Some Objections to AD70 Rapture Answered

[asterisktom]

Harpazo

Acts 8:39 And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.

2 Corinthians 12:2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth such an one caught up to the third heaven.

12:3 And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth

12:4 How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.

1 Thessalonians 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

Revelation 12:5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.

First of all I don't believe in a rapture as some do... And if I were some of you on here I would find out where this doctrine came from... And I can tell you its not Baptist!... The above uses Harpazo and if you want to get to the Greek of the matter talk to JOJ... Was Philip raptured?... What about Paul?... The last two is not about a rapture (or being caught up) but resurrection... I'm waiting for a resurrection!... Was Jesus Christ resurrected or raptured?... I been on here too long and no one has since then convinced me there is going to be rapture and all that entails... Brother Glen

Well, brother, I have to disagree here, at least somewhat. I think we cannot always force a single definition of a word throughout its uses in the Bible. Notwithstanding the same word being used I would only call the Thess. verse a rapture. The rapture there IMV has two components, bodily change and taking up. Harpazo covers only the latter.

Resurrection is a term that has two main meanings (more, actually, but simplifying here) - the resurrection of Christ and the resurrection of saved and unsaved at the Parousia (1 Thess. 4, Daniel 12:2). As you know, I believe this happened as a past event. So on that day there was both resurrection (for the dead) and rapture for the living.

When we die we will go to be with the Lord. Our bodies will be like those who went up to meet the Lord in the air. I dont know if I would use either resurrection or rapture for our change. The important thing is we will be like Him and with Him.

 

[Dave G]

Tom,
I usually don't answer your threads because I see that you're so convinced of a position that, for the life of me, I cannot understand how you've arrived at through the Scriptures.
But, I'd like to address a few things, if I may.

You ask me about Church history and ask me that?

I see that he did it because it's relevant to the timing.
See Matthew 24, Mark 13.

When it happened there were no church fathers to notice. If they were true fathers in the faith, so to speak, they would have been all raptured. And as to why others would have either not noticed or misconstrued the event, I already wrote above.

Here's where I see a problem existing, Tom...
For the Lord to have come again in 70 A.D., several things would have had to have happened:

1) " Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they [also] which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen." ( Revelation 1:7.
In order for me to believe you, you would have to demonstrate, with historical facts, that this has already happened.
I'm a student of world history, Tom, and I can tell you for a fact that nothing like that has ever happened...yet.

There is no recorded event like this, in while all eyes would have seen Him, nor has there been any period of time experienced by this world inhabitants that exceeds the events of the plague of Egypt.
This has been pointed out to you many times, yet these facts don't seem to make any difference to you.

 

[Dave G]

2) According to Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21, there are several things which happen sequentially right before He comes, and they happen one at a time, each one right before the next.

Anti-Christ showing himself as God by sitting in the mercy seat of the temple, claiming to be God.
The Tribulation of those day, which lasts for 42 months.
All of the "tribes" ( nations ) of the earth shall mourn, for they know that "the jig is up", and the One that they hate has finally made good on His promised return.
The Lord sends forth His angels and gathers all of His elect to Him, and returns with them ( Matthew 24:29-31, Mark 13:24-27, 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 )


3) Jerusalem completely surrounded by armies ( Luke 21:20, Zechariah 14:1-3 )...not just a Roman army.
The siege of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. was not an event that involved the armies of many nations...it was the Roman army, and the Lord Jesus did not defend Jerusalem from them as Zechariah 12:1-14 and Zechariah 14:1-4 states that He will.

To me, you're overlooking what is revealed in many prophecies that tell us specific information.
Only some prophecies were fulfilled in 70 A.D., such as the destruction of the 2nd temple and the razing of Jerusalem.
If you'd like to go through some of those prophecies, we can do that.
However, I think we both know that you've looked at this very carefully, and you are convinced of your position.

I am not, and the more that I study His words, the more I look at what you're presenting as gross error, IMO.
To me, there is no support in the Scriptures for either a-millennialism, pre-tribulationalism, or a 7 year Tribulation... nor is there any for "preterism" or even "partial preterism".

What I see and understand from them results in a 3.5 year Tribulation taking place after the mid-point of a seven year agreement ( Daniel's 70th "week" ), during which many smaller events happen.

At the end of all this, the Lord returns, catching His people up as He is coming down.
He brings those that are "asleep" with Him, and gathers those that are alive to Him, at His return.
He then rules and reigns for 1,000 literal years at Jerusalem, with His people ruling and reigning with Him.

I can present all of the Scriptures for this and get as detailed as you like, but I doubt it will make any difference to you, because it has not in other threads.

To me,
it seems that His words simply "bounce off" your mind when it comes to this subject, as it seems to bounce off many who hold to a-millennialism, as well.

 

[Dave G]

For one John describes the Temple as still standing.

Where?
In Revelation 11:19?

" And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail."

One thing that I notice here, is that His temple is said to be in Heaven, not on earth, Tom.

 

[asterisktom]

This has been pointed out to you many times, yet these facts don't seem to make any difference to you.

I have answered this many times, yet these answers don't seem to make any difference to you. Why should I repeat myself?
And they are tenets you are presenting, based on a basic misunderstanding of apocalyptic language.

 

[Dave G]

I have answered this many times, yet these answers don't seem to make any difference to you.

Because your answers don't satisfy me, Tom.

Why should I repeat myself?

Because the readers who look at threads like this will have many questions.

Firstly, why your view should be accepted as the truth contrary to what they may see the Scriptures saying.
Secondly, why your view is so very different from what many were taught all their lives using the Scriptures.
Thirdly ( and most importantly ) why it brings them no hope... knowing that the first resurrection unto life has already occurred, and that His second coming has already happened.

This means that the only thing left is the Judgment,
and only those that are physically with Him before the Judgement, will be at His right hand ( Matthew 25:34-41 ) and escape God's wrath in the Lake of Fire.

Given what the Scriptures detail, I don't think that you're seriously considering all of what it says, Tom...
nor the ramifications of what you are telling your audience.

 

[Dave G]

And they are tenets you are presenting, based on a basic misunderstanding of apocalyptic language.

Says who?
I'm sorry, but I don't recognize your authority over the Scriptures, and neither should anyone accept mine.

Each and every believer in Jesus Christ has it within themselves to decide, for themselves, what it says ( 1 Corinthians 2:6-16, 1 John 2:20-27 ).
This "system of authority" that we as believers have been subjected to ( and grown used to ) over the centuries, is man-made, Tom.
God did not establish a "hierarchy" over His people when it comes to them deciding the truth of a matter.

His teachers teach the Scriptures...they do not dictate how a passage should be understood.

For example,
You telling me that I have a misunderstanding of them, carries no more or no less weight than me telling you the reverse, my friend.
I have the same right to read the word of God and come up with what I see, as you do.

In addition, if we both have the Holy Spirit dwelling in us, why the confusion and differing teachings about what the Bible says?

 

[asterisktom]

Where?
In Revelation 11:19?

" And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail."

One thing that I notice here, is that His temple is said to be in Heaven, not on earth, Tom.

I am referring to the first verse of that chapter, not the last. And this passage needs to be compared with certain passages in Ezekiel.

 

[Dave G]

I am referring to the first verse of that chapter, not the last. And this passage needs to be compared with certain passages in Ezekiel.

" And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.
2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.
3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth."

Oh, that temple.
The one that I see ( I could be wrong ) will be established when the Lord comes again in Zechariah 14:1-20.

Yes, I see that there will be at least one more, and passages in Ezekiel confirm one of them it in great detail.

 

[asterisktom]

Because your answers don't satisfy me, Tom.

Because the readers who look at threads like this will have many questions.

Firstly, why your view should be accepted as the truth contrary to what they may see the Scriptures saying.
Secondly, why your view is so very different from what many were taught all their lives using the Scriptures.
Thirdly ( and most importantly ) why it brings them no hope... knowing that the first resurrection unto life has already occurred, and that His second coming has already happened.

This means that the only thing left is the Judgment,
and only those that are physically with Him before the Judgement, will be at His right hand ( Matthew 25:34-41 ) and escape God's wrath in the Lake of Fire.

Given what the Scriptures detail, I don't think that you're seriously considering all of what it says, Tom...
nor the ramifications of what you are telling your audience.

You completely misunderstand my position. What is more you grossly misrepresent it. My position is full of hope. My hope is on a Person. Yours seems to be on an event. To be with Christ forever, to have immortal bodies, eternal life - how can you call that "no hope"? Or say that "the only thing left is judgment"?

On the contrary, my position takes the many time statements at face value. And also appreciates the connection of the OT with the NT.

 

[asterisktom]

Says who?
I'm sorry, but I don't recognize your authority over the Scriptures, and neither should anyone accept mine.

This is getting into argumentativeness. I am not claiming personal authority.

 

[Dave G]

You completely misunderstand my position.

On the contrary, I think I completely understand it, plus all of its ramifications.

What is more you grossly misrepresent it.

Not at all...but if you like, why not answer the objections?

My position is full of hope

Hope that my Saviour has already returned, and that the events surrounding His return I will never partake of?
To me, that's no hope, Tom.

My hope is on a Person.

As is mine, and His every word.

Yours seems to be on an event

Not at all, my friend.
Mine is on a Saviour who has promised to me that certain events will fore-tell and precede His coming again, and I look to them as proof of His sure coming.

To be with Christ forever, to have immortal bodies, eternal life - how can you call that "no hope"? Or "the only thing left is judgment"?

I don't.

On the contrary, my position takes the many time statements at face value.

If you say so, but respectfully, i disagree.

and also appreciates the connection of the OT with the NT.

I can read it for myself, Tom, but thanks.

 

[asterisktom]

Revelation 11:1-2, "And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months." Which temple, the temple destroyed in 70AD or the one not yet built?

The temple destroyed.

 

[Dave G]

I am not claiming personal authority.

I accept your clarification, and thank you for that.

 

[Dave G]

The temple destroyed.

That's where we differ in our understanding of the pieces and how they all relate, Tom.
I see a total of 4 temples being built, the last for the Lord Himself to rule from at Jerusalem during the 1,000 years He is here, right before the Judgment.

That said, I can see that further discussion will be unfruitful, as in other threads.
You see what you see, and I see what I see.
Mine has been arrived at over many years of study, and in all probability, yours has, as well.

I think it best, yet again, if I do not reply to you further on this.
Every time I do, we seem to run into a wall of disagreement.


May God bless you sir, despite those disagreements.

 

[asterisktom]

On the contrary, I think i completely understand it, plus all of its ramifications.

People who say they "completely understand" a differing position "plus all its ramifications" have pretty much opted put of any meaningful dialogue. I mean, what would be the purpose? You say you understand my view - completely (although your comments belie that). All that is left is argument. And I am not interested in that. Intelligent, respectful iron sharpening iron, yes,

But you have already had your epiphany. You only want to correct me (not in itself a bad thing. I never claim to be infallible) but you show no corresponding awareness of your own fallibility.

 

[asterisktom]

That's where we differ in our understanding of the pieces and how they all relate, Tom.
I see a total of 4 temples being built, the last for the Lord Himself to rule from at Jerusalem during the 1,000 years He is here, right before the Judgment.

That said, I can see that further discussion will be unfruitful, as in other threads.
You see what you see, and I see what I see.
Mine has been arrived at over many years of study, and in all probability, yours has, as well.

I think it best, yet again, if I do not reply to you further on this.
Every time I do, we seem to run into a wall of disagreement.


May God bless you sir, despite those disagreements.

Agreed. The same to you, brother.

 

[asterisktom]

I am still waiting for a reply to my post 55. John of Japan and two others have asked for historical proof for an early date of Revelation and I provided, if not ironclad proof, at least something worthy of consideration,

 

[37818]

The temple destroyed.

How did you come to that conclusion? Please.

 

[asterisktom]

How did you come to that conclusion? Please.

I believe there are parallels in the Old Testament (Zech. 2:1-5, Amos 7:7-9). Measuring seems to imply both preservation and destruction, which is what happened in AD 70 to Jerusalem. The godly remnant were saved out of it, but those who were destroyed were those who were, in the phrase from Rev. 11:2 "outside the temple".

Not only the temple but, strangely to our way of thinking, the people also were to be measured. But not those outside the temple.