It wouldn't mean much to you Steve. :( It is too far removed from your theology. I might even have to use the T word. Yep, sure of it.
But, if it helps.....I do believe that God, through the Holy Spirit, applies all His redemptive power in the lives of His own as guarantee and down payment....until......
Thanks for your response, geisha, and you don't need to be shy about using the T word... at least with me. I never was a trinitarian, before, during or after my stint with the Way, but I'm not Trinity-phobic the way Wierwille was. When I was involved with the Way, I could and did proof-text duel with trinitarians for hours on end, but since then, I haven't found that activity to be particularly fruitful. I've been involved in a number of interdenominational activities in the past fifteen years or so, and I've been able to do so without ever broaching my views about the trinity.
I think the doctrine of the Trinity is close enough in practical terms to the scriptural relationship between God and Jesus Christ set forth in I Corinthians 8:6 that the Lord can work equally well with anybody who genuinely looks to Him, regardless of what they think about homoousios. Some of the saints who have had the most powerful affect on my walk with the Lord have been trinitarians. On the other hand, some have not been trinitarians.
I think the doctrine of the Trinity is an over-simplification put forward by gentile Christians who didn't understand the significance of the shema or Paul's explanation in I Corinthians 8:6. But I don't think it's EEEEEEVIL IDOLATRY. It's just the way some people have been taught to think about God and Jesus, and it works for those people, AND for God, AND for Jesus. Praise God! He IS glorified in the Son!
The Churches' teachings about Holy Spirit are less clear. Roman Catholicism departed from Orthodoxy over the question of how the Holy Spirit proceeds from God. The whole question can be cleared up by diagramming I Corinthians 8:6.
Thanks for your response, geisha, and you don't need to be shy about using the T word... at least with me. I never was a trinitarian, before, during or after my stint with the Way, but I'm not Trinity-phobic the way Wierwille was. When I was involved with the Way, I could and did proof-text duel with trinitarians for hours on end, but since then, I haven't found that activity to be particularly fruitful. I've been involved in a number of interdenominational activities in the past fifteen years or so, and I've been able to do so without ever broaching my views about the trinity.
I think the doctrine of the Trinity is close enough in practical terms to the scriptural relationship between God and Jesus Christ set forth in I Corinthians 8:6 that the Lord can work equally well with anybody who genuinely looks to Him, regardless of what they think about homoousios. Some of the saints who have had the most powerful affect on my walk with the Lord have been trinitarians. On the other hand, some have not been trinitarians.
I think the doctrine of the Trinity is an over-simplification put forward by gentile Christians who didn't understand the significance of the shema or Paul's explanation in I Corinthians 8:6. But I don't think it's EEEEEEVIL IDOLATRY. It's just the way some people have been taught to think about God and Jesus, and it works for those people, AND for God, AND for Jesus. Praise God! He IS glorified in the Son!
The Churches' teachings about Holy Spirit are less clear. Roman Catholicism departed from Orthodoxy over the question of how the Holy Spirit proceeds from God. The whole question can be cleared up by diagramming I Corinthians 8:6.
God bless you, geisha!
with love and a holy kiss Steve
While I appreciate the condescension Steve, concerning a simplistic Christian understanding of God.......I would encourage you to take another look at 1 Corinthians from the beginning....taking special note of how the Apostle treats the Lord Jesus as Yahweh....yet still distinguishing Him from the Father. For example, a Christian is someone who "together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ"..............."And everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be saved"...Joel 2:32
There are stunning examples leading up to 8:6 Also consider the language Paul uses in reference to Jesus...the Lord of glory...that is specific language reserved for Yahweh.
By the time we get to to 1 Corinthians 8:6, we have already seen Paul putting the Father and the Lord side by side, yet distinguished from one another, although both are being attributed functions of deity in creation, this actually echoes the shema. There is a distinction in function......but, maybe it really is important who we confess when we say Jesus is Lord.
I think the trinity does a rather good job in summing it all up.
Take another look at Deut 6:4 if interested.....and when you read 1 Corinthians...consider it in light of something unfolding to you...or a revelation of God.
You might be surprised by what you see. Corinthians 8:6 may look differently to you...who knows!
What I also think is fairly important to remember....is that the Jews in large part rejected Jesus....but, God is revealed to us in Jesus. He is the image of God.....Immanuel, God is with us.....maybe....rejecting something based on what you think is a Jewish understanding....might not be the wisest course of action. "but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe."
Similarly in Ephesians...the things which I declined to articulate to you..... Ephesians1: 3-14 describe God's plan for salvation past, present, future....election, redemption and inheritance.....but also they emphasize the Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit....all with distinct functions in salvation.....yet working as one for the ultimate purpose.....that the glory goes to God.
Either way...I would lovingly encourage you to take a look at what you are saying about the Lord....and the Holy Spirit in light of God's ultimate goal...which is not us BTW.....but, His glory....it can't be any other way.....because of who He is......but, we too want this because in it we find our peace and satisfaction. We are made to worship Him.
While I appreciate the condescension Steve, concerning a simplistic Christian understanding of God.......I would encourage you to take another look at 1 Corinthians from the beginning....taking special note of how the Apostle treats the Lord Jesus as Yahweh....yet still distinguishing Him from the Father. For example, a Christian is someone who "together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ"..............."And everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be saved"...Joel 2:32
There are stunning examples leading up to 8:6 Also consider the language Paul uses in reference to Jesus...the Lord of glory...that is specific language reserved for Yahweh.
By the time we get to to 1 Corinthians 8:6, we have already seen Paul putting the Father and the Lord side by side, yet distinguished from one another, although both are being attributed functions of deity in creation, this actually echoes the shema. There is a distinction in function......but, maybe it really is important who we confess when we say Jesus is Lord.
I think the trinity does a rather good job in summing it all up.
Take another look at Deut 6:4 if interested.....and when you read 1 Corinthians...consider it in light of something unfolding to you...or a revelation of God.
You might be surprised by what you see. Corinthians 8:6 may look differently to you...who knows!
What I also think is fairly important to remember....is that the Jews in large part rejected Jesus....but, God is revealed to us in Jesus. He is the image of God.....Immanuel, God is with us.....maybe....rejecting something based on what you think is a Jewish understanding....might not be the wisest course of action. "but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe."
Similarly in Ephesians...the things which I declined to articulate to you..... Ephesians1: 3-14 describe God's plan for salvation past, present, future....election, redemption and inheritance.....but also they emphasize the Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit....all with distinct functions in salvation.....yet working as one for the ultimate purpose.....that the glory goes to God.
Either way...I would lovingly encourage you to take a look at what you are saying about the Lord....and the Holy Spirit in light of God's ultimate goal...which is not us BTW.....but, His glory....it can't be any other way.....because of who He is......but, we too want this because in it we find our peace and satisfaction. We are made to worship Him.
I am going to do as you asked, geisha. I know it will take me a few days, so if you don't see me around the forums for a few days, it's not because I'm taking a vacation. I know I'm gonna hafta shut up for awhile if I'm gonna do this right. I will probably start a different thread when I come back, so this one can resume its course.
Darby NEVER taught of a "pre-tribulation rapture."
I am utterly unfamiliar with Darby’s works, but the following seems to indicate Darby DID (at some time, at least) promote the idea of a pre-tribulation rapture of the church.
In Revelation 12: 10-12, it is said, "And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation and strength and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night. And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death. Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea!" Now I do not take this as the rapture, because I believe it had taken place before, and is pointed out in the timeless rapture of the man-child, for the church is one with Christ, and shall rule the nations as He. But I find a positive revelation, that three years and a half before the close (that is the last half-week of Daniel), Satan is cast down, the accuser of the brethren is no longer in heaven, the triumph of those accused is come - their trial passed; they had been in trial and conflict, and had overcome, and conflict is ended for dwellers in heaven. It begins, and with great wrath of Satan, for the inhabiters of earth. There had been persecution, there had been death. For one class it had now ceased, and for another it was just going to begin. And note, this is exactly the epoch spoken of by Daniel, which the Lord refers to as the tribulation such as never was since there was a nation; nor have I the smallest doubt that the woman represents the Jews.
I'd be interested in hearing the origination of a pretribulation gathering discussed here. But all I can do is read what you all say right now. :)
Ohh BTW, Nice to see you on this topic Wolfman!
I'm not qualified to dicuss any of these folks, but even to me it seems Darby or the folks who worked from his material had a big part in the "late in Christianity" (as far as I know) developement of this idea.
Either way, I don't think the doctrine can be directly attributed to scriptural teaching. IMO the scripture teachings are that the Lord gathering His people and the resurrection remain consistently taught from the gospels through the book of Revelation.
Just a note here: I'm reading Global Warning by Tim LaHaye (of Left Behind series fame and Edward Hindson. I'm approaching completion, & I find the book to be logical, comprehensive, and understandable. It is definitely pretribulation rapture in its perspective & presents some fairly simple and persuasive reasons for being so.
Anyway, like many of you here, all I've been able to do on this thread for the most part is read what people say about what people say. I realize all I'm doing here is recommending what others have said, however reading this book has put quite a bit of scripture into a perspective that seems to fit for me.
Where did this idea of some end of the world for everyone rapture, tribulation, some burn in hell forever, annihilation of people, and some don't, for everyone at the same time come from anyway?
Looks like some scripturally astute observations by JeffSjo. As I recall we were taught in the Way ministry that first came the gathering together which only had those in the new testament body of Christ. Then came the the ressurection of the just which included the old testament believers. Then at the end came the resurrection of the unjust.
After looking at the scriptures more carefully over time I now believe in just two resurrections. One for the just and one for the unjust. These two resurrections will take place at two different times. The scriptures in 1 Thes. 4:13-17 describe the first resurrection also known as the resurrection of the just.
Here are scriptures that also describe the first resurrection, which is the resurrection of the just.
Rev 20:4-6
4 Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom judgment was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word of God, and who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life, and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is he who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and they shall reign with him a thousand years.
RSV
And if you want to ask me about what is the mark on the forehead or hands described above. So much of the book of revelation is written with difficult imagery and symbols which are not literal, but represent spiritual truth. This is describing things that have to do with faithfullness in the words and message of Jesus Christ.
Here are the scripture in 1 Thess 4:13-18 to compare.
13 But we would not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. 14 For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. 15 For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel's call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; 17 then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.
RSV
Here are scriptures describing the second resurrection which is also called the resurrection of the unjust.
Rev 20:11-15
11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who sat upon it; from his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Also another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, by what they had done. 13 And the sea gave up the dead in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead in them, and all were judged by what they had done. 14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire; 15 and if any one's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.
RSV
And here is a link to a web site which I just authored and placed on the world wide web which has a section dealing with what the lake of fire is.
And this seems like a good discussion here. You don't need to add information from the web site which I just recently spent well over 100 hours to write and code and add it to this discussion. If you want to you can, but I may not have time to comment.
The concept referred to as the "Rapture" (or any other term used to describe it) seems to cover a different set of facts and circumstances than this account.
The concept referred to as the "Rapture" (or any other term used to describe it) seems to cover a different set of facts and circumstances than this account.
Gen, I just check 8 different biblical versions using my bible study software. There is not even 1 usage of the word "rapture" in any of these 8 versions. "Rapture" may describe something, but this is an unbiblical word.
Gen, I am only adding biblical insight. To many times people use unbiblical words with a result of a degradation of understanding. You are not the only person that uses the word rapture. I am just pointing out what I see in my bible software.
For everyone I recommend that you check the first page of the link that I just provided. When it comes to the prophetic future we see through a glass darkly. There is no reason to argue about something that no one has perfect vision of.
As to scripture,... I have indicated two points of disimilarity between these events which you cannot reconcile. Sure you can say that not everything is written, but as you said lets stick to scripture. and what is said, and it says completely different things.
It sounds like you are not familiar with the book of Revelation and the doctrinal errors that can crepe in with its interpretation. I was merely warning people about this. Why do you have a problem with that CMAN?
REVELATION OF JOHN
The last book of the Bible, and the only book of APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE in the New Testament. Apocalypse, the title of this book in the original Greek, means "unveiling" or "disclosure" of hidden things known only to God. Other examples of apocalyptic literature can be found in the Old Testament in Daniel (chaps. Dan), Isaiah (24-27), Ezekiel (chaps. 37-41), and Zechariah (chaps. 9-12).
Like its counterparts, the Book of Revelation depicts the end of the present age and the coming of God's future kingdom through symbols, images, and numbers. These symbols include an angel whose legs are pillars of fire, men who ride on horses while smiting the earth with plagues of destruction, and a fiery red dragon with seven heads and ten horns who crouches before a heavenly woman about to deliver a child.
Why was apocalyptic literature written in such imagery? One reason is that these books were written in dangerous times when it was safer to hide one's message in images than to speak plainly. Moreover, the symbolism preserved an element of mystery about details of time and place. The purpose of such symbolism, however, was not to confuse, but to inform and strengthen believers in the face of persecution.
Although the keys to some symbols have been lost, the overall message of this book is clear: God is all-powerful. No countermoves of the devil, no matter how strong, can frustrate the righteous purposes of God.
Where did this idea of some end of the world for everyone rapture, tribulation, some burn in hell forever, annihilation of people, and some don't, for everyone at the same time come from anyway?
I don't buy it.
A good observation CMAN and I don't buy it either. And that is why I recently authored this web site.
I'm happy for you and your software Mark. There's a reason I put the word -Rapture- in quotes and qualified the term, which you take umbrage to as unbiblical. Yo seem to think I believen in the "Rapture" concept. At least your reply to me seems to assume that point
You said
After looking at the scriptures more carefully over time I now believe in just two resurrections. One for the just and one for the unjust. These two resurrections will take place at two different times. The scriptures in 1 Thes. 4:13-17 describe the first resurrection also known as the resurrection of the just
So you believe that the dead that were beheaded (and had not worshipped the beast ,... and had not received the mark) and the living will meet the lord in the air and reign with him on the earth and that so shall they ever be with the lord for a thousand years. and that these two are all the same event. Well - you can believe that, but you'd have to do a heck of a lot to reconcile your "BIBLICAL" concept. It's all the same....?
By the way, I don't believe in the groundswell concept of the "Rapture" but I do think it's rather obvious (by what's written) that these two events are NOT the same event. We may see through a glass darkly, in our present time,... but when the bible points out clear differences between 2 events, we should pay attention. If not, we will quickly lapse into disregarding scripture in favor of what we think God really meant. We don't know when God will do these things, But we do know He will perform his words. Maybe you don't agree.
According to your view, and since you have not been beheaded (and so on) you must believe that you will not be raised from the dead until after the thousand years and judged out of the books.
I believe that God has not limited Himself to your philosophy, Mark.
Since you cannot be PM'd Mark I'll leave this not here for you
I'm not sure why you assumed I am one of those "unbiblical" "Rapture" people whom you seem to detest, or why you simply refused to respond to my earlier comments. But you were quite an a$$ about it. Smug in your software and more perfect knowledge of how things are.
This is how you came off in your post. If you don't see that Your eyes are glossed over, You were a jacka$s to me. You must have felt I deserved it.
Since you cannot be PM'd Mark I'll leave this not here for you
I'm not sure why you assumed I am one of those "unbiblical" "Rapture" people whom you seem to detest, or why you simply refused to respond to my earlier comments. But you were quite an a$$ about it. Smug in your software and more perfect knowledge of how things are.
This is how you came off in your post. If you don't see that Your eyes are glossed over, You were a jacka$s to me. You must have felt I deserved it.
Gen2, all I did was point out that the word rapture is not found in the bible. I was not making any judgements at all. You should be thanking me for biblical input that not everyone on this forum has. Gen, I know you are a very smart lady. But no one knows everything about everything. We all have our areas of good knowledge and areas where we are mediocre in knowledge.
So now I am an a$$ for contributing something from a bible software program to this forum discussion? You have, to put it mildly, over reacted.
And I just read your prior post Gen. So then what do you believe? Do you believe there is more than two resurrections? Do you believe like they taught in the Way ministry that there is a gathering together, which is a form of resurrection of the dead, then some time later a resurrection of the just. Then at the end of time as we know it the resurrection of the unjust?
Instead of being so judgmental with me and merely criticizing my viewpoint which I have taken the time to state. And which I might add has some similarities with some of the other people on this forum including the person who started this thread, who I think looks to be knowledgeable and well researched on this subject. Why don't you instead tell us what you actually believe.
And actually as I understand it there are 3 resurrections to spiritual life. The first one was God raising Jesus Christ from the dead. The next one the resurrection of the just. Then the final one the resurrection of the unjust.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
16
21
18
20
Popular Days
May 24
24
Apr 25
13
May 23
13
Apr 24
11
Top Posters In This Topic
Mark Sanguinetti 16 posts
Steve Lortz 21 posts
geisha779 18 posts
Gen-2 20 posts
Popular Days
May 24 2010
24 posts
Apr 25 2010
13 posts
May 23 2010
13 posts
Apr 24 2010
11 posts
Popular Posts
Tom
Not sure what you are saying here, Steve, when you say, "I don't think the gift of holy Spirit first poured out on the day of Pentecost is salvation itself." Unless all you mean is that it is not the
JeffSjo
I like it. Much better to be able to face it and deal. Much easier to keep it stuffed away out of sight. Much easier to write them off for the very same faults I myself have. Much easier to think
Gen-2
Since you cannot be PM'd Mark I'll leave this not here for you I'm not sure why you assumed I am one of those "unbiblical" "Rapture" people whom you seem to detest, or why you simply refused to respo
Steve Lortz
Thanks for your response, geisha, and you don't need to be shy about using the T word... at least with me. I never was a trinitarian, before, during or after my stint with the Way, but I'm not Trinity-phobic the way Wierwille was. When I was involved with the Way, I could and did proof-text duel with trinitarians for hours on end, but since then, I haven't found that activity to be particularly fruitful. I've been involved in a number of interdenominational activities in the past fifteen years or so, and I've been able to do so without ever broaching my views about the trinity.
I think the doctrine of the Trinity is close enough in practical terms to the scriptural relationship between God and Jesus Christ set forth in I Corinthians 8:6 that the Lord can work equally well with anybody who genuinely looks to Him, regardless of what they think about homoousios. Some of the saints who have had the most powerful affect on my walk with the Lord have been trinitarians. On the other hand, some have not been trinitarians.
I think the doctrine of the Trinity is an over-simplification put forward by gentile Christians who didn't understand the significance of the shema or Paul's explanation in I Corinthians 8:6. But I don't think it's EEEEEEVIL IDOLATRY. It's just the way some people have been taught to think about God and Jesus, and it works for those people, AND for God, AND for Jesus. Praise God! He IS glorified in the Son!
The Churches' teachings about Holy Spirit are less clear. Roman Catholicism departed from Orthodoxy over the question of how the Holy Spirit proceeds from God. The whole question can be cleared up by diagramming I Corinthians 8:6.
God bless you, geisha!
with love and a holy kiss Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
While I appreciate the condescension Steve, concerning a simplistic Christian understanding of God.......I would encourage you to take another look at 1 Corinthians from the beginning....taking special note of how the Apostle treats the Lord Jesus as Yahweh....yet still distinguishing Him from the Father. For example, a Christian is someone who "together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ"..............."And everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be saved"...Joel 2:32
There are stunning examples leading up to 8:6 Also consider the language Paul uses in reference to Jesus...the Lord of glory...that is specific language reserved for Yahweh.
By the time we get to to 1 Corinthians 8:6, we have already seen Paul putting the Father and the Lord side by side, yet distinguished from one another, although both are being attributed functions of deity in creation, this actually echoes the shema. There is a distinction in function......but, maybe it really is important who we confess when we say Jesus is Lord.
I think the trinity does a rather good job in summing it all up.
Take another look at Deut 6:4 if interested.....and when you read 1 Corinthians...consider it in light of something unfolding to you...or a revelation of God.
You might be surprised by what you see. Corinthians 8:6 may look differently to you...who knows!
What I also think is fairly important to remember....is that the Jews in large part rejected Jesus....but, God is revealed to us in Jesus. He is the image of God.....Immanuel, God is with us.....maybe....rejecting something based on what you think is a Jewish understanding....might not be the wisest course of action. "but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe."
Similarly in Ephesians...the things which I declined to articulate to you..... Ephesians1: 3-14 describe God's plan for salvation past, present, future....election, redemption and inheritance.....but also they emphasize the Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit....all with distinct functions in salvation.....yet working as one for the ultimate purpose.....that the glory goes to God.
Either way...I would lovingly encourage you to take a look at what you are saying about the Lord....and the Holy Spirit in light of God's ultimate goal...which is not us BTW.....but, His glory....it can't be any other way.....because of who He is......but, we too want this because in it we find our peace and satisfaction. We are made to worship Him.
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
I am going to do as you asked, geisha. I know it will take me a few days, so if you don't see me around the forums for a few days, it's not because I'm taking a vacation. I know I'm gonna hafta shut up for awhile if I'm gonna do this right. I will probably start a different thread when I come back, so this one can resume its course.
with love and a holy kiss Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
One of the ploys of those insufficiently schooled is to smear Darby by attributing to him
positions he never took and doctrines he never agreed to-
then blame him for disseminating them.
Darby NEVER taught of a "pre-tribulation rapture."
Disagree with a "pre-tribulation rapture" all you want, but spare Darby the consistent LIE
that was invented by Dave McPherson and used in his hate-filled, anti-rapture CRUSADE.
McPherson's life seems to be about attacking that position and using any tool- including
lies and misinformation- to attack it.
Chief among them is that Darby got this doctrine from a vision by Mc Donald, and that both
taught a "pre-tribulation rapture." Neither John Darby nor McDonald taught either, and any person
who can do an internet search on Margaret Mc Donald, and READ what her supposed vision was
about. Whether it is a true vision or not, it never mentions a "pre-tribulation rapture."
Mc Donald was specifically worried that the Church living at her time would be present on
Earth through the Tribulation- and that they weren't READY to live through it.
Why would a "pre-tribulation rapturist" be concerned that Christians would not be ready to
live on Earth through a tribulation if they weren't even going to BE THERE?
Believe what you want, teach what you want, but do not rely on MISINFORMATION to support
your point. You're not McPherson. He attributed all sorts of things including his father's
death to the doctrine of "pre-tribulation rapture". You need not take such a PERSONAL
(and ridiculous) stance against a doctrine even if you think it's error.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cynic
I am utterly unfamiliar with Darby’s works, but the following seems to indicate Darby DID (at some time, at least) promote the idea of a pre-tribulation rapture of the church.
See also:
http://www.stempublishing.com/authors/darby/PROPHET/11006E.html
****
Edited by CynicLink to comment
Share on other sites
JeffSjo
I'd be interested in hearing the origination of a pretribulation gathering discussed here. But all I can do is read what you all say right now. :)
Ohh BTW, Nice to see you on this topic Wolfman!
I'm not qualified to dicuss any of these folks, but even to me it seems Darby or the folks who worked from his material had a big part in the "late in Christianity" (as far as I know) developement of this idea.
Either way, I don't think the doctrine can be directly attributed to scriptural teaching. IMO the scripture teachings are that the Lord gathering His people and the resurrection remain consistently taught from the gospels through the book of Revelation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom
Just a note here: I'm reading Global Warning by Tim LaHaye (of Left Behind series fame and Edward Hindson. I'm approaching completion, & I find the book to be logical, comprehensive, and understandable. It is definitely pretribulation rapture in its perspective & presents some fairly simple and persuasive reasons for being so.
Anyway, like many of you here, all I've been able to do on this thread for the most part is read what people say about what people say. I realize all I'm doing here is recommending what others have said, however reading this book has put quite a bit of scripture into a perspective that seems to fit for me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
Where did this idea of some end of the world for everyone rapture, tribulation, some burn in hell forever, annihilation of people, and some don't, for everyone at the same time come from anyway?
I don't buy it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Looks like some scripturally astute observations by JeffSjo. As I recall we were taught in the Way ministry that first came the gathering together which only had those in the new testament body of Christ. Then came the the ressurection of the just which included the old testament believers. Then at the end came the resurrection of the unjust.
After looking at the scriptures more carefully over time I now believe in just two resurrections. One for the just and one for the unjust. These two resurrections will take place at two different times. The scriptures in 1 Thes. 4:13-17 describe the first resurrection also known as the resurrection of the just.
Here are scriptures that also describe the first resurrection, which is the resurrection of the just.
Rev 20:4-6
4 Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom judgment was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word of God, and who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life, and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5 The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is he who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and they shall reign with him a thousand years.
RSV
And if you want to ask me about what is the mark on the forehead or hands described above. So much of the book of revelation is written with difficult imagery and symbols which are not literal, but represent spiritual truth. This is describing things that have to do with faithfullness in the words and message of Jesus Christ.
Here are the scripture in 1 Thess 4:13-18 to compare.
13 But we would not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. 14 For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. 15 For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel's call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; 17 then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.
RSV
Here are scriptures describing the second resurrection which is also called the resurrection of the unjust.
Rev 20:11-15
11 Then I saw a great white throne and him who sat upon it; from his presence earth and sky fled away, and no place was found for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Also another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, by what they had done. 13 And the sea gave up the dead in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead in them, and all were judged by what they had done. 14 Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire; 15 and if any one's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.
RSV
And here is a link to a web site which I just authored and placed on the world wide web which has a section dealing with what the lake of fire is.
http://www.christian-universalism.info
And this seems like a good discussion here. You don't need to add information from the web site which I just recently spent well over 100 hours to write and code and add it to this discussion. If you want to you can, but I may not have time to comment.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
The concept referred to as the "Rapture" (or any other term used to describe it) seems to cover a different set of facts and circumstances than this account.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Gen, I just check 8 different biblical versions using my bible study software. There is not even 1 usage of the word "rapture" in any of these 8 versions. "Rapture" may describe something, but this is an unbiblical word.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
True, but I'd be amazed if you din't understand perfectly what I was referring to.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Gen, I am only adding biblical insight. To many times people use unbiblical words with a result of a degradation of understanding. You are not the only person that uses the word rapture. I am just pointing out what I see in my bible software.
For everyone I recommend that you check the first page of the link that I just provided. When it comes to the prophetic future we see through a glass darkly. There is no reason to argue about something that no one has perfect vision of.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
The dead and the living,... versus the - dead only - being raised, is one good point
another would be where everyone goes when this happens earth or the sky
etc....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
As to scripture,... I have indicated two points of disimilarity between these events which you cannot reconcile. Sure you can say that not everything is written, but as you said lets stick to scripture. and what is said, and it says completely different things.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
And 1 Thessalonians 4 is literal as opposed to figurative?
Are these our only choices?
No.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
It sounds like you are not familiar with the book of Revelation and the doctrinal errors that can crepe in with its interpretation. I was merely warning people about this. Why do you have a problem with that CMAN?
REVELATION OF JOHN
The last book of the Bible, and the only book of APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE in the New Testament. Apocalypse, the title of this book in the original Greek, means "unveiling" or "disclosure" of hidden things known only to God. Other examples of apocalyptic literature can be found in the Old Testament in Daniel (chaps. Dan), Isaiah (24-27), Ezekiel (chaps. 37-41), and Zechariah (chaps. 9-12).
Like its counterparts, the Book of Revelation depicts the end of the present age and the coming of God's future kingdom through symbols, images, and numbers. These symbols include an angel whose legs are pillars of fire, men who ride on horses while smiting the earth with plagues of destruction, and a fiery red dragon with seven heads and ten horns who crouches before a heavenly woman about to deliver a child.
Why was apocalyptic literature written in such imagery? One reason is that these books were written in dangerous times when it was safer to hide one's message in images than to speak plainly. Moreover, the symbolism preserved an element of mystery about details of time and place. The purpose of such symbolism, however, was not to confuse, but to inform and strengthen believers in the face of persecution.
Although the keys to some symbols have been lost, the overall message of this book is clear: God is all-powerful. No countermoves of the devil, no matter how strong, can frustrate the righteous purposes of God.
(from Nelson's Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Copyright ©1986, Thomas Nelson Publishers)
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
A good observation CMAN and I don't buy it either. And that is why I recently authored this web site.
http://www.christian-universalism.info
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
thanks everybody
because Mark Sanguinetti and other believes in only two resurrection.
I will let them believe in vain because it does not changed a thing
whether my believed is vain it does not matter
their all fleshly believes mine and his
the bible is only limit is the words in it
but truth goes above and below and more places I can name
the "Rapture" is nothing but a illusion
There are more resurrection everyday
Apocalypse Literature is nothing but vain words of King
but when one makes them living in one heart they come alive
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Edited by year2027Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
I'm happy for you and your software Mark. There's a reason I put the word -Rapture- in quotes and qualified the term, which you take umbrage to as unbiblical. Yo seem to think I believen in the "Rapture" concept. At least your reply to me seems to assume that point
You said
After looking at the scriptures more carefully over time I now believe in just two resurrections. One for the just and one for the unjust. These two resurrections will take place at two different times. The scriptures in 1 Thes. 4:13-17 describe the first resurrection also known as the resurrection of the just
So you believe that the dead that were beheaded (and had not worshipped the beast ,... and had not received the mark) and the living will meet the lord in the air and reign with him on the earth and that so shall they ever be with the lord for a thousand years. and that these two are all the same event. Well - you can believe that, but you'd have to do a heck of a lot to reconcile your "BIBLICAL" concept. It's all the same....?
By the way, I don't believe in the groundswell concept of the "Rapture" but I do think it's rather obvious (by what's written) that these two events are NOT the same event. We may see through a glass darkly, in our present time,... but when the bible points out clear differences between 2 events, we should pay attention. If not, we will quickly lapse into disregarding scripture in favor of what we think God really meant. We don't know when God will do these things, But we do know He will perform his words. Maybe you don't agree.
According to your view, and since you have not been beheaded (and so on) you must believe that you will not be raised from the dead until after the thousand years and judged out of the books.
I believe that God has not limited Himself to your philosophy, Mark.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
Since you cannot be PM'd Mark I'll leave this not here for you
I'm not sure why you assumed I am one of those "unbiblical" "Rapture" people whom you seem to detest, or why you simply refused to respond to my earlier comments. But you were quite an a$$ about it. Smug in your software and more perfect knowledge of how things are.
This is how you came off in your post. If you don't see that Your eyes are glossed over, You were a jacka$s to me. You must have felt I deserved it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
Thanks Gen-2
I am sorry your feeling got hurt I would hope Mark Sanguinetti would tell he sorry whether he thinks he in the wrong or not
because to love one another is better than fight over small things
I love you Gen-2 and I love you too Mark Sanguinetti
with love and a holy kiss Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
soul searcher
I've always wondered, and still do, why a religion that preaches "love thy neighbor" can manage to divide itself so many ways.
I actually have my own hypotheses and they amount to just what you said, Roy: "small things".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Gen2, all I did was point out that the word rapture is not found in the bible. I was not making any judgements at all. You should be thanking me for biblical input that not everyone on this forum has. Gen, I know you are a very smart lady. But no one knows everything about everything. We all have our areas of good knowledge and areas where we are mediocre in knowledge.
So now I am an a$$ for contributing something from a bible software program to this forum discussion? You have, to put it mildly, over reacted.
And I just read your prior post Gen. So then what do you believe? Do you believe there is more than two resurrections? Do you believe like they taught in the Way ministry that there is a gathering together, which is a form of resurrection of the dead, then some time later a resurrection of the just. Then at the end of time as we know it the resurrection of the unjust?
Instead of being so judgmental with me and merely criticizing my viewpoint which I have taken the time to state. And which I might add has some similarities with some of the other people on this forum including the person who started this thread, who I think looks to be knowledgeable and well researched on this subject. Why don't you instead tell us what you actually believe.
And actually as I understand it there are 3 resurrections to spiritual life. The first one was God raising Jesus Christ from the dead. The next one the resurrection of the just. Then the final one the resurrection of the unjust.
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.