RED HEIFER CALF BORN LAST WEEK IN ISRAEL!!

[Angela53510]

No rapture? There is no doubt a rapture in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 whatever you wish to call it. Rapture, catching away of the church. Its there:

Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

I looked it up on biblehub and all translations agree. There is a rapture. It says CAUGHT UP in the clouds. If that's not a rapture or catching up, I don't know what else it can be.

Do you want to explain that first point? NO RAPTURE?

In Greek it says caught up in the aere. That is the atmosphere, not clouds or heaven. If it said ouranos, that could mean heaven. No where does it say the saints are going anywhere.

So tell me where the word “rapture” is in the Bible? I can’t find it anywhere! Harpazio is a verb, rapture is a noun. Even if you want to include 1 Thess. 4:17, that is only one example. Sorry, bad hermeneutics to make a doctrine out of one verse.

As for the verses in the gospels about one taken, one not- read them carefully. Sometimes the saved person is taken, sometimes it is the unsaved person. Sorry, I’m on my phone, no access to the exact verses.

If this doctrine was so important, because dispensationalism rests on it, why wouldn’t it be all over the Bible? Like the cross is, in the doctrine of the atonement? Or salvation by grace through faith, in soteriology?

Talk about majoring in minors!

 

[Hevosmies]

In Greek it says caught up in the aere. That is the atmosphere, not clouds or heaven. If it said ouranos, that could mean heaven. No where does it say the saints are going anywhere.

So tell me where the word “rapture” is in the Bible? I can’t find it anywhere! Harpazio is a verb, rapture is a noun. Even if you want to include 1 Thess. 4:17, that is only one example. Sorry, bad hermeneutics to make a doctrine out of one verse.

As for the verses in the gospels about one taken, one not- read them carefully. Sometimes the saved person is taken, sometimes it is the unsaved person. Sorry, I’m on my phone, no access to the exact verses.

If this doctrine was so important, because dispensationalism rests on it, why wouldn’t it be all over the Bible? Like the cross is, in the doctrine of the atonement? Or salvation by grace through faith, in soteriology?

The doctrine is important and it was revealed as a MYSTERY to Paul. "For I tell you a mystery".

The word rapture is in the bible in 1 thessalonians 4:17, if you insist on being literal lets call it "caught up". We are caught up into the atmosphere as you said, is that not a rapture? People are going somewhere!

If you do not believe in being caught up (1 thessalonians 4:17???) what do you suggest happens to the believers who are alive when Jesus returns? Do they just remain in the flesh? Of course not.
The resurrection is for the people who are already dead, but those who are ALIVE AND REMAIN shall be caught up and changed from corruptible to incorruptible in a MOMENT in a TWINKLING OF AN EYE. Why is this so difficult to grasp? Are you just so against dispensationalism that you must throw away the rapture altogether? Do you know that not all people believe in the PRE-TRIB rapture. The historical premills believe the rapture occurs post-trib.

You dont need to throw out or nullify a bible verse just because you dont like dispensationalism. I have never even heard someone suggest there is no catching away of any kind, even amillennial scholars of the 1800s believed in it. Check out the commentaries. This is just odd.

 

[Angela53510]

The doctrine is important and it was revealed as a MYSTERY to Paul. "For I tell you a mystery".

The word rapture is in the bible in 1 thessalonians 4:17, if you insist on being literal lets call it "caught up". We are caught up into the atmosphere as you said, is that not a rapture? People are going somewhere!

If you do not believe in being caught up (1 thessalonians 4:17???) what do you suggest happens to the believers who are alive when Jesus returns? Do they just remain in the flesh? Of course not.
The resurrection is for the people who are already dead, but those who are ALIVE AND REMAIN shall be caught up and changed from corruptible to incorruptible in a MOMENT in a TWINKLING OF AN EYE. Why is this so difficult to grasp? Are you just so against dispensationalism that you must throw away the rapture altogether? Do you know that not all people believe in the PRE-TRIB rapture. The historical premills believe the rapture occurs post-trib.

You dont need to throw out or nullify a bible verse just because you dont like dispensationalism. I have never even heard someone suggest there is no catching away of any kind, even amillennial scholars of the 1800s believed in it. Check out the commentaries. This is just odd.

No, amillennials do not believe in a rapture! I am one!

I am not throwing out any verses, I am saying what has been taught by Darby and his successors since the 1800’s is a bad interpretation of 1 Thess 4:17! No where is the word “away” used in the Greek! We may all stand up, or jump up, but we go no where. In fact, the promise for our incorruptible bodies will happen on earth. Why would God take a bunch of people to heaven with corruptible bodies? What you are saying makes no sense!

Jesus is returning once! And we will be changed, in a twinkling if an eye. Nothing about a secret rapture, or going to heaven with corrupted bodies. Enough of this fantasy eschatology!

 

[Hevosmies]

No, amillennials do not believe in a rapture! I am one!

I am not throwing out any verses, I am saying what has been taught by Darby and his successors since the 1800’s is a bad interpretation of 1 Thess 4:17! No where is the word “away” used in the Greek! We may all stand up, or jump up, but we go no where. In fact, the promise for our incorruptible bodies will happen on earth. Why would God take a bunch of people to heaven with corruptible bodies? What you are saying makes no sense!

Jesus is returning once! And we will be changed, in a twinkling if an eye. Nothing about a secret rapture, or going to heaven with corrupted bodies. Enough of this fantasy eschatology!

Many believe in POST-TRIB rapture which has one return of Jesus and then translated, if you don't like the pre-trib theory thats your right to do so. God will not take anyone to heaven with corruptible bodies, you dont even know the doctrine you are criticizing. Nobody ever taught that. We are given the glorified bodies in a moment in a twinkling of the eye, then caught up, and its necessary that we are caught up because the Lord returns with thousands of his SAINTS! If we just jump here as you suggest, this Scripture is not possible.

And do I need to go back and quote amillennial scholars who believe that we are caught up in the clouds, like the Bible says?

And we all stand up or jump up??? LOL. That is fantasy eschatology if there ever was one. What im claiming CAUGHT UP in the clouds, is in the verse. What you are claiming is not. And hiding behind the greek wont help you here, since all the translators translate it the same way.

Take heed people reading this conversation. This is how "education" falsely so called can ruin you, you end up denying very plain and easy to understand scriptures, while insisting you are not denying them. Well why do you change CAUGHT UP to the clouds to "jump or stand" but "we go nowhere".

What can I say if you dont believe what the verse says? CAUGHT UP IN THE CLOUDS CAUGHT UP IN THE CLOUDS CAUGHT UP IN THE CLOUDS.
That is what I believe and I don't care what anyone says. God said it, I believe it and that settles it.

 

[Hevosmies]

Here is proof from an AMILLENNIAL Hoekema who has written books on the subject, and even he believes in the rapture.:

4. After the resurrection, believers who are then still alive shall suddenly be transformed and glorified. The basis for this teaching is what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:51-52: “Listen, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed—in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed” (NIV).

5. The “rapture” of all believers now takes place. Believers who have just been raised from the dead, together with living believers who have just been transformed, are now caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air (1 Thess. 4:17). That there will be such a “rapture” the Bible clearly teaches. But I have put the word rapture between quotation marks in order to distinguish the amillennial conception of the rapture from the dispensationalist view. Dispensationalists teach that after the rapture the entire church will be taken up to heaven for a period of seven years while those still on earth are undergoing the great tribulation.

Now would be high time to admit you were misrepresenting my view and even the amillennial view.
He says just what the bible says: we are caught up in the clouds.

Dont know why you deny this FACT. I've never seen ANYONE deny the rapture, no matter what eschatology they hold to. EVER. Thats like denying a plain verse that says Jesus went to Galilee or something. "NOPE HE DIDNT!" Never seen such a thing. Mindblown.

 

[garee]

Here is proof from an AMILLENNIAL Hoekema who has written books on the subject, and even he believes in the rapture.:



Now would be high time to admit you were misrepresenting my view and even the amillennial view.
He says just what the bible says: we are caught up in the clouds.

Dont know why you deny this FACT. I've never seen ANYONE deny the rapture, no matter what eschatology they hold to. EVER. Thats like denying a plain verse that says Jesus went to Galilee or something. "NOPE HE DIDNT!" Never seen such a thing. Mindblown.

The Amil position works best .But like all positions there is some wiggle room

Clouds are a metaphor to represent the invisible presence of God . There will be a rising up into the new heavens and earth .Not in respect to this corrupted universe.

God in the beginning created "two Genesis's" as beginnings . The new is not formed of the corrupted rudiments of this world.

 

[trofimus]

In Greek it says caught up in the aere. That is the atmosphere, not clouds or heaven.

ΠΡΟΣ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΕΙΣ Α΄ 4:17 Greek NT: Nestle 1904
ἔπειτα ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι ἅμα σὺν αὐτοῖς ἁρπαγησόμεθα ἐν νεφέλαις εἰς ἀπάντησιν τοῦ Κυρίου εἰς ἀέρα· καὶ οὕτως πάντοτε σὺν Κυρίῳ ἐσόμεθα.

νεφέλη, νεφέλης, ἡ (νέφος) (from Homer down), the Sept. especially for עָנָן, but also for עָב and שַׁחַק; a cloud

 

[Jimbone]

is anyone actually opposed to cattle?

down with cows?

LOL, it's the chickens counter Chic-fil-a campaign.

 

[garee]

LOL, it's the chickens counter Chic-fil-a campaign.

LOL How now brown cow and not the red cow instead.... she fled and went to bed.

 

[posthuman]

Had the council NOT voted on every Book within the Old Testament, it would look more like the Torah.

i think you mean the talmud, but yeah -- and that they did by prayer and scholarship and wisdom, right? so i think there's a place for examining the evidence of the manuscripts we do have ((i'm personally totally not qualified to judge that kind of scholarship)) and that doesn't shake my faith.

 

[Angela53510]

ΠΡΟΣ ΘΕΣΣΑΛΟΝΙΚΕΙΣ Α΄ 4:17 Greek NT: Nestle 1904
ἔπειτα ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι ἅμα σὺν αὐτοῖς ἁρπαγησόμεθα νεφέλαι /[ B] εἰς ἀπάντησιν τοῦ Κυρίου εἰς ἀέρα· καὶ οὕτως πάντοτε σὺν Κυρίῳ ἐσόμεθα.

νεφέλη, νεφέλης, ἡ (νέφος) (from Homer down), the Sept. especially for עָנָן, but also for עָב and שַׁחַק; a cloud

I was actually referring to εἰς ἀέρα, and I admit forgetting the ἐν νεφέλαις. My bad for posting at 5 am in the dark, and not pulling up the Scripture.

My point? In the atmosphere, not the heavens! Still on earth.

 

[Angela53510]

Here is proof from an AMILLENNIAL Hoekema who has written books on the subject, and even he believes in the rapture.:



Now would be high time to admit you were misrepresenting my view and even the amillennial view.
He says just what the bible says: we are caught up in the clouds.

Dont know why you deny this FACT. I've never seen ANYONE deny the rapture, no matter what eschatology they hold to. EVER. Thats like denying a plain verse that says Jesus went to Galilee or something. "NOPE HE DIDNT!" Never seen such a thing. Mindblown.

Not all Amills believe exactly the same thing. We are not uniform in our beliefs. I have read Hoekema, in fact, I have all three of his books. Amills are thinkers, generally, and so we don't just believe what we are told, but rather, we read the Bible and study it.

As for you, dispensationalism was started in the 18th century with Darby and was popularized by Scofield's Bible. Before that time, no one anywhere believe in this rapture. The reason, being, it was not in the Bible.

Your so-called "Plain meaning" is really something you have come to believe after hearing preachers preach on it, and reading dispensational books. There is no way you would ever come up with such a ridiculous doctrine if you just used the Bible.

In fact, the first 15 years I was a Christian I went to dispensational churches, and didn't understand how the verses offered could possibly support the Rapture. I kept quiet, especially when I heard people being called "heretics" who did not agree with dispensationalism.

Lucky me, I got educated, read the Greek, studied all FOUR eschatological views, read widely,, until I was satisfied that there was no millennium, let alone this rapture. Anthony Hoekema is an excellent scholar, but I do not agree with him using the term "Rapture" to describe what he is speaking of. I do agree with him, but I disagree with the term he uses.

Amazing how you had to go ad hominium on me Just discuss the Scriptures and you would be a lot farther ahead than insulting my education. I believe what I believe, because that is what the Bible says. Again, one verse with haparizo in it, does not a doctrine make.

 

[rlm68]

From the GREEK CLV translation BIBLE:

1 Thes 4:17

17 Thereupon we, the living who are surviving, shall at the same time be snatched away together with them in clouds, to meet the Lord in the air. And thus shall we always be together with the Lord."

 

[fredoheaven]

At the Midnight Cry

I HEAR THE SOUND
OF A MIGHTY RUSHING WIND
AND IT’S CLOSER NOW
THAN IT’S EVER BEEN
I CAN ALMOST HEAR THE TRUMPET
AND GABRIEL SOUND THE CHORD
AT THE MIDNIGHT CRY WE’LL BR GOING HOME.

CHORUS:
WHEN JESUS STEPS OUT
ON A CLOUD TO CALL HIS CHILDREN
THE DEAD IN CHRIST SHALL RISE
TO MEET HIM IN THE AIR
AND THEN THOSE THAT REMAIN
SHALL BE QUICKLY CHANGED
AT THE MIDNIGHT CRY
WHEN JESUS COMES AGAIN.

I LOOK AROUND ME
I SEE PROPHECIES FULL FILLING
AND SIGNS OF THE TIMES
they're APPEARING EVERYWHERE
I CAN ALMOST HEAR THE FATHER
AS HE SAYS
SON GO GET YOUR CHILDREN.?
AT THE MIDNIGHT CRY
THE BRIDE OF CHRIST WILL RISE.

AND THEN THOSE THAT REMAIN
WILL BE QUICKLY CHANGED
AT THE MIDNIGHT CRY
WHEN JESUS COMES AGAIN
AT THE MIDNIGHT CRY
WHEN JESUS COMES AGAIN
WHEN JESUS COMES AGAIN.
Songwriters: Charles Robert Day / Greg Day

 

[fredoheaven]

Ephesians 3:2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:
Colossians 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

Dispensationalism start right with the Bible.

God bless

 

[trofimus]

From the GREEK CLV translation BIBLE:

1 Thes 4:17

17 Thereupon we, the living who are surviving, shall at the same time be snatched away together with them in clouds, to meet the Lord in the air. And thus shall we always be together with the Lord."

I think the point Angela is making is that there is nothing in the text saying we will be transported to heaven and wait there for 7 years, thus disappearing from this world.

 

[Miri]

Holy Cow!

 

[Hevosmies]

Not all Amills believe exactly the same thing. We are not uniform in our beliefs. I have read Hoekema, in fact, I have all three of his books. Amills are thinkers, generally, and so we don't just believe what we are told, but rather, we read the Bible and study it.

As for you, dispensationalism was started in the 18th century with Darby and was popularized by Scofield's Bible. Before that time, no one anywhere believe in this rapture. The reason, being, it was not in the Bible.

Your so-called "Plain meaning" is really something you have come to believe after hearing preachers preach on it, and reading dispensational books. There is no way you would ever come up with such a ridiculous doctrine if you just used the Bible.

In fact, the first 15 years I was a Christian I went to dispensational churches, and didn't understand how the verses offered could possibly support the Rapture. I kept quiet, especially when I heard people being called "heretics" who did not agree with dispensationalism.

Lucky me, I got educated, read the Greek, studied all FOUR eschatological views, read widely,, until I was satisfied that there was no millennium, let alone this rapture. Anthony Hoekema is an excellent scholar, but I do not agree with him using the term "Rapture" to describe what he is speaking of. I do agree with him, but I disagree with the term he uses.

Amazing how you had to go ad hominium on me Just discuss the Scriptures and you would be a lot farther ahead than insulting my education. I believe what I believe, because that is what the Bible says. Again, one verse with haparizo in it, does not a doctrine make.

Is it the word 'rapture' that you disagree with? You even admitted earlier that: "My point? In the atmosphere, not the heavens! Still on earth."
That is what I believe, in the clouds, clouds are not in outer space. And i am NOT NOT NOT a dispensationalist. NO!
John Gill was not a dispensationalist, and look at what he has to say:

"in the clouds; the same clouds perhaps in which Christ will come, will be let down to take them up; these will be the chariots, in which they will be carried up to him; and thus, as at our Lord's ascension a cloud received him, and in it he was carried up out of the sight of men, so at this time will all the saints ride up in the clouds of heaven:"

If you read the entire commentary on that verse, John Gill believes that at that time (the second coming time) we will be changed into glorified bodies, and we go upto the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and then return with Him to earth. Do you disagree with that?

I truly hope this is just a misunderstanding of terms and its the TERM rapture you disagree with, not catching up to the clouds, because if that is what you disagree with you are just arguing with Paul at that point, in which case the conversation is over.

Be that as it may, I still want to apologize for being too rude/crude, I hope this was a misunderstanding. And once again: I am NOT a dispensationalist! They believe only Romans to Philemon is for the church, I believe the words of Jesus are of utmost importance!

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Not all Amills believe exactly the same thing. We are not uniform in our beliefs. I have read Hoekema, in fact, I have all three of his books. Amills are thinkers, generally, and so we don't just believe what we are told, but rather, we read the Bible and study it.

As for you, dispensationalism was started in the 18th century with Darby and was popularized by Scofield's Bible. Before that time, no one anywhere believe in this rapture. The reason, being, it was not in the Bible.

Your so-called "Plain meaning" is really something you have come to believe after hearing preachers preach on it, and reading dispensational books. There is no way you would ever come up with such a ridiculous doctrine if you just used the Bible.

In fact, the first 15 years I was a Christian I went to dispensational churches, and didn't understand how the verses offered could possibly support the Rapture. I kept quiet, especially when I heard people being called "heretics" who did not agree with dispensationalism.

Lucky me, I got educated, read the Greek, studied all FOUR eschatological views, read widely,, until I was satisfied that there was no millennium, let alone this rapture. Anthony Hoekema is an excellent scholar, but I do not agree with him using the term "Rapture" to describe what he is speaking of. I do agree with him, but I disagree with the term he uses.

Amazing how you had to go ad hominium on me Just discuss the Scriptures and you would be a lot farther ahead than insulting my education. I believe what I believe, because that is what the Bible says. Again, one verse with haparizo in it, does not a doctrine make.

Lol, thats why these discussions are prety much meaningless. Both sides go and say there is no way one could read the bible and believe this or that. Accusations thrown around that this person believes this or that (which is most of the time not even true) I am educated, you are not. If you were you would believe like me. Why is it that we can not have meaningful discussions? It is sad. And just makes the world look and say there, see, You want us to follow God but all you do is attack each other. We look at you and laugh.


Ps. Rapure is latin for being caught up. The bible says, through the apostle Paul. That at a time in the future, the dead in christ will raise, and we who are alive will be “Caught up” after, and thus we will be with the lord forever. So this believe that no one believed in the rapture is pretty silly when paul himself said that all people who are living on that day will be raptured. It is why we shoudl think, and not be caught up in he said she said.. The thought that the rapture was not taught until a certain day is what men taught, it is where you got your information. So to say you do not follow men is another thing you should be careful about doing,

 

[eternally-gratefull]

And once again: I am NOT a dispensationalist! They believe only Romans to Philemon is for the church, I believe the words of Jesus are of utmost importance!

What? Where do people come up with these things? I have never heard such a thing.. not saying SOME do not think this, there are different sects of people who believe God has done things different for different people (dispensations - and no I am not saying people are saved different, salvationhas been the same for all people by grace through faith in all ages) but saying all believe this is wrong!

Can people stop for a minute and listen to what people actually say instead of assuming they know? And i am asking both sides, even i have been guilty, we need to stop