Christian Readers discussion

Share your views. Which do you think is first?

The ebook titled "Rapture: Fact or Fable?" pretty much answers this question and may change one's belief about both Rapture and the Great Tribulation. Bottom line is that when Jesus was asked about the end of the age, he said nothing that could be construed as either Rapture or the Great Tribulation as popularly believed today. So who are you going to believe?

Well, how do you explain Matthew 24:29-31 or all of Matthew 24 for that matter?

This question is addressed in a book I just finished called The Day of the Lord: The Book of Revelation Revealed. The author, Vaughn Martin, explains that "a more biblical term than 'rapture' is 'gathering' - although the gathering may look like what some people envision when they think of the rapture when the angels of God gather His elect." He expounds on this.

I'm in agreement with the author that God will not remove the church from the earth before the Tribulation, as scripture reveals that it will be a time of great harvest (Rev. 7:14)

I guess the important thing, regardless of how it all transpires, is that we're prepared for the testing of our faith. Already in America, the level of persecution is stepping up and most of us aren't used to it.

Interesting question , i thought the rapture first and those left behind will go through tribulation..I will check the book out. The word of God will not contradicts itself,i pray the Holy spirit will shine some light

The answer to that question can be found in the scripturs itself. I now have a book on pre-realease at Barnes and Noble, Apple and Smashwords "The Rapture and the Great Tribulation Revealed: Which is First?" ISBN 9781301637102. Release date is 16/09/2013. It really is an eye opener with supportive scriptures.

Beverley wrote: "Well, how do you explain Matthew 24:29-31 or all of Matthew 24 for that matter?"
*******************************************************
"Rapture: Fact of Fable?" dissects Matthew 24, verse-by-verse, including 29-31. Personally, I have difficulty fitting in the pre-trib rapture as an event when Jesus' uses the pronoun "you" throughout Matthew 24, including "you" will see the abomination of desolation; "you" will know when the end is near; and "you" are urged to be ready for the second coming of Christ. None of "you" seeing or experiencing those things would be possible if "you" have been raptured away. Verse 30 says that all the earth will see His coming — there goes the concept of a "secret" rapture where those left behind will be bewildered and wonder what happened. In fact, the only event that can be construed as rapture that Jesus' speaks of is found in verse 31— the gathering of the elect in conjunction with the "Son of Man [Christ] coming." That being the case, there can be only one conclusion: Yes there is a rapture and it is coincidental — one and the same — with the second coming of Christ and is not either a pre-trib rapture or a mid-trib rapture.

The study of this topic can be quite involved and very interesting.
I investigated this once as part of a Bible study group. You can categorize theories of when the rapture occurs in relation to the tribulation as either pre-trib, mid-trib, or post-trib.
At that time, people in the group were separated into those three, and the group really couldn't all agree on one conclusion.
Although I still believed that this is an investigation worth pursuing, I ended up placing myself in a new category: pan-trib. Which means, it'll all pan out in the end. :)
Nevertheless, I encourage everyone to pursue this study and learn the theories and the scriptures that back them.

Emily wrote: "I guess the important thing, regardless of how it all transpires, is that we're prepared for the testing of our faith. Already in America, the level of persecution is stepping up and most of us aren't used to it."

Agreed, and a very good point.
Some people say that our rights/freedoms as Christians in this country are being slowly eroded.
I don't know if this is even on the radar screen of most pastors. I pray that our eyes and our pastors eyes be opened and that they and we speak out boldly.

Fredrick wrote: "Emily wrote: "I guess the important thing, regardless of how it all transpires, is that we're prepared for the testing of our faith. Already in America, the level of persecution is stepping up and ..."
*****************************************************************
http://www.cbn.com/tv/1509282970001

I am a pan-trib. I believe that God has me in the palm of His hand and that it will all pan out in the end. That said, I pray for a pre-trib, but plan for a post-trib and just STAY READY.

Based on my studies as outlined in my book, I believe that there will be a Rapture (Grand Return of Christ) as well as there will be a Great Tribulation. If Jesus said it, I believe it. I also agree with you all that the signs of the time are evident and the best thing that we all should do is prepare. In preparing though, What should we prepare for? Should we prepare for the Rapture only, the Tribulation only or both?

Jesus said "For then shall be great tribulation" (Mt 24:21). Note the lack of a definite article and capital letters. Tribulation means troublous, difficult, dangerous times. Great means plenty of it. It was exactly the same thing as saying "all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution" (2Ti 3:12). Nothing the Lord said connected great tribulation with a 7-year period, or any specified timeframe. There are periods when or places where persecution is very terrible, and others where it's almost nonexistent. Tribulation is general.

Bart wrote: "Jesus said "For then shall be great tribulation" (Mt 24:21). Note the lack of a definite article and capital letters. Tribulation means troublous, difficult, dangerous times. Great means plenty of ..."

I think Bart is right on here. I think the layering of Daniel on Matthew 24 and Revelatoin all together is a misguided attempt by man to try to discern what God has clearly intended to remain hidden. I think it is misplaced attention for us to be reading scripture like this--since we're reading it for what is in it for us, rather than reading it for God's purpose.

I think that the prognostications of many end-times theologians have served only to alienate non-believers, confuse new believers, annoy true bible-readers, and serve primarily to make themselves feel good because they think they have it "all figured out." They don't realize that they are shouting where scripture is whispering and conveniently gloss over verses and entire exegetical principles that contradict their particular eschatological model.

Gordon wrote: "I think Bart is right on here."

Thanks Gordon for the kind words. But the Rapture is another side of the coin. While the word is not Biblical the concept is: “For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout… Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air…” 1Th 4:16,17. We can look forward to that day, for sure, which is why v18 says "Wherefore comfort one another with these words".

Bart wrote: "Jesus said "For then shall be great tribulation" (Mt 24:21). Note the lack of a definite article and capital letters. Tribulation means troublous, difficult, dangerous times. Great means plenty of ..."
******************************************
Agreed re "tribulation."

Bart wrote: "Gordon wrote: "I think Bart is right on here."

Thanks Gordon for the kind words. But the Rapture is another side of the coin. While the word is not Biblical the concept is: “For the Lord himself s..."
************************
Many proponents of the pre-trib rapture hang their hat on 1Thessalonians 4:13-17, as the key set of verses in support of the pre-trib rapture position. The verses read:
Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who fall asleep, or to grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope. We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. According to the Lord’s own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.
Agreed. The verses do describe a "caught up," which many consider as rapture. But to read pre-tribulation into the verses is unsupported by the context. Why? In part because fifteen learned scholars and theologians (and others) have opined in The Wycliffe Bible Commentary on these verses, stating that Paul was simply trying to calm the church at Thessalonica because Paul's teaching about the imminent return of Christ had caused the congregation a certain "lack of industry" and "…a fear that the church's dead believers would be robbed of the rights of participation in the glories of that grand event [the return — the second coming — of Christ]."
Therefore, within context, these verses are simply Paul's way of addressing an immediate problem by giving words of comfort and reassurance to the Thessalonica church about the future (remember, the church has always adopted the position that Christ's return was imminent); it was not Paul's intent to give a description of last things. (Some also seem to forget that Paul was NOT a prophet...)
Note the latter part of the verses quoted are contextually referring to Jesus coming "down from heaven." Down to what? The earth, of course. The second coming. And, yes, there is a "caught up," even a rapture, but note that it is in conjunction — in context — with Jesus coming down to earth. That is quite clear in Matthew 24:30-31 when Jesus says:
"Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."
Note also that "all the tribes...will see the Son of Man," which is contrary to the popular belief of a secret pre-trib rapture where those left behind wonder what happened.

Calvin wrote: "it was not Paul's intent to give a description of last things. (Some also seem to forget that Paul was NOT a prophet..."

Cal, if you are trying to say that Paul's words in this or any other NT epistle is not the Word of God, then I'll have to part company with you here. Paul was in fact a prophet, and he does in this verse give an accurate description of last things. “For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.” 1Th 2:13. And “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:” 2Ti 3:16. The OT prophets brought forth the Scriptures, and so did Paul.

It's not accurate to say that Paul taught an imminent return of Christ, except in the same sense that the Church has always taught it. He didn't teach that it was about to happen. The message is and was, be ready. “Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.” Mt 25:13.

Bart wrote: "Calvin wrote: "it was not Paul's intent to give a description of last things. (Some also seem to forget that Paul was NOT a prophet..."

Cal, if you are trying to say that Paul's words in this or a..."
*********************************************
Bart, that's an awful lot of interpolation on your part, not only on what I said and what I didn't say but also on what Paul said. Paul was an apostle. Nowhere is he described as a prophet. He wrote to the church at Thessalonica to commend them for their dedication to Christ and to one another and to encourage them to continue in love and holiness. Nothing in his letter to that church when read within context can be construed as an end-times or second coming prophecy as opposed to simple words of praise and commendation for the stalwart faith of the young church as Paul sought to ground them ever more solidly in the faith and reassure them about the Second Coming and their and their deceased brethrens' eternal destiny.

Concerning Paul's teaching of the imminent return of Christ, I call to your attention Paul's instruction in the second chapter of Titus: "... we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age, looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ..." In addition, Paul's attempt to calm the church in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 — ..."that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord..." — is riddled with the pronoun "we," the "we" meaning Paul and the church members whom he was addressing. I suggest that you cannot read those verses and not understand that the teaching was that the coming of the Lord was thought to be imminent, the same as it has been in every generation since, including ours.

It's all about context, context, context. Wishful thinking, or convoluted interpretation, or interpolation to make something other than what is meant by the context, or failure to consider the writer and his intent and to whom directed, or failure to understand the culture of the time and the simple meaning of the original text can trick a person to make most any verse say whatever they want it to say.

Calvin wrote: "Paul was an apostle. Nowhere is he described as a prophet."

It doesn't actually matter whether the Scriptures described Paul as a prophet in so many words. Look at the office of a prophet, and see if Paul fits. A prophet received revelation directly from God and was commissioned by God to share that message with certain people, whether those people were kings, councils, leaders, or the congregation. That describes Paul. Prophets and apostles are not mutually exclusive.

"Nothing in his letter to that church when read within context can be construed as an end-times or second coming prophecy…"

Perhaps you have read too much into what I wrote. I only said that this one verse is an accurate description of last things. I made no comment about the rest of the epistle. And this one verse is accurate. 1Th 4:16,17 says that the Lord will descend from Heaven, and that we who remain will be caught up. That is true. The context does nothing to render it untrue.

"Concerning Paul's teaching of the imminent return of Christ, I call to your attention Paul's instruction in the second chapter of Titus…"

I realise some of his statements sound like they are teaching an imminent return. I will repeat my original statement: It's not accurate to say that Paul taught an imminent return of Christ, except in the same sense that the Church has always taught it. The "we" in statements such as this must be understood to refer to God's people generally, not only to the church to whom they were addressed. If they are not, then what are they doing in the Bible? What are Christians doing calling this God's eternal Word? If the "we" here is not a term with the flexibility to refer generally to the people of God in any age, then Paul literally meant that he and the Thessalonian church would be caught up at the return of Christ, and he was wrong. If we contextualize the Bible to this degree we strip it of its authority. If it does not apply in every age to all people then it is only a book for studying history (which may or may not be accurate given the proclivities of its authors).

Bart wrote: "Calvin wrote: "Paul was an apostle. Nowhere is he described as a prophet."

It doesn't actually matter whether the Scriptures described Paul as a prophet in so many words. Look at the office of a p..."
*****************************************************
Repeating: "Wishful thinking, or convoluted interpretation, or interpolation to make something other than what is meant by the context, or failure to consider the writer and his intent and to whom directed, or failure to understand the culture of the time and the simple meaning of the original text can trick a person to make most any verse say whatever they want it to say."

You can also trick a person into thinking the verse has nothing at all to say to him in his time and place.

You're doing good Bart. I'm still not quite sure what Calvin believes. My guess is that eventually he will undo the entire Bible.

It's interesting how few people connect the millennium with the Rapture and second coming. All of these things affect the Bible in interesting ways - as well as the readers of the Bible.
It's comical how many people assume that none of the Bible has immediate advise for those going through the millennium. And yet it does!

Ah, now we're talking about the "millennium," a word found nowhere in the Bible and only referenced as "a thousand years" in Revelation. Rather strange that Jesus said nothing about a "millennium," don't ya think? Also, I hope you don't have any ambition to reign with Christ for those thousand years because Rev. 20:4 says that only those martyred during (apparently) the Great Tribulation will reign. On the other hand, if your propensity is to interpolate a verse to say what you want it to say instead of what it actually says, have at it.

Thanks Calvin. I will! :D