The Rapture

[Jon]

It's probably true that "The Rapture" means different things to different people. If I could at least define it by an event of Jesus coming to take away Christians from the world before some tribulation/test period, then I would ask...

Do you believe in the Rapture? If so, why? As far as I can tell, it's a theory of Bible interpretation that didn't hit the streets until the early 1800s. So, even the great Reformation with Luther didn't come up with this idea of the end times?

At face value, it seems like an idea that there are TWO second comings of Jesus, not one. The whole idea seems popularized by some series of books called "Left Behind". I can't say I've read the series, but before getting into that kind of detail, the simple fact that this is a NEW interpretation of the Bible raises huge red flags. In my opinion this should point any reasonable person to the conclusion that any rapture theory is probably incorrect.

So, what do other folks think? The concept of the rapture is a relatively new topic for me, so I don't know if there's a huge history of heated debate, if everyone generally believes it, or if it's just a loud minority that is pretending that it's accepted by a large portion of Christians.

Jon

[Paidion]

As you define the word, Jon, only dispensationalists believe it. It does not have wide acceptance. The idea of a pre-tribulation rapture is supposed to have arisen from the revelation of one Margaret MacDonald while she was at a Catholic Apostolic Church in about 1830. It seems that J.N. Darby was present, and that he latched on to the idea of a pre-trib rapture. He carried it back to his "Plymouth brethren" assembly, and it spread rapidly throughout all of the assemblies of these brethren, and from there to most fundamentalist denominations. The concept was propagated by Arno C. Gabelein, editor of "Our Hope" magazine (which was widely published in the first half of the 20th century), and C.I. Scofield, editor of the Scofield Reference Bible.

Hazel, my mother, was an avid reader of "Our Hope", and her father-in-law referred to the magazine as "Hazel's bible." She also used the Scofield Reference Bible with its pre-trib rapture notes. I have that volume on my book shelf to this day.

As a teenager, I accepted this view as you might imagine, having been influenced by my mother and the literature which she read. But over the years, I came to see that the bible didn't actually teach this. I still believe in the rapture depicted in I Thessalonians 4, but now believe that it will occur AFTER the tribulation period when Jesus returns. I also believe that although the raptured saints will be caught up to meet the Lord in the air, they will then return with Him on His journey to the earth. The Greek word translated as "meet" was used to describe people who left a city to meet and welcome a triumphant army general who was returning to his city.

[Jon]

Thanks, Paidon.

Is there a better/more appropriate definition of the "Rapture", or a list of typical definitions? What's the significance of calling it "the Rapture" vs. simply the 2nd coming of Jesus. Are they one in the same? If not what connotation does the word "Rapture" mean above and beyond the 2nd coming?

Jon

[Paidion]

The idea of a "rapture" (catching away) comes from I Thessalonians 4:17. It come from the Greek word "αρπαζω" (to catch up, take by force, snatch)

Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.


I don't think we need define the word beyond what the Greek word means. There is no indication in I Thessalonians as to the timing of the rapture with respect to the tribulation period, the millenium, or any other event, except that of the Lord's return. Pre-tribs make two events out of the second coming, a secret coming before the tribulation which they call "His coming FOR his saints" and a coming after the tribulation of which all shall be aware, which they call "His coming WITH his saints." At one time I was brainwashed with this view. There is no scriptural justification for it. Now I believe in just one second-coming event — after the tribulation, marking the beginning of the millenium. The amillenialists believe there is no millenium, or that the millenium is figurative and that we are in it right now — that there is just one final coming of Christ which will mark the end of this age.

[Enrogel]

Maybe I can chip in here and say that just yesterday whilst browsing a list of Christian Classic writers of a bygone age,
http://www.raptureready.com/resource/best.html I learned that in fact the claim that a pre-trib rapture had its roots in a prophecy as stated by PADION is not really true. SORRY Brother but please read the brief article at the bottom of this post and you will see that as far back as the 1700's a certain Morgan Edwards was preaching a pre-trib rapture. http://www.raptureready.com/resource/ed ... ards2.html. As for two comings, TRUE, Jesus must first come FOR His church if He is to come WITH it. For those who really want to know the truth about this oft debated doctrine I have good news for you. There is a certain Jacob Prasch -a Messianic Jew- who is fluent in Hebrew and (in my humble opinion) is one of the most dependable bible teachers around today. The good news is friends, he deals with this subject in depth in a sermon entitled. "One Messiah, Two Comings" and can be viewed at the following link.
http://www.radiofreechurch.com/jacob-pr ... wo-comings
If you have a stomach for the truth, this is one of the foremost trustworthy Bible prophecy teachers around today. There are also many more of his sermons in video format @ < radiofreechurch.com > plus other sound preachers like David Hocking & John Higgins. First, if one is to rightly divide the word of truth it must be understood that there are no less than 15 Greek words all translated COMING in the KJV. and the twice it is used relative to the Lord's future coming are from two Greek words with vastly different meanings. By the wonders of the web I am able -for the benefit of those who might like to see those 15 verses where the word "Coming" is found in the NT. Here is the link to a screen shot I took from my computer Bible Study program. http://s7.postimage.org/vqsa06jjv/15_separate_words.jpg

Quote about Morgan Edwards: - Morgan Edwards was born May 9, 1722 in Trevethin Parish, Wales, and after being educated at Bristol College he began preaching in 1738. He served several small Baptist congregations in England and Ireland. Edwards emigrated to America and in May 1761 became pastor of the Baptist Church in Philadelphia. Edwards founded the first Baptist college in the Colonies, Rhode Island College, which we know today as Brown University. In recent years, Edwards has become known for being one the earliest promoters of a pre-tribulation rapture, debunking the idea that John Darby invented the concept.
Must sign off its half past midnight. Enrogel.

[wwalkeriv]

SORRY Brother but please read the brief article at the bottom of this post and you will see that as far back as the 1700's a certain Morgan Edwards was preaching a pre-trib rapture.

Regardless of which man invented this system, in which century, I fail to see any biblical basis for a pretribulational rapture.

I think eschatology is fun to discuss, but I don't know why anyone would devote their whole ministry to end times. Why's it really matter anyway?

[Paidion]

I learned that in fact the claim that a pre-trib rapture had its roots in a prophecy as stated by PADION is not really true. SORRY Brother but please read the brief article at the bottom of this post and you will see that as far back as the 1700's a certain Morgan Edwards was preaching a pre-trib rapture

I read Morgan Edwards. He did not teach a pre-trib rapture; he taught a mid-trib rapture. But it's not that important. Both views are a relatively modern invention and have no basis in Christian teaching prior to the middle ages.

[steve]

It took a lot of digging for someone to locate Morgan Edwards as the first pre-trib rapture advocate. For many years, Evangelist John Bray was offering $1,000 to anyone who could document that the pre-trib rapture (or any rapture prior to the second coming of Christ) was taught by anyone prior to Darby. Over several years, he got many responses from people who searched for that "holy grail," but all of them came up short of actually finding someone who taught this. Finally, the reward was given to someone who discovered Morgan Edwards. He and his teaching were obviously very obscure.

My lectures were given prior to the discovery of Edwards' views, so they reflected the universal view of published church historians at the time they were recorded.

It would not be surprising if dozens of independent thinkers had conceived of such an idea as that of a separate removal of Christians from the earth prior to the unsaved. What is surprising is how few there must have been, since they are so hard to find. It seems to me that, over a period of 2000 years, with tens of thousands of biblical scholars writing and thinking up new angles on biblical prophecy, it would be possible to find someone somewhere who had imagined (and possibly taught) every bizarre interpretation imaginable (in our own day, there are many innovators. I would expect the same in previous centuries).

Someone who wrote "Pseudo-Ephraem" (7th or 8th century) is also sometimes cited as having come up with some similar idea. If so, that unidentified writer seems to have reflected his own views, quite out of step with the beliefs of the Christians in his day, and appears to have had no influence on Christian eschatological thinking in general. You can read about this text, and also read the actual text itself, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocalypse ... do-Ephraem

Whatever the status of Pseudo-Ephraem or Morgan Edwards, then claim remains true that no one who ever made a widespread or lasting impact on evangelical thinking was teaching such a doctrine prior to Darby. Therefore, there is no injustice in saying that the teaching of the pre-trib rapture in the modern church can be traced back to Darby, and no further.

[jarrod]

I think eschatology is fun to discuss, but I don't know why anyone would devote their whole ministry to end times. Why's it really matter anyway?

I understand the motive behind your question... I have felt the same way. However, I do think that some of these things typically related to "eschatology" are not only beneficial to discuss, but essential to work through with fellow brothers and sisters.

I have heard many people suggest, because of their view of eschatology, that the kingdom of God is not present and if it was, that they didn't want any part of it because Jesus wasn't doing a good job. I think this concept that the kingdom is far off in the future and that satan reigns can be an excuse for living how we want to live. Also, living in an affluent part of the country, I have heard things expressed by the same people that this world isn't so bad and that they really enjoy the life. I enjoy my life, but it is not because of worldly possessions or because I am comfortable in this country.

I think eschatology, how it is currently discussed, is very important to discuss because it expresses how we view the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God and the reality of it's existence under our Lord is probably one of the most important subjects to discuss and understand.

Jarrod

[Paidion]

It's true, Jarrod, that the Kingdom of God (or Kingdom of Heaven) began with Jesus and his disciples. Jesus was the King and his disciples were the subjects so that Jesus was able to say to the the scribes and Pharisees, "The kingdom of God is in the midst of you." (Luke 17:21 RSV)

But the Kingdom was then in its infant stage.

Jesus' parables indicate the growth of the Kingdom (as a grain of mustard seed grows into a large plant).

He also indicates that there is a future state, the fulness of the Kingdom, in the last days. When asked to explain the parable of the wheat and the darnel (or "tares" or "weeds" as the RSV has it), a plant that resembles wheat, Jesus said:

He who sows the good seed is the son of man; the field is the world, and the good seed means the sons of the kingdom; the weeds are the sons of the evil one, and the enemy who sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the close of the age, and the reapers are angels. Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the close of the age. The son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire; there men will weep and gnash their teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their father. he who has ears, let him hear. (Matthew 13:37-43)