I Want To Be Left Behind

[BenJasher]

I wanted to name this something about the Rapture. But everything I came up with had already been used. So I am using the name of one of the best books I have ever read on the subject of the Rapture. It is written by Pastor Ron Poch. Get yourself a copy.

What I want to do here is to prove the Rapture to be a false teaching, and replace it by right scriptural thinking. Jesus said that the Truth would set you free. And it has been my experience that seeing the truth about the Rapture Theory has been one of the most liberating experiences of my life.

People get nervous and defensive when you try to take one of their pet teachings away from them. But if I can show you something better than Rapture, something more scripturally sound, something that actually made sense, wouldn't it be in all things wise to at least consider it?


So: here we go...
Basically, I want to make sure of the basic principals of the Rapture Theory before I start ripping said theory a "new one."

The Rapture Theory basically is stating that God is planning to pour out His wrath on the world for being disobedient to His word. He has instituted into those plans a "rescue" of His people. The wrath of God is going to be poured out during a period of time known in eschatological terms as The Tribulation Period. The debate concerning all of this wrathful vengeance is whether the "rescue" is going to happen before, during, or after this outpouring of God's wrath.

Here is where I hope to solicit your help. I need scriptural evidence for this theory. I taught this theory as truth for quite some time myself. But it has been such a long time, and the whole notion seems so silly to me these days, that I am afraid that I can't even provide scripture on this subject.;-) :

But don't get nervous about that, I can provide encyclopedic volumes of scripture that plainly state the the righteous aren't going anywhere.

So before I begin, could or would someone please re-aquaint me with some of the scriptures on the Rapture?

 

[scorpia]

I wanted to name this something about the Rapture. But everything I came up with had already been used. So I am using the name of one of the best books I have ever read on the subject of the Rapture. It is written by Pastor Ron Poch. Get yourself a copy.

What I want to do here is to prove the Rapture to be a false teaching, and replace it by right scriptural thinking. Jesus said that the Truth would set you free. And it has been my experience that seeing the truth about the Rapture Theory has been one of the most liberating experiences of my life.

People get nervous and defensive when you try to take one of their pet teachings away from them. But if I can show you something better than Rapture, something more scripturally sound, something that actually made sense, wouldn't it be in all things wise to at least consider it?


So: here we go...
Basically, I want to make sure of the basic principals of the Rapture Theory before I start ripping said theory a "new one."

The Rapture Theory basically is stating that God is planning to pour out His wrath on the world for being disobedient to His word. He has instituted into those plans a "rescue" of His people. The wrath of God is going to be poured out during a period of time known in eschatological terms as The Tribulation Period. The debate concerning all of this wrathful vengeance is whether the "rescue" is going to happen before, during, or after this outpouring of God's wrath.

Here is where I hope to solicit your help. I need scriptural evidence for this theory. I taught this theory as truth for quite some time myself. But it has been such a long time, and the whole notion seems so silly to me these days, that I am afraid that I can't even provide scripture on this subject.;-) :

But don't get nervous about that, I can provide encyclopedic volumes of scripture that plainly state the the righteous aren't going anywhere.

So before I begin, could or would someone please re-aquaint me with some of the scriptures on the Rapture?

Why make this one a big issue when all you can do is just to tell everybody here to come to the Lord God and study and learn from the Lord God himself so that no one will be led astray by anyone, even of what is written in the scriptures, the Lord God can decode the scriptures for us to get to the TRUTH ANYWAY. Always give the glory unto God and we must always decrease. The Lord God is the Teacher, not us or even the written scriptures.

 

[BenJasher]

Actually, Buttercup, after thinking about how I went about the subject, I really should have began by just addressing some of the scriptures that is used to support the notion of a Rapture.

I wanted someone who thought they knew what they were talking about to refresh me on the subject of the Rapture. That would allow me to let someone else give me a place to start. That was the idea.

My whole premise is that the notion of a Rapture can be shown to be quite unscriptural very easily.

I have been reading through some of Vic's discussion on the subject of a Rapture. And I have noticed a pattern.

What you find is most of the scriptures that people associate with the Rapture actually deal with something else. In other words, they may talk about the Beast, or the Tribulation Period but they don't address the Rapture itself.

Very few scriptures actually indicate an occurrence of some kind that people interpret as a Rapture, without actually talking about one of the peripheral issues.

So, let's take a look at the Rapture theory with this in mind, and argue the case from there.

There are several points to keep in mind that aren't normally brought to people's attention when the Rapture is discussed:

1) The Rapture is entirely a New Testament notion. It is completely without precedence or support in the Old Testament. (Peripheral topics, maybe. But not the Rapture)

2) In the New Testament, there are only two scriptures that actually speak of some type of occurrence that people take to mean a Rapture.

3) There is no other doctrine that has ever occupied a place in the collective consciousness of the Church, that wasn't dismissed outright as a heresy with no more scriptural support as the Rapture Theory has.

The fact is that 1 Corinthian 15:51-57 and the passage in 2 Thessolonians are the only two places where the Rapture is spoken of directly, so to speak. And these two passages can be clearly shown to have nothing to do with a Rapture. All the other scriptures that have to do with the Rapture, actually have to do with "peripheral issues" that go along with the Rapture.

Add to that the fact that I can post in this thread literally hundreds of, if not more, scriptures that clearly state that it is the wicked who will be removed, and that the Righteous are going to stay here.

It is my contention that someone who had no real light on the real subject matter of 1Corinthians 15, or 2 Thessolonians, came up with a "Fly-away Doctrine" and all the other stuff was used to build up this phantasmagoric horror fantasy that has been swallowed hook, line and sinker by the general rank and file of the Church.

But there are growing numbers of us that God has had an extra measure of mercy upon, and allowed us to see the lie that lurks beneath all the fluff and junk.

Up until recent history, the Catholic Church has burned people at the stake for preaching doctrine that had more scriptural backbone than what the Rapture Theory does. Why is it even allowed to be taught today? Could it be that it is because we are in the great Falling Away?

 

[scorpia]

]Actually, Buttercup, after thinking about how I went about the subject, I really should have began by just addressing some of the scriptures that is used to support the notion of a Rapture.

I wanted someone who thought they knew what they were talking about to refresh me on the subject of the Rapture. That would allow me to let someone else give me a place to start. That was the idea.

I know but why not subject yourself directly under God's command and tutelage, it would be better that way rather than devicing your own way just to show something to your fellas, wouldn't it?

]
My whole premise is that the notion of a Rapture can be shown to be quite unscriptural very easily.

God is over and above the scriptures hence hearing them from God would be absolutely much better.

]
What you find is most of the scriptures that people associate with the Rapture actually deal with something else

.
Before, I was with the denomination, too, and those very same verses convinced me that there was this so called and supposed to be rapture but things changes very easily when you find the Lord God Jesus Christ and it is not what I find that counts with me now, it is what the Lord God Jesus Christ is teaching us that we believe and follow in our life. I came to ask those verses with the Lord and I got the answers from Him hence I do share with you guys now.

]In other words, they may talk about the Beast, or the Tribulation Period but they don't address the Rapture itself.

I've gone through this before and it is understood that we were supposed to be taken out of this world when the Beast, or the Tribulation Period comes in.

]1) The Rapture is entirely a New Testament notion. It is completely without precedence or support in the Old Testament. (Peripheral topics, maybe. But not the Rapture)

As far as I could remember, the taking out of Lot and his family in Sodom and Gomorrah is attributed to the taking place of the Rapture. The transfer of Elijah and Enoch, too and so is the taking out of Noah and his family before the Great flood.

]Add to that the fact that I can post in this thread literally hundreds of, if not more, scriptures that clearly state that it is the wicked who will be removed, and that the Righteous are going to stay here

Why don't you go and do it now?

]Up until recent history, the Catholic Church has burned people at the stake for preaching doctrine that had more scriptural backbone than what the Rapture Theory does. Why is it even allowed to be taught today? Could it be that it is because we are in the great Falling Away?

I did tell you already that we are indeed in the great Falling Away and this is the fulfillment of Apo. 6:2 as the Lord taught and explained to us.

 

[BenJasher]

As far as I could remember, the taking out of Lot and his family in Sodom and Gomorrah is attributed to the taking place of the Rapture. The transfer of Elijah and Enoch, too and so is the taking out of Noah and his family before the Great flood.

I was wondering if someone was going to bring these up. (I bet if you were a coyote, you would be a three legged coyote, eh Buttercup.) Why did you not also mention Shadrach, Meshach, Abed-Nego in the fiery furnace?

Remember, we are looking for two things here: Precedence and support for the idea of a Rapture in the Old Testament. We need both of these for the Rapture to make any theological sense in the New Testament.

1)Noah and his family. Noah's thundering herd went through the Flood by way of Divine providence and protection. They weren't rescued from it, or rescued out of it. They were here the whole time the Flood was taking place. They didn't go anywhere.

This story tells us that the righteous are saved, while the wicked are destroyed. And that isn't the same story as what we hear from the Rapture.

The story of the Flood clearly illustrates God's ability and willingness to protect the righteous. But it lends no support nor precedence to the notion of a Rapture.

Close scrutiny of the scripture in this instance failed to uphold your hopes of flying away.

2)Lot in Sodom This story would almost seem to support the idea of a Rapture. Angels took him by the hand and led him out of Sodom just before they rained fire and brimstone down on the city.

But also consider: In one record of this story, Lot was a wicked fool with his heart set on the things of the world. And in another story, Lot is called a righteous man. So, who is being "raptured" here? A righteous man or a wicked fool? The answer to that question will have a deep impact on whether this story actually in fact supports the notion of a Rapture.

But in the end, it does not. If this story is our shining example of how the Rapture is going to transpire, then we can all relax. Let's all move to a big town and mingle with the Gay community. Lot was more concerned with the things of the world than following the Lord with his uncle. His only "get out of jail card" was the fact of who his uncle Abe was.

Also, we can expect to experience tragic loss as the Rapture unfolds. Lot's wife had a stroke, which is what the Hebrew idiom, "turned to stone" means.

And I won't go into the implications of his having incest with his daughters. I might get banned for profane speech.

If there is precedence here, it is a poor one. And if this is a picture of how the Rapture happens, let me stay here.

3)Elijah I went into a long discourse one time before about Elijah being taken up, and the implications of a Rapture in this story.
I will quote part of it here for you:

Elijah is a different story. For all intents and purposes, this story would seem to support the idea of a rapture. He was taken up alive, without having to die first. That's a good start. I will grant you that.

But what about that? And what about the prophets that studied in the school he started? Were they any less deserving? What about Elisha? And what about the inference that the rapture is only for a select few, if you use these stories to document your fantasy? Peter did away with the upper echelon idea for us, so we must look somewhere else for an answer. The only way for this story to bear any significance to the Rapture Theory is if Elisha, the 7,000 men who had not bowed the knee to Baal, and the student prophets were taken up as well. But they were not. So this story, by necessity, leaves us no choice but to come to the conclusion that God took Elijah the way He did simply because it pleased Him to do so. And in this story, there are no implications of some fantastical Rapture Theory for us to build our sand castles in the air with

Suffice it to say that when Elijah was taken up, it may not mean what you think it meant. Consider this point brought out by Wavy in the same thread:

As far as Elijah, after he was taken up, he wrote a letter to Jehoram as recorded in 2 Chronicles 21:12-15. This was after the event where Elijah was taken up by the whirlwind. How did he write a letter to some one if he is in heaven?

4) Enoch Enoch doesn't give us anymore help in our search for precedent and support. It simply states that "God took him." Let me quote from the same thread again:

What this statement does not say is that Enoch was raptured because he was such a good little boy. Read it for yourself. Enoch was not. Could be he expired. It does not say. It does say that God took him, though. But God also took Moses. But there it is recorded exactly what happened. We know that Moses died, and that God took it upon Himself to bury his body. Did the same thing happen to Enoch? It does not say. But to use the story of Enoch to support the fantasy of a Rapture is foundless conjecture. The story of Enoch does not support the idea of a rapture. If you think otherwise, let me sell you some ocean-front property in Missouri. I could have your toes in the sand, and your money in my bank account real fast.

5) This is getting long, and I apologize. But let me address the three Hebrew children in the Furnace.
This story leaves us holding the bag if we are looking for precedent and support. This story, in the same way that Noah and the Flood does, shows us that (1)God will take us through our times of fiery trials , and never offers to rescue us from them, and that (2) God will Divinely provide for our miraculous protection in the times of those fiery trials.

Is there anymore irrefutable proof you want to discuss with me?

 

[BenJasher]

Why don't you go and do it now?

There wouldn't be a tone of condescension in there would there? I hope so. It would show that at least you have backbone enough to speak up for what you believe.

I posted several scriptures in the thread mentioned above,
You can read it here

I have posted scripture on other threads on this same subject. I promised Vic I would post a list of scriptures showing the Rapture Theory to be false. I have been very busy with my work since then. But I have more free time now.
I may start posting scriptures for those who are seriously interested.

It would have to be in small doses. People, for the most part, won't read a long post. But the list of scriptures will provide what we failed to find earlier: Precedence and support. Not in favor of a Rapture, but just the opposite.

When the current discussion slows down, I will start listing scriptures showing why I want to be left behind. Hopefully you will feel the same way by the time this thread runs it's course.

 

[scorpia]

I was wondering if someone was going to bring these up. (I bet if you were a coyote, you would be a three legged coyote, eh Buttercup.) Why did you not also mention Shadrach, Meshach, Abed-Nego in the fiery furnace?

You know pretty well that I do not also believe the theory of rapture. However, just for the sake of discussion, I learned then from our pastor that rapture was simply taking the believers of the Lord out of this world to escape from the Great Tribulation which will come afterwards. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego were rescued from the fiery furnace but there was tribulation of any sort that came down to the people then, hence not applicable.
[quote:232c8]
Remember, we are looking for two things here: Precedence and support for the idea of a Rapture in the Old Testament. We need both of these for the Rapture to make any theological sense in the New Testament.

From your point of view, which one do you consider precedence and which one do you consider support?

1)Noah and his family. Noah's thundering herd went through the Flood by way of Divine providence and protection. They weren't rescued from it, or rescued out of it. They were here the whole time the Flood was taking place. They didn't go anywhere.

This story tells us that the righteous are saved, while the wicked are destroyed. And that isn't the same story as what we hear from the Rapture.

When I was still in the denomination, your very last sentence in this quote is somewhat similar to the very essence and nectar of the theory of rapture, "the righteous are to be saved from the fangs of the Great Tribulation.but wicked will have to undergo with it", that was what I knew then.

The story of the Flood clearly illustrates God's ability and willingness to protect the righteous. But it lends no support nor precedence to the notion of a Rapture.

What notion of the rapture here are you looking for by the way?

Close scrutiny of the scripture in this instance failed to uphold your hopes of flying away.

Oh I see. The only thing I know until now about the rapture is this, that the flying away that you are talking about is just the parallel meaning of the escape of Noah and his family from the Great Flood but not to literally fly away.

2)Lot in Sodom This story would almost seem to support the idea of a Rapture. Angels took him by the hand and led him out of Sodom just before they rained fire and brimstone down on the city.

But did Lot and his family fly away, they didn't, did they?

But also consider: In one record of this story, Lot was a wicked fool with his heart set on the things of the world. And in another story, Lot is called a righteous man. So, who is being "raptured" here? A righteous man or a wicked fool?

How long does it take for a wicked one to be completely turned into a righteous? What is a righteous one, how do you understand it? REmember the thief on the cross, wasn't he a wicked one until the last minute of his life where he was able to talk to Jesus? Did the thief die wicked or righteous?

The answer to that question will have a deep impact on whether this story actually in fact supports the notion of a Rapture.

Only God can answer the said question. If we will persist in answering same, all that is left with us today is merely speculation, immagination, or to the least, hallucination.

But in the end, it does not. If this story is our shining example of how the Rapture is going to transpire, then we can all relax. Let's all move to a big town and mingle with the Gay community. Lot was more concerned with the things of the world than following the Lord with his uncle. His only "get out of jail card" was the fact of who his uncle Abe was.

As I said, it is not within our bounds that we can have an absolute answer for this thing but God only. Let us just call on and come to God and ask God all about this issue and let us stop specualating or making an illusion. God is real and alive and let us put all our trust and confidence in the Lord God.

Also, we can expect to experience tragic loss as the Rapture unfolds. Lot's wife had a stroke, which is what the Hebrew idiom, "turned to stone" means.

Hence put yourself directly under the Lord God for you to make sure that you will not really experience a sure tragic loss.

And I won't go into the implications of his having incest with his daughters. I might get banned for profane speech.

How did you know that it was an incest in the eyes of God during that time?

If there is precedence here, it is a poor one. And if this is a picture of how the Rapture happens, let me stay here.

How come will there be any when rapture itself is not true but just a fallacy?

5) This is getting long, and I apologize. But let me address the three Hebrew children in the Furnace.
This story leaves us holding the bag if we are looking for precedent and support. This story, in the same way that Noah and the Flood does, shows us that (1)God will take us through our times of fiery trials , and never offers to rescue us from them, and that (2) God will Divinely provide for our miraculous protection in the times of those fiery trials.

If we really wanted to avail of this providence of God, then let us all come direct to God and put all our trust in Him. let us study and learn directly from God and let us willfully obey whatever God will tell us to do in our life. God is not any written scripture but a real and alive spirit being in whom nothing is impossible with Him.

Is there anymore irrefutable proof you want to discuss with me?

[/quote:232c8]
Leave everything to God and let God increase and let yourself, on the other hand, decrease and God will be with you always. Give the glory and praise to God.

 

[scorpia]

There wouldn't be a tone of condescension in there would there?

I don't understand the last part "in there would there", could you help me please?

[quote:bfe54]When the current discussion slows down, I will start listing scriptures showing why I want to be left behind.

[/quote:bfe54]
In fact the Lord said that no one would ever escape the literal burning when the general resurrectionf (where afterwards all will be burnt with fervent fire so that nothing is left unturned) comes, starting from Adan and Eve up to the Second coming, except those who died and are fortunately turned into an angel of the Kingdom of God. Your wish to be left behind will then come to reality unless you change your wish to be turned to an angel of the Kingdom of God when you die.

 

[BenJasher]

From your point of view, which one do you consider precedence and which one do you consider support?

Okay, Precedence and support are two things that are necessary for the Rapture to have theological credence. Without these two things, the Rapture is an anomaly of theology with no rightful standing in the credo of Christian consciousness.

Precedence is when something that can be equated as the same thing has happened before. Then you have precedence to support the thought of it happening now, or that it could happen again in the future.

In this case, there is nothing in the Old Testament that establishes precedent, thereby enabling us to believe that it could happen again in this day and age.

Enoch doesn't provide this for us. Neither does Lot leaving Sodom. Noah and the Flood leaves us wanting precedent, and having to look elsewhere. Daniel and the lion's den tells the same story. And the list goes on. Not once does the Old Testament give any shred of precedence for us to believe in a rapture.

And, last but not least, there is support. Support would be any type of evidence from the Old Testament that would lend favor and acceptability to the idea of a Rapture. Support would be one of the prophets prophesying a rapture in the last days. For that matter, precedence would be strong support.

But we find no support of even the faintest kind in the Old Testament. I am not closed minded about this, but I am firmly convinced that the Rapture is a theological anomaly, entirely based (falsely, I might add) upon the New Testament. Therefore it has no right to occupy any place in our minds or spirits, or even in our faith. And I believe it is dangerous for anyone to base their faith on this anomalous doctrine.

 

[scorpia]

Okay, Precedence and support are two things that are necessary for the Rapture to have theological credence. Without these two things, the Rapture is an anomaly of theology with no rightful standing in the credo of Christian consciousness.

Precedence is when something that can be equated as the same thing has happened before. Then you have precedence to support the thought of it happening now, or that it could happen again in the future.

In this case, there is nothing in the Old Testament that establishes precedent, thereby enabling us to believe that it could happen again in this day and age.

Enoch doesn't provide this for us. Neither does Lot leaving Sodom. Noah and the Flood leaves us wanting precedent, and having to look elsewhere. Daniel and the lion's den tells the same story. And the list goes on. Not once does the Old Testament give any shred of precedence for us to believe in a rapture.

And, last but not least, there is support. Support would be any type of evidence from the Old Testament that would lend favor and acceptability to the idea of a Rapture. Support would be one of the prophets prophesying a rapture in the last days. For that matter, precedence would be strong support.

But we find no support of even the faintest kind in the Old Testament. I am not closed minded about this, but I am firmly convinced that the Rapture is a theological anomaly, entirely based (falsely, I might add) upon the New Testament. Therefore it has no right to occupy any place in our minds or spirits, or even in our faith. And I believe it is dangerous for anyone to base their faith on this anomalous doctrine.

Though we both believe rapture is a false teaching, still what you are looking for is just a battle of opinions, aren't you? By the way, may I know how do you understand the theory of rapture for it seems to me that mine is diifferent from what you know?

 

[Atonement]

BenJasher,

I been watching your post here about the rapture on these threads. Actually you been under my microscope (sorta speak). I notice you don't quote much Latin, Hebrew or Greek? I'm waiting for you to lay all your cards on the table. Then one day you will find that I have come here with my responce(s) and ripped every single thing you have to say about the rapture apart. I guess you do not know that the word Rapture is mentioned in Latin? I'll give you time to study that including the verse(s) it's found in. I guess you would not know the Greek word "Ek" means to take us (Church) out of: As in the Tribulation!! Another thing I'll let you study on. I'm gonna continue to watch you, and when I think you have layed your cards on the table. I will come back and ask for a ONE ON ONE debate with you, with no outside influence. Then we'll test your knowledge.

But untill then, please by all means.. continue..

 

[BenJasher]

Actually my self anointed intellectual friend, the word Rapture isn't even in the Latin. The word Rapture is a contrived word, spoon fed to those who don't know better, causing them to accept the false notion that it is scripture.

If you know so very much, and you can just tear my statements to shreds, then you know that the word Rapture has more in common with Rape than scripture.

And as far as a challenge to a one on one debate on the Rapture, tell me what you are going to do with the small vial of smelling salts I will be sending to you via private messenger? If you don't know, ask me, I will tell you what that is supposed to mean.

And if you really do know so all-fired much, and if you really are that confident in your standing as an authority of the scriptural truthfulness of the Rapture; Bring it. Otherwise, take your humanistic, escapist fantasy and go somewhere else with it. You ain't gonna change me. and it is obvious from your tone that you won't be persuaded to consider changing your mind. In reality, you are challenging me to waste my time.

I don't think you know as much as you pretend. I used the right word there: pretend. You know what that word means, don't you? Or do I need to explain what that means?

 

[BenJasher]

By the way, if you want to discuss this issue on an intelligent level, check your grammar and learn how to spell. How can I discuss anything intelligently with someone who won't take the time to speak or spell properly, or punctuate correctly?

I could care less how many different languages you are familiar with, to be fluent inherently connotates knowing how to spell, and having a grasp of the grammar.

 

[BenJasher]

Though we both believe rapture is a false teaching, still what you are looking for is just a battle of opinions, aren't you? By the way, may I know how do you understand the theory of rapture for it seems to me that mine is diifferent from what you know?

Scorpia, I am glad to find that you also believe that the Rapture is a false teaching.

No. I am not looking for a battle of opinions. The fact of the matter is that most who teach the Rapture as Gospel truth, don't really believe in it in their heart of hearts. They don't talk openly about that fact. But if you are listening, you will hear indicative statements along the way. I know that for a fact because I taught it myself at one time, and know others who once taught it but no longer do. I know a pastor who lost his church when he realized the Rapture was a lie, and began to speak openly about it. I am by no means alone in my stand against the Rapture.

What I do hope for is a harvest. I hope to be able to convince at least one person to take another look at what they think they believe about the Rapture, and realize the real truth(s) hidden beneath it.

So that it is a matter of record, in case anyone is curious: The Rapture is a teaching that Christians hold to that teaches them, in essence, that God is going to take them out of the world when He decides to pour out His judgment upon it. There are scenarios where planes full of passengers fall out of the sky because the pilot was suddenly raptured. Raptured people's clothes fall to the floor in a pile because we got Raptured right out of our clothes. (Comical nonsense. The Rapture ain't all bad. It's good for a laugh once in a while.)

Woven into the Rapture fantasy are other, not necessarily related scriptural events.

There is the Tribulation period. In order for the Rapture idea to kinda, almost sorta make sense to people, they have assigned a time period of seven years to the Tribulation Period. They have taken Daniel's prophesy of seventy weeks, made the last week into seven years, and somehow associated it with the Tribulation Period.

Along with that are the Beast prophecies. Somehow the Anti-Christ, and the False Prophet get thrown into the same pot and the three are set to a rapid boil during the Tribulation Period.

During the Tribulation Period, the world and it's inhabitants will be left for the Anti-Christ and False Prophet and the Beast to misuse to their heart's content while God vents His anger on the earth. And this is supposed to be alright because the Saints will be at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb, far away from the terrible situation down below.

Have I gotten everything? Let's see: The Tribulation Period, The Un-Holy Trinity, The Rapture, the Marriage Supper of the Lamb...

Oh, and before I forget, during all of this, the Jews are supposed to come to their senses and realize that Jesus was the Messiah after all and start the sacrifices again, in the new Temple they build after they fight a war with the Islamic nations and tear down the Dome of the Rock. ( What an impossible crock, if you stop and give it some serious thought.) I am starting to gag. This much twisting of the scriptures in the name of truth makes me wretch.

But before I get sick to my stomach and throw up on my keyboard, I will say that the only way there could be any truth in any of this is for us to find some way to do away with some pretty far reaching truths of the scripture. These truths also help us to see the fallacy of the Rapture idea.

So let's do like the guy in the Book of Jeremiah and use a pen-knife to cut these concepts out of the Bible. Then we will have nothing left but a few scriptures to feed our fantasy of a Rapture with.

You see, my friend, the Rapture was purported for the sole purpose of preventing the real truths contained in the teaching(s) of the Rapture from ever being seen. And we like sheep have gone astray...

It's earliest appearance was somewhere in the close neighborhood of 175 A.D. Then again in the 800's, then Mr. Darby finally sold the pig in a poke to the Church in the 1800's. Even today, the Rapture hasn't taken hold of the Church the way we would think it has here in the United States. You can go to just about any other country and people will laugh in your face if you try to tell them of a rapture. But you are in danger of starting a fight if you tried to tell someone in the United States there was no such thing as a Rapture.

 

[scorpia]

Scorpia, I am glad to find that you also believe that the Rapture is a false teaching.

I guess we are the only two, so far, who voted for no in the poll, aren't we?

[quote:ccf67]No. I am not looking for a battle of opinions. The fact of the matter is that most who teach the Rapture as Gospel truth, don't really believe in it in their heart of hearts. They don't talk openly about that fact. But if you are listening, you will hear indicative statements along the way. I know that for a fact because I taught it myself at one time, and know others who once taught it but no longer do. I know a pastor who lost his church when he realized the Rapture was a lie, and began to speak openly about it. I am by no means alone in my stand against the Rapture.

If you are very observant, there are also many in the so called Christian denominations who do not believe in the theory of the rapture. Here in our place, I know a very prominent pastor who has a very large number of memberships who is not advocating for this theory of Rapture, his name is Eli Soriano of the ADD group.

What I do hope for is a harvest. I hope to be able to convince at least one person to take another look at what they think they believe about the Rapture, and realize the real truth(s) hidden beneath it.

Not bad but don't forget or be sure to ask the help of God and I am willing to be of any help in your pursuit regarding this matter.

So that it is a matter of record, in case anyone is curious: The Rapture is a teaching that Christians hold to that teaches them, in essence, that God is going to take them out of the world when He decides to pour out His judgment upon it.

Exactly as how we did learn same from our previous pastor in the denomination, but unfortunately he passed away months ago without experiencing this thing which he taught us to be true (in reality, it is only in his mind).

There are scenarios where planes full of passengers fall out of the sky because the pilot was suddenly raptured. Raptured people's clothes fall to the floor in a pile because we got Raptured right out of our clothes. (Comical nonsense.

Even today, movie tapes and cds are stil availble for this doctrine of rapture. Have you seen any of these movies?

The Rapture ain't all bad. It's good for a laugh once in a while.

But it is highly poisonous.

Woven into the Rapture fantasy are other, not necessarily related scriptural events.

There is the Tribulation period. In order for the Rapture idea to kinda, almost sorta make sense to people, they have assigned a time period of seven years to the Tribulation Period. They have taken Daniel's prophesy of seventy weeks, made the last week into seven years, and somehow associated it with the Tribulation Period.

I do believe in the Great Tribulation which by now is in existence, however, if we have a different view in this part, I deem it unnecessary this time for us to have a discourse in this issue. Let us just watch with our very own two eyes what is happening around the globe and pray to God to grant us peace and let same come to pass to both of us painless/ly.

Along with that are the Beast prophecies. Somehow the Anti-Christ, and the False Prophet get thrown into the same pot and the three are set to a rapid boil during the Tribulation Period.

During the Tribulation Period, the world and it's inhabitants will be left for the Anti-Christ and False Prophet and the Beast to misuse to their heart's content while God vents His anger on the earth. And this is supposed to be alright because the Saints will be at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb, far away from the terrible situation down below.

Have I gotten everything? Let's see: The Tribulation Period, The Un-Holy Trinity, The Rapture, the Marriage Supper of the Lamb...

Watch out for the mark on the forehead or on the hand. You will be greatly surprised as to what group of sect will this prophecy be fulfilled in the soonest time possible? This sect is all around the globe now.

Oh, and before I forget, during all of this, the Jews are supposed to come to their senses and realize that Jesus was the Messiah after all and start the sacrifices again, in the new Temple they build after they fight a war with the Islamic nations and tear down the Dome of the Rock. ( What an impossible crock, if you stop and give it some serious thought.) I am starting to gag. This much twisting of the scriptures in the name of truth makes me wretch

Maybe the best approach for this one is see how the Jews are now behaving with her neighbors and the world in totality. Is there any sign of awakening that you can see from them?

But before I get sick to my stomach and throw up on my keyboard, I will say that the only way there could be any truth in any of this is for us to find some way to do away with some pretty far reaching truths of the scripture. These truths also help us to see the fallacy of the Rapture idea.

BEing pushed to the wall, there is only option for both of us to go to, let us ask for the rescue from God himself and let us only listen to the voice of God, no other can rescue us my friend except God.

So let's do like the guy in the Book of Jeremiah and use a pen-knife to cut these concepts out of the Bible. Then we will have nothing left but a few scriptures to feed our fantasy of a Rapture with.

If God ordained us to do so, why not my friend?

You see, my friend, the Rapture was purported for the sole purpose of preventing the real truths contained in the teaching(s) of the Rapture from ever being seen. And we like sheep have gone astray...

[/quote:ccf67]
But don't forget that even if we have gone astray of the way, somewhere along the way, God is always there waiting, for us to call on and to come to Him so that He may lighten up our way and redirect our path leading to His kingdom, don't lose hope my friend.

 

[Atonement]

LOL

Anyway, post on thee of little wisdom of prophecy...

 

[BenJasher]

LOL

Anyway, post on thee of little wisdom of prophecy...

Are you here to heckle or debate the issue at hand? For a moderator, I find you demeanor to be a little trite. Do you need me to look that word up for you?

If you really do know so much and you can just shoot down everything I or anyone else says with ease, then why is it that all I see out of you is ad hominem? I will let you look that word up. I have better things to do.

It may be embarrassing for you to find that you are not even close to being qualified to debate this issue with me. I don't care if you are a moderator. Obviously around here, it doesn't take much to be a moderator.

And don't be making fun of Scorpia because of his weaker grasp of English. English is his second language, and I think he does pretty good. I have no problem figuring out what he is trying to get across. Let's you and I go over to the pinoi forums and try to communicate in Tagalog. (I bet you can't even pronounce that word properly) See if anyone makes fun of you for the way you say things. They would probably be gracious enough to help you when you had problems with the language instead of making fun of you. Of course, I already do that for the way you say things in English.

If you have some debating you would like to do here, I am still waiting. I have been waiting since you fired the first shot.

 

[D46]

If there is precedence here, it is a poor one. And if this is a picture of how the Rapture happens, let me stay here.

Thus sayeth the Lord..."Wish granted".

 

[Atonement]

Are you here to heckle or debate the issue at hand? For a moderator, I find you demeanor to be a little trite. Do you need me to look that word up for you?

The more you post, the more I "heckle". As a Mod I could warn you for posting falsely against what the Bible teaches in violation of rule number 1 as you agree to when you signed up here. However, I think you need a clear 'window' to see out of before action is taken on that rule, because you're just mistaken in your theology. Am I dull enough yet?

But, I will post a warning against your account for the following..

And don't be making fun of Scorpia because of his weaker grasp of English

Let's you and I go over to the pinoi forums and try to communicate in Tagalog. (I bet you can't even pronounce that word properly) See if anyone makes fun of you for the way you say things.

Violation of rule #5, 6

I find this funny because it truly shows you can not read in context when someone is speaking cleary to you, thus you feel you should bash a member. I never said anything to or against Scorpia. That's your own barnyard thinking. Already how am I or anyone on this site, suppose to trust what you have to say about the Bible? You have come here with nothing but personal bashings. You could not have a cilvil debate if you tried. Already your scared and backing into a corner, it shows through your immature posts.

I don't care if you are a moderator. Obviously around here, it doesn't take much to be a moderator.

2nd warning openly challenging a MOD.. Violation of rule number 10

It must be noted one more violation could have you banned from this site. Am I still being a little trite with you?

Stay on topic and off personalties..

In time your theology will fall, if you don't 1st...

 

[BenJasher]

In time your theology will fall, if you don't 1st...

We'll see.