The Rapture when is it?

[Calypsis4]

• 33:17 “For thus says the Lord: ‘David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel; 18 nor shall the priests, the Levites, lack a man to offer burnt offerings before Me, to kindle grain offerings, and to sacrifice continually.’”

So who is sitting on David's throne at present?

No one. The point of origin of the fulfillment of this prophecy is in the future, not the past. When Christ sits on the throne of David in Jerusalem in that yet coming day the prophecy will begin to be fulfilled and it will remain that way forever.

 

[Yeshua1]

Which is why the challenge was open to the amil and preterist.




True, but my understanding of the popularity of the amillennial view (which is said to be the view most adopted over the last five hundred years) stems from the Reformer's desire to separate themselves from Catholic Doctrine, which used to hold to a premillennial position, but, as I said, we have a hard time seeing the difference because both spiritualize so much of prophecy (meaning they make it analogy, metaphor, etc.) that the sum total is very close.




Doesn't matter, the influence of Reformed Theology is the likely root of the position he holds.

And it is a rejection of Prophecy as Prophecy as always been interpreted, despite the fact that Prophecy does use figurative language. There is a difference between how prophecies such as that of Christ and salvation have been fulfilled and how the amil and preterist approach Revelation.

Revelation is a comprehensive timeline which gives us, in order, the events of the Tribulation. Prophecy demands a seven year Tribulation and a Pre-Tribulation Rapture, and my hope is that the amils and preterist who think they can support their doctrine from Scripture won't beg off the discussion as has been done typically in the past.

So again, bring what you have to the table, let's discuss it.

And I would ask that instead of simply continuing to throw proof texts as they are dismantled, please also address the points provided that support the Pre-Tribulation Rapture, and the consistency of Prophecy.


God bless.

Ever since the time of Augustine, would think that the RCC was strongly A Mil, as he saw the Church of Rome as the Kingdom of God on earth!

 

[PrmtvBptst1832]

In my humble opinion, it is impossible to interpret the Olivet Discourse as Preterists do and still maintain a future coming of the Lord and resurrection of the dead. In fact, there are some Preterists who are consistent in their hermeneutic and place both in the past as having been fulfilled in connection with the First Jewish-Roman War. I applaud them for their consistency, but when one interprets the resurrection of the dead so as to exclude the participation of the body, he has rejected the gospel (1Corinthians 15).

All things are lawful for me, but not all things are beneficial. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be dominated by anything. Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food, and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is meant not for fornication but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. And God raised the Lord and will also raise us by his power. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Should I therefore take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! Do you not know that whoever is united to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For it is said, The two shall be one flesh. But anyone united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. Shun fornication! Every sin that a person commits is outside the body; but the fornicator sins against the body itself. Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you were bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body. (1 Corinthians 6:12-20)

 

[David Kent]

The Olivet discussion starts with a converstion of the then standing temple which Jesus said would be destroyed. When did the discussion pass into the future?

 

[Yeshua1]

In my humble opinion, it is impossible to interpret the Olivet Discourse as Preterists do and still maintain a future coming of the Lord and resurrection of the dead. In fact, there are some Preterists who are consistent in their hermeneutic and place both in the past as having been fulfilled in connection with the First Jewish-Roman War. I applaud them for their consistency, but when one interprets the resurrection of the dead so as to exclude the participation of the body, he has rejected the gospel (1Corinthians 15).

All things are lawful for me, but not all things are beneficial. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be dominated by anything. Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food, and God will destroy both one and the other. The body is meant not for fornication but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. And God raised the Lord and will also raise us by his power. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Should I therefore take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! Do you not know that whoever is united to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For it is said, The two shall be one flesh. But anyone united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. Shun fornication! Every sin that a person commits is outside the body; but the fornicator sins against the body itself. Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you were bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body. (1 Corinthians 6:12-20)

To deny the bodily/physical resurrection of Jesus and the sainst would be rank heresy!

 

[PrmtvBptst1832]

The Olivet discussion starts with a converstion of the then standing temple which Jesus said would be destroyed. When did the discussion pass into the future?

I think most would agree that Herod's Temple was under consideration. It is the overall interpretation of the Olivet Discourse, including what Jesus said concerning his Parousia, and how that relates to passages like 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:10, that is in question. In my humble opinion, it is totally inconsistent to claim that Matthew 24-25 was completely fulfilled in the events surrounding the First Jewish-Roman War and claim that 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:10 still awaits fulfillment, ignoring the obvious parallels.

 

[Yeshua1]

I think most would agree that Herod's Temple was under consideration. It is the overall interpretation of the Olivet Discourse, including what Jesus said concerning his Parousia, and how that relates to passages like 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:10, that is in question. In my humble opinion, it is totally inconsistent to claim that Matthew 24-25 was completely fulfilled in the events surrounding the First Jewish-Roman War and claim that 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:10 still awaits fulfillment, ignoring the obvious parallels.

I am still waiting for ANY historical proof that the resurrection of the dead has happened in the past....

 

[PrmtvBptst1832]

I am still waiting for ANY historical proof that the resurrection of the dead has happened in the past....

I do not know that anyone on the board holds to that view, but their hermeneutic consistently demands that they should. Read Matthew 24-25 in its entirety along with 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:10, and the parallels are obvious.

The Apostles on the Olivet Discourse

 

[Yeshua1]

I do not know that anyone on the board holds to that view, but their hermeneutic consistently demands that they should. Read Matthew 24-25 in its entirety along with 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:10, and the parallels are obvious.

The Apostles on the Olivet Discourse

The scriptures would hold to a future Second Coming Event still to happen!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Ahem, not to sound critical, but the Superbowl is not the Rapture...

I know many Christians get caught up in it, but, not exactly what Paul is teaching.


God bless.

You are probably not from N/E Pennsylvania

 

[Darrell C]

The two are the same. Post 45:

"The trifold declaration of scripture is “this generation” is that of the 1st century, contemporary with Christ and the apostles:

Matthew:
28 Verily I say unto you, there are some of them that stand here, who shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. Mt 16
33 even so ye also, when ye see all these things, know ye that he is nigh, even at the doors.
34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all these things be accomplished. Mt 24

Mark:
1 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There are some here of them that stand by, who shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God come with power. Mk 9
29 even so ye also, when ye see these things coming to pass, know ye that he is nigh, even at the doors.
30 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, until all these things be accomplished. Mk 13

Luke:
27 But I tell you of a truth, There are some of them that stand here, who shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God. Lk 9
31 Even so ye also, when ye see these things coming to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh.
32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all things be accomplished. Lk 21

The very simple hermeneutic of comparing scriptures plainly shows the synonomy of 'some will not taste of death', and, 'this generation will not pass away', and the synonomy of 'His coming,' and, 'the coming of the kingdom'."

Your conclusion is irrelevant. The generation alive when Christ taught this could not possibly be the one in view because we do not have...

1. The Return of Christ;
2. The gathering of the Elect;
3. The physical destruction of unbelievers;
4. The Establishment of the Promised Kingdom.

So if you want to build your eschatology on one feeble argument, that is your right.

Just don't think that it has anything to do with Biblical Prophecy.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Fantastic = fantasies. Spurgeon said he was called to preach the gospel and not to preach on prophecies.

That's funny, The men who preached the Gospel in the First Century did nothing but quote Prophecy.

Don't you think we should learn a lesson from that?

As far as Spurgeon goes, fantastic material to go to sleep by.




God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Pre tribulation is not accurate. It is a modern invention amongst protestants from about 1825.

Actually it is the First Century teaching of Paul, and the only conclusion one can draw if one maintains the harmony of Prophecy.

Paul was not waiting for the Tribulation, he was waiting to be physically resurrected while alive:


2 Corinthians
5 King James Version (KJV)

1 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.


The "earthly house of this tabernacle" is the physical body we now reside in. He says, if that body dissolves (and I would suggest that katalyō speaks of the separation of the spirit from the body) we have another house (body, that which our spirit resides in) not made with hands (that is, not of this creation), made by God, and eternal in the heavens.

That body he speaks about is the glorified body promised by God and guaranteed by the indwelling of God.

Now see Paul's (and our) desire:


2 For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:


"We," that is, those of us who are believers...earnestly desire to have that body.

Now see Paul make it clear he is not speaking about dying physically so we can go to Heaven, because that is not when we get the body made by God:


3 If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.


Being "naked" is the spirit without the earthly house, which clarifies what Paul is saying: we desire to be clothed with that everlasting body, rather than dying and not having a house for our spirit. That is the only way we are not "naked."

And that means Paul is desiring, and saying we all desire...to be glorified in the Rapture.


4 For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.


We in this tabernacle, our earthly body, groan because we are burdened in this body.

Not that we be without our body which brings with it burden (unclothed), but clothed upon, that the mortality of this body would be swallowed up with the life we will have in the body made without hands.

Pre tribulation is not accurate. It is a modern invention amongst protestants from about 1825.

If you have a Scriptural Basis for saying I am wrong, or, can address the points I have thus far raised, then please do so. "You're wrong" just isn't going to contribute to the discussion.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

That sounds like The Sect Without a Name aka the Two by Twos, or Cooneyites, I did read some articles about them about a year or so ago, but can't remember much about them.

In hindsight I think they are quite a bit like Mormons, but without the added heresies. If we think about the number of sects that arose in early America and look at the similarities, its my view we should not really be surprised. While the Founding Fathers were men who feared God, a number of them were Rational Theists, rather than Christians. You would have to include other groups that denied the Deity of Christ as Christians if you are going to call them Christians.


God bless.

 

[poor-in-spirit]

Matthew 24-25 discuss all three prophetic future events: 70AD, Catching away and the Second Coming in Power.

Jesus singles out specifically the 70AD destruction of Jerusalem in Luke 19: 41-46. This clearly indicates the Lord's reason for the immediate destruction of Jerusalem in Vs. 44: "Because they knew not the time of their visitation". He does not in any way use descriptive language for the catching away or triumphant Second Coming here. The remainder of the NT focuses on the 2 remaining prophetic events described thoroughly in Revelation. The 70AD destruction was the only one of the 3 events attributed to that "living generation".

Instead of comparing I Thess 5 to Matthew 24-25, I recommend that folks contrast the two, consider Vs. 9 of I Thess 5:

"For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ"

Many believers were killed by Rome during and after the 70AD conquest so consider this in your interpretations.

This should clear up some confusion I pray.

 

[Calypsis4]

David Kent: "Pre-tribulation is not accurate. It is a modern invention amongst protestants from about 1825."

That is simply not true. The protestants of that period did not invent pre-trib. Jesus spoke of it and his disciples wrote of it.

Luke 21:35-36
35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth. 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.

So, to escape the wrath to come is to stand before the Son of man. That matches perfectly with 'we shall all be changed'...and 'in the twinkling of an eye' (I Corinthians 15:51-52) and also with "Then we...shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air. I Thess. 4:17.

This has never happened in the past. It is yet future.

Not only so but Ephraim the Syrian(306-373) wrote: "“Woe to those who desire to see the day of the Lord!” For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins."

But much earlier than Ephraim, Irenaeus(130-202) whose mentor was Polycarp, who learned at the feet of the Apostle John himself: "And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, “There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.”(2) For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.” (in Against Heresies 5.29)

You need to do a serious reconsideration of your position, friend.

By the way, you ignored my answer to you about the prophecy of Christ on the throne of David being fulfilled in the future not the past. Why did you not reply?

 

[Calypsis4]

Matthew 24-25 discuss all three prophetic future events: 70AD, Catching away and the Second Coming in Power.

Jesus singles out specifically the 70AD destruction of Jerusalem in Luke 19: 41-46. This clearly indicates the Lord's reason for the immediate destruction of Jerusalem in Vs. 44: "Because they knew not the time of their visitation". He does not in any way use descriptive language for the catching away or triumphant Second Coming here. The remainder of the NT focuses on the 2 remaining prophetic events described thoroughly in Revelation. The 70AD destruction was the only one of the 3 events attributed to that "living generation".

Instead of comparing I Thess 5 to Matthew 24-25, I recommend that folks contrast the two, consider Vs. 9 of I Thess 5:

"For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ"

Many believers were killed by Rome during and after the 70AD conquest so consider this in your interpretations.

This should clear up some confusion I pray.

You are the one confused, dear friend.

You said:
He does not in any way use descriptive language for the catching away or triumphant Second Coming here.

He most certainly did:

Luke 21:35-36
35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth. 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.

 

[Darrell C]

You are probably not from N/E Pennsylvania

No from Virginia, which is now housing the Redskins.

I'm a Dallas fan, and then secondly Pittsburgh. And this because my best friend at the time of Super Bowl 13 was a Dallas fanatic. His whole family in fact. Dallas dishes, Dallas lamps, Dallas wallets, you name it, everything they owned was silver and gray and had Dallas stamped all over it. So, being about eight years old, I became a Dallas fan too.

And then the unthinkable happened...Pittsburgh beat Dallas.

So for years, even though I have never been a big football fan (I do think its the most interesting sport to watch, though, and like to watch a game every now and then), I hated Pittsburgh. But over time, I decided hating them was kind of dumb, particularly when its based on them beating my adopted team. So now Dallas and Pittsburgh are the teams I root for, but Dallas is still my team. They either play very well, or very bad, but isn't that all the teams?

So if Dallas goes to the Super Bowl, I'll watch. But for other teams, I can think of better ways to spend my Sunday afternoon.

And by the way, I think the Redskins stink.




God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Matthew 24-25 discuss all three prophetic future events: 70AD, Catching away and the Second Coming in Power.

I take the position that Matthew 24-25 does not speak of the Rapture, but refers explicitly of Christ's Return.

But, that is the point of the thread, so let's discuss it.

Jesus singles out specifically the 70AD destruction of Jerusalem in Luke 19: 41-46. This clearly indicates the Lord's reason for the immediate destruction of Jerusalem in Vs. 44: "Because they knew not the time of their visitation".

First, it is important to recognize that certain prophecies can be seen to have multiple fulfillments. The coming of Christ is exhibit A, and prophecy surrounding Antichrist is another good example, and relevant to a discussion of how Scripture might be applied to First Century events. I don't have a problem seeing a fulfillment in the first century, as long as we do not see it as The Fulfillment. Daniel's prophecy of the Antichrist is seen by many to apply to Antiochus Epiphanes, so no reason not to see an application to the first century.

But, just as Antiochus Epiphanes was not The Fulfillment, neither was Nero.

As far as Luke 19:41-46, this is likely specific to the destruction soon to take place, because in the Tribulation, at the mid point, Antichrist will stand in the Temple and declare himself to be God. I think we will see this in the Tribulation as well.

He does not in any way use descriptive language for the catching away or triumphant Second Coming here.

Where exactly do you see the Catching Away?

The remainder of the NT focuses on the 2 remaining prophetic events described thoroughly in Revelation.

Couls you be a little more specific in regards to what passages in Revelation you see The Rapture in?

I would suggest to you that Revelation does not mention The Rapture at all, but only speaks of the rapture of the Two Witnesses.

The First Resurrection is not the Rapture, either, because we only see the dead from among believers (who were saved during the Tribulation) raised at this time, also not correlating to Paul's teaching of the Rapture, in which all, both dead and those alive are resurrected physically and caught up.

The 70AD destruction was the only one of the 3 events attributed to that "living generation".

I don't see it as the generation taught at that time is the generation in view.

The generation in view are those who see the signs.

And the first century generation did not see the sign of the Son of Man coming, lol.

Instead of comparing I Thess 5 to Matthew 24-25, I recommend that folks contrast the two, consider Vs. 9 of I Thess 5:

"For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ"

Many believers were killed by Rome during and after the 70AD conquest so consider this in your interpretations.

This should clear up some confusion I pray.

1 Thessalonians is distinct to the Return, whereas Chapter 4 is distinct to the Rapture. We can correlate chapter 5 to Matthew 24-25.

Keep in mind that the "they" Paul is speaking about are unbelievers. The "Day of Christ" in view is not the Rapture, but the Day of the Lord, when God judges this earth.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

You said:
He does not in any way use descriptive language for the catching away or triumphant Second Coming here.

He most certainly did:

Luke 21:35-36
35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth. 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.

So you see this as referring to the Rapture?

I would suggest that in view is the Day of the Lord, rather than the Rapture, because first, it speaks of that which is to come on the face of the whole earth, which clarifies judgment is in view. Secondly it speaks of those who are judged by Christ, which correlates to the Sheep and Goat judgment, and those "counted worthy" will be those who endure the Tribulation and live through it physically, thus entering the Kingdom Christ will establish at His Return. And lastly, those who are caught up are not caught up because they are worthy, but caught up because they are in Christ.

I don't see it as unreasonable to see the "escaping" as a reference to the Rapture, but I don't think I would be dogmatic about it.

This...

Revelation 3:10
King James Version (KJV)

10 Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.


...I would be dogmatic about, and view it as basically saying "Those who are saved (overcome) will be kept from the hour of testing which will be global."


God bless.