By “Day of the Lord” do you mean “one day” or do you mean a “Thousand Years”? I ask because I have seen where some think the time from the Rapture to the very end is the “Day of the Lord” (2 Pet 3:10, Is 13:6,9, 1 Thess 5:2-4). I understand the Seven years of Tribulation is judgement but not the Thousand Year Reign. It seems that these verses say it comes as a “thief in the night” or suddenly which suggests “one day” and not a thousand years. It even says the “Day” of the Lord and not “days”. I know you probably see this exact day as the Rapture but I see it either as the very last day or, in my minority view, as right before the Thousand Year Reign. Also, notice: In 2 Pet 3:10 it says “in which the heavens pass away”. To the straight Amillennialist, this proves that this is the very end. In my minority view, I can see a different interpretation. I know this is a little complicated.

 

My Comment: Ok.

My Comment: Of course I disagree as I’ve explained and I know you have too.

My Comment: We don’t see Israel as a separate people as being restored but, rather, the restoration of the “New Israel” which is the Catholic Church. At the beginning of the Great Tribulation, the Church will be a remnant but, at the 3 1/2 year mark, the “Restoration” will begin with the Two Witnesses. This is when the Jews will come into the church. By the time the Two Witnesses are killed, the Church will be strong. Christ, through the Church, will be able to overthrow the Antichrist. Christ will reign through His Church in the Eucharist for a thousand years or whatever the length. Christ is reigning “right now” through the Eucharist but He will reign in a fully restored church and state during the thousand year reign. This fits in with our Doctrine of the Social Reign of Christ the King - NO separation of church and state. Separation of duties only. Restoration of the true practice (Traditions, that is, Apostolic Tradition) of the Faith is what is needed (2 Thess 2:14). This is Restoration, not reformation. Notice: The context of this verse is set in the end times.

Israel will not be offering animal sacrifices in the thousand year reign. I’m not sure if you think this but I’ve seen this a lot. If they do, it will be against God. The Jews will be received into the Church through the Two Witnesses and will participate in the Eucharistic Sacrifice. Christ will rein in the Catholic Church in Israel and not Rome. Israel will be the New Rome.

I’ll stop here. I know, It’s a lot to digest. I’ll have to explain things a little bit at a time. I know this post is going to get me in a lot f trouble! Lol

My Comment: I’ve explained this elsewhere so I won’t do it here. I will say this: When you talk of Israel offering sacrifice again (I don’t know if you do believe this but, for sake of argument, I’ll assume you do) in the temple during the thousand year reign, you are recognizing that sacrifice is being offered in heaven (Marriage Supper of the Lamb) and on earth (Temple Sacrifice) at the SAME TIME! If you could see the Eucharist as the sacrifice on earth, you would be able to accept the Doctrine of the Communion of Saints like in the Nicene Creed! Because you don’t accept it you somehow see Temple Sacrifice as a positive thing! Do you really think God is going to be happy with that? I’m sure you see this in the scriptures but maybe they could be interpreted to prove the Eucharist? I’m not sure which ones you use. If Christ is on earth (Second Coming) during the Thousand Year Reign, why would you offer Temple Sacrifice? Makes no sense. Christ will rule through the Eucharist and the Second Coming comes at the very end.

My Comment: Luke 24:30-31(they recognized Jesus in the Breaking of Bread), John 20:26-28 (this was while they were at the Eucharistic Sacrifice on Sunday)

In both of these examples, Christ was in His glorified body and tied to the Eucharist.

 

Correction to Post #101

I said, “ I know you probably see this exact day as the Rapture but I see it either as the very last day or, in my minority view, as right before the Thousand Year Reign”.

My Comment: The “Day of the Lord” is the very last day (General Judgement) and not before the Thousand Year Reign. It also can be the day of your death (Particular Judgement - 1 Cor 3:13). I’ve said this more than once in prior posts and even in this post (third comment). You make mistakes when you’re tired or in a hurry.

 

My Comment: Ok. Lol I understand. Of course, I disagree but either you believe or you don’t just like the disciples who walked away because they did not believe in the Eucharist [John 6:61-67 (60-66)]. You know Darrell, not trying to be a wise guy either, I’m really not, but I’ve always heard dispensationalists believe in the literal interpretation of scripture more than anyone else when it comes to the end times, but I have to disagree. It seems like dispensationalists believe everything is “symbolic”! I’m being funny and exaggerating some. Lol

 

My Comment: This is Dispensationalism. This would mean that none of the apostles were believers because Pentecost hadn’t come yet. Thomas doubted which means he did not disbelieve totally. After Christ appeared to him, he did believe. Believing was a matter of degree. So, did Thomas believe when he said “My Lord and my God”? If he wasn’t a believer before he said this wasn’t he a believer right after? It sounds like you’re saying he wasn’t a believer or a Christian until Pentecost. Not sure if that is what you mean. Scripture says otherwise. Thomas and the other Apostles had received the Spirit (Baptism - John 3:22 - see note below*) and they are receiving the Spirit again because Christ says, “receive ye the Holy Ghost” (John 20:22). This shows that they received the Holy Ghost before Pentecost. They receive the Spirit again here (John 20:22) because this is a “different” sacrament. They are receiving the power to forgive sins which has to do the Sacrament of Penance (John 20:23). This is a charism or Gift of the Holy Ghost (1 Cor 12:4 ff). In Baptism you receive the Holy Ghost one time (Eph 4:5) but in the other sacraments you receive more or the fullness of the Spirit (Eph 4:11 - more of the Spirit for the Gifts in the Church). Same with Confirmation (Acts 8:14-17, 2 Cor 1:21-22, Acts 19:6). Confirmation is receiving the “Fullness” of the Spirit for perseverance. Notice in Heb 6:2 is says the plural “Baptisms”. “Baptisms” refers to both Baptism and Confirmation. Confirmation is the sacrament that equates to the fullness of the Spirit at Pentecost (Acts 2). Once the apostles received this “Fullness” they didn’t run anymore. They had the courage to die for the Faith. You have to understand the difference between a Sacrament and a Charism or Gift of the Holy Ghost. I cannot write everything here on this subject.

*John 3:22 - Scripture is silent on when the apostles were baptized. I think it could be implied here in this verse. Could be implied somewhere else. Anyway, we know they were because Jesus baptized (John 3:22) and He instituted the sacrament when He ordained the apostles to baptize (Matt 28:19). Of course, before Matt 28 they were already baptizing.

My Comment: Cornelius was Baptized with the Holy Ghost in Acts 10:48 when it says he was Baptized in “the NAME of the Lord Jesus Christ”. Through this Baptism Cornelius received remission of sins (sounds like the gift in John 20:22-23) when it says “In His NAME” (Acts 10:43). Matt 28:19 says “Going therefore, teach ye all nations: BAPTIZING them in the NAME of the Father and of the Son and OF THE HOLY GHOST.” Just to make this clear, the outpouring of the Spirit in Act 10:44-46 is a “Gift of the Holy Ghost” (notice them Speaking in Tongues in v46). You are not saved or justified by the charismatic gifts but they lead to justification. Justification comes with Baptism in Acts 10:43,48. This is why Peter Baptized. Once he saw they already had Faith, he baptized them. Faith is not enough. Faith leads to justification. Even the devils believed (James 2:19). Faith is a Gift (1 Cor 12:9), a Fruit (Gal 5:23) and a virtue (Ex: Rom 5:1 in that it is a power that leads to justification). Right in Acts 2, at the time of Pentecost, they exhorted everyone to be Baptized in Acts 2:38, “But Peter said to them: Do penance: and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins. And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

This all means that those at the Sunday Sacrifice of the Mass (John 20:19) are at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb. This might help: You cannot be in mortal sin to receive Christ in the Eucharist (1 Cor 11:27-29). Only those in the white linen of Justification (Sanctifying Grace) can receive (Apoc 19:8). This proves that the Marriage Supper is going on here right now as well as in heaven.

 

2 Cor 5:16 Wherefore henceforth, we know no man according to the flesh. And if we have known Christ according to the flesh: but now we know him so no longer. (DRV)

My Comment: St. Thomas the Apostle was already willing to die for Christ (John 11:17). It’s possible he believed Christ would resurrect but didn’t think it had happened yet. Just a thought. I have a book on dispensationalism (“Things That Differ” by Pastor Cornelius Stam) that uses John 20:27 as proof that the Apostles did not know Christ (pp 182-183). The book uses 2 Cor 5:16 to back this up and say they didn’t recognized Jesus as savior (I think this is what he is saying) while He was in the flesh and, therefore, this verse is the dividing line for a new dispensation. Not true. What Paul is doing in 2 Cor 5:16 is looking back on his conversion and the other apostle’s conversion. Here’s what Paul, in this verse, is saying, “We no longer look at men according to the world’s standards but as God sees them. If we knew Christ as a man, friend or relative, it is nothing in comparison to knowing of Him as Saviour.” He is preaching through his letters to the Corinthians. Paul continues this thought in the next verse when he refers to living a new way of life in the Spirit. We are a “New Creation”. Paul is saying that knowing Christ as Saviour changed their life. Christ revealed Himself in degrees and the Apostles believed in degrees. We all do. When I was 5 years old I believed in Christ but now I believe in Christ in a deeper way. Same with Paul and the Apostles. Catholics are always asked how many “Works” do you have to do to be saved? I say, How much Faith do you have to have to be saved? I agree you have to believe in the resurrection now but, when Thomas doubted, it had just happened. Even if you single Thomas out for doubting Christ’s resurrection, the other Apostles weren’t accused of that. You can’t lump them all under a previous dispensation.

My Comment: I think I have. I have spoken on the Communion of Saints. I’ve talked about Rom 12, 1 Cor 12, Rom 8:35-39, John 15, etc. We could talk more on it. I brought it up because I think it plays an important part in eschatology.

My Comment: Wasn’t Ephesians written after Pentecost? Doesn’t Eph 5:29 speak of the Church in the “Church Age”? Remember me saying the “Marriage” in the “Marriage Supper of the Lamb” is the marriage between Christ and His CHURCH? (Post #19) Christ’s CHURCH exists right now. If Christ’s Church exists right now then the marriage exists right now. If the Marriage exists right now then the Marriage Supper exists right now.

My Comment: What you are saying is that “Identified” means nothing happened. “United” means something happened. Pentecost is where it happened and Baptism is where it didn’t happen. OK. It’s hard to talk about all this at one time. I’ll leave you with this thought:

Acts 2:38 But Peter said to them: Do penance: and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins. And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Notice the Order: Penance, Baptism, remission of sins, receiving the Holy Ghost.

Penance (repentance, fasting, almsgiving) is first, however, there is a separation between Penance and Baptism in this verse. Penance leads to Baptism. Notice: Baptism is FIRST in the order of salvation and NOT last! Most of the time I hear someone say they “believed” and “walked the aisle” or made an “altar call” (even though there is no altar) and THEN, in a lower voice to show less importance, they will whisper that they were Baptized. They will say Baptism is just an ordinance. Jesus ordered it so we have to do it. Jesus “Orders” Baptism, Jesus “Orders” the Great Commission, Jesus “Orders” keeping the Commandments. To dispensationalists these are all “symbolic”.

In Acts 2:38 the order is cause and effect.

In other words:

Baptism causes remission of sins (Nicene Creed)
Baptism causes the receiving of the Holy Ghost

You are wanting to say it means:

Be Baptized (for no really good reason)
Your sins will be remitted (doesn’t say how in this verse)
You will receive the Holy Ghost (doesn’t say how in this verse)

The first part of the sentence has no relation to the middle or last part. Makes no sense.

My Comment: Lol Darrell, you’re a good guy. I see that in your posts. We may disagree strongly but we are trying to do the same thing which is to follow Jesus in spirit and in truth (John 4:24).

Talking about ZZ Top is speaking to my age. I’m an older guy but young in the Faith! Anyway, I understand the connection - LaGrange - the song. Funny! I like it. The first time I heard ZZ Top was when they came out with their album “Fandango” in 1975. Yea, I’m old. Lol

Just so you know, where the name “LaGrange” comes from is that it is the name of my favorite Thomistic Theologian named Fr. Reginald Garrigou-LaGrange. He taught at the Angelicum in Rome from 1909-1959.

To Sum Up this Thread

I think I have shown that you cannot be Raptured because you have to die first. Also, I brought up two doctrines that I thought would help stabilize any view of Eschatology and they were: (1) The Communion of Saints and (2) The Marriage Supper of the Lamb (Eucharist)

Now I would like to briefly introduce a possible alternative to the Rapture. The Rapture seems to be a way to avoid suffering and death during the Great Tribulation. How about this:

Acts 12:7-10 An angel protected Peter and freed him from prison
Gen 19:15-17 Lot and his wife and daughters led out of Sodom and Gemmorah by an angel
Mary (Gen 3:15, Apoc 12:13-17 - protects Her seed - she will crush the serpent - through the power of her Son)

Notice: God is not intervening directly but through mediators.

In Catholic private prophecy (not biblical), this scenario comes up fairly often. An example is the private prophecy of the Warning and the Three Days of Darkness, which probably comes right at the end of the Tribulation. It speaks of protection where you either will be under the protection of an angel or an angel will direct you to a refuge where you can’t be seen. This is at the end of the Tribulation but some prophecies have been interpreted to mean protection all the way through the Tribulation. Or you could be protected under the “Mantle of Mary”. I realize this needs to be explained. Anyway, it’s protection. There will still be suffering though. I read a book a couple of years ago by the exorcist, Fr Esper and he thinks this. Just a thought. We can talk about it later. Think about that.

Darrell, I know you are probably going to post another 20+ posts right after I finish. You are so fast! I’ve always been slow. I will evaluate them and go from there. May God bless you Darrell!

 

I really like Scott Hahn. You are so right. God bless you!!!

 

For the viewers,

First, I want to explain again why this has come up on this thread about the Rapture. I am advocating for believing in the Doctrines of the Communion of Saints and the Mass (Marriage Supper of the Lamb) because these would allow for things to be taking place on earth and in heaven at the same time. I think this would bring a lot more harmony into any eschatological view. I know the Mass is a hard sell.

Ok 37818,

I spoke about the Mass (Marriage Supper) all through my discussion with Darrell. I would list the post numbers but it would be too many. I barely scratched the surface in proving the Mass but there is enough to get started. I suggest you go through all my posts with Darrell and see what I said.

Here’s what I will do:

You give me a post number and something I said about the Mass that you disagreed with and I’ll answer it. Is that ok?

 

My Comment: I guess you were reading post #20. If Paul went to the Third Heaven (heaven as we think of heaven) bodily in 2 Cor 12:2, then he didn’t stay there because he later died. Scripture doesn’t say he died but the historian, Eusebius, said he did. Also, even more important, Paul says he did this Fourteen years earlier! He wrote this down fourteen years later so we know he didn’t stay. He came back and died. This shows you have to die to get to heaven.

My Comment: Timetofly, I don’t think scripture says that anywhere, does it? A “permanent” incorruptible body? Paradise isn’t heaven as we think of heaven because Christ had not opened the gates of heaven (Mark 16:19) when Enoch was taken up (Gen 5:24).

My Comment: Noah and his family, after the Flood, stayed on the same earth. I know you are looking at 2 Pet 3:3-7. The earth was new in the sense that it was cleansed. This signifies baptism because it means that by Baptism (water) you enter the Church (ark) (1 Pet 3:20-21). I’m not sure what you mean by “paradise was taken to heaven at the Flood”? I don’t think all the people that died (drowned) went to heaven because they signified sin.

My Comment: I agree that the Bosom of Abraham went to heaven when Christ ascended into heaven. Quoting Matt 27:52-53 to prove the Rapture is possible doesn’t work because all those in the Bosom of Abraham had died. I said that in my discussion with Darrell. You have to die to go to heaven.

I don’t think Enoch came back as Elijah but, even if he did, neither one of them has died yet. This is why many believe they will be the Two Witnesses (Apoc 11:3-12). You have to die to go to heaven.