There will be no Rapture!!!

[The_Parson]

There will be no pre or mid tribulation rapture. This is an invention of the dispensationalists. The Pre-Rapture was invented by the dispensationalist John Darby in the 19th century. It did not exist before that. Church history did not know a Pre-Rapture before the 19th century.

Man, there go my travel plans out the door. You're wrong however to say that the dispensationalist are the ones who came up with it.

• Morgan Edwards (1703-1796) Edwards, a Baptist minister, wrote about his pre-tribulation rapture beliefs in 1744 and later published them in 1788. He saw a distinct rapture three and a half years before the start of the millennium1.
• John Asgill (1659-1738) Asgill wrote a book in 1700 about the possibility of translation (i.e., rapture) without seeing death.
• William E. Blackstone (1841-1935) Blackstone taught the pre-trib rapture in his book "Jesus is Coming" published in 1878

Next question? Were there earlier ones other than these? Yes indeed...

• Johann Heinrich Alsted (1588-1638): Alsted, a German theologian, wrote about the rapture occurring before the tribulation in his works.
• Thomas Brightman (1562-1607): Brightman, an English clergyman, wrote about the rapture happening before the tribulation in his posthumously published work "Apocalypsis Apocalypseos" (1609).

I'll have to dig a little deeper to find more.

 

[ewq1938]

John 14:1-3
14 “Do not let your hearts be troubled. You believe in God[a]; believe also in me. 2 My Father’s house has many rooms; if that were not so, would I have told you that I am going there to prepare a place for you? 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am.

"I will come back" refers to the second coming from heaven to Earth so "you also may be where I am" means they are together at the Earth not at heaven.

 

[The_Parson]

Here we go.

• Ephraem the Syrian (c. 373): Ephraem's sermon "On the Last Times, The Antichrist, and The End of the World" is often cited as containing elements that some interpret as pre-tribulation rapture ideas.
• Brother Dolcino (1304): Dolcino and his followers, known as the Apostolic Brethren, held a belief similar to pre-tribulation rapture, teaching that they would be taken to paradise before the coming of the Antichrist

Oh, I'm sure there's more. So what was the assertion that Cyrus Scofield, John Darby, and Clarence Larkin came up with this concept, or am I imaging it and can continue on with my travel plans?

 

[The_Parson]

And no, I'm "NOT" a dispensationalist by no means. I know someone is going to ask that.

 

[The_Parson]

Hey, found a couple more from the 2nd century. It's a good thing to keep notes.

• The Shepherd of Hermas: This 2nd-century work speaks of the imminent return of Christ and the need for repentance to escape the coming tribulation. It emphasizes the imminence of Christ's return and the importance of living a pure and holy life.
• The Epistle of Barnabas: It's an anonymous work, often dated to the late 1st or early 2nd century, also discusses the end times and the coming judgment. It encourages believers to remain faithful and vigilant.

Am I posting too much proof, or do I need to dig deeper?

 

[Mem]

zif

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

zif

[quoting from Merriam-Webster]

"Zif is the second month of the ancient Hebrew calendar, corresponding to Iyar in the modern Hebrew calendar."

-- Zif Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster



So, this has what to do with the current discussion?



[just kidding!]

 

[Mem]

[quoting from Merriam-Webster]

"Zif is the second month of the ancient Hebrew calendar, corresponding to Iyar in the modern Hebrew calendar."

-- Zif Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster



So, this has what to do with the current discussion?



[just kidding!]

I started to write "If" and when I saw that I wrote 'Zif,'... I liked it a lot, and left it.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

^




Easton's Bible Dictionary - Zif
Zif [N] [H]
brightness; splendour; i.e., "the flower month," mentioned only in 1 Kings 6:1 1 Kings 6:37 , as the "second month." It was called Iyar by the later Jews. (See MONTH .)

 

[Mem]

^




Easton's Bible Dictionary - Zif
Zif [N] [H]
brightness; splendour; i.e., "the flower month," mentioned only in 1 Kings 6:1 1 Kings 6:37 , as the "second month." It was called Iyar by the later Jews. (See MONTH .)

I'm definitely have to look into this now.

As I wrote, I liked it, and left it. Do you see here where one might leave something that one loved, rather than... 'cross it out'? I think there's a lesson there?

 

[ewq1938]

Here we go.

• Ephraem the Syrian (c. 373): Ephraem's sermon "On the Last Times, The Antichrist, and The End of the World" is often cited as containing elements that some interpret as pre-tribulation rapture ideas.
• Brother Dolcino (1304): Dolcino and his followers, known as the Apostolic Brethren, held a belief similar to pre-tribulation rapture, teaching that they would be taken to paradise before the coming of the Antichrist

Oh, I'm sure there's more. So what was the assertion that Cyrus Scofield, John Darby, and Clarence Larkin came up with this concept, or am I imaging it and can continue on with my travel plans?

Pre-trib existed in various forms long before the 1800's stretching back to Paul's time when he had to address that the coming of Christ and our gathering unto him (rapture) could not happen unless two major things happened, both being tribulation related. What he taught against was the earliest form of Pre-trib. People misunderstood his writing of the second coming being like "a thief in the night" and thus the any moment rapture doctrine was born.

1Th 5:2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

This was misunderstood so Paul wrote to clarify:

2Th 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2Th 2:2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

The letter he mentions was what he said in the first letter to the Thessalonians. People misunderstood so badly what he said that he had to write again to correct them.

 

[Mem]

1 Samuel 6: 19-20
19But God struck down some of the people of Beth-shemesh because they looked inside the ark of the LORD. He struck down seventy men,c and the people mourned because the LORD had struck them with a great slaughter.

20The men of Beth-shemesh asked, “Who can stand in the presence of the LORD, this holy God? To whom should the ark go up from here?”

We should expect the same as this when the LORD comes again. Script asks, "who can look upon the face of the LORD and live?" but, then again, scripture declares that "we shall see Him face to face." And so will everyone else, when He comes, these will become ashes just as those in 1Sam who looked inside the ark of the LORD.

 

[sawdust]

It's more than positional. That's where my spirit dwells. But getting back to the original point, Jesus told the disciples before he died that he would come back to earth and receive them, which he did in John 20:19. John 14:3 doesn't say he would take them to heaven. The place he prepares for us is the new Jerusalem that comes down from heaven to earth

Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. John 20:19​

Huh? That does not make sense. Jesus had not even left the earth in John 20:19. Try reading two verses prior for context, it's the same day as verse 19. Hadn't happened, still a future event.

John 20:17
17 Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

If the place He is preparing is the New Jerusalem and we don't live in it until it arrives here on earth, why didn't Jesus bring it with Him when He (supposedly returned) as you claim? And what Coming then are we waiting for? Is there a Third Coming?

Your spirit dwells within you otherwise you would be spiritually dead. How could Jesus commend His spirit into the Fathers hands if His spirit was not in Him? Why do you think unbelievers cannot comprehend spiritual matters? It's our spirit that communes with God's Spirit so we can understand the things of the Kingdom. It's why we must be born of the Spirit. (Jn.3:3)

You're all over the place. According to you ...

Jesus ascends to heaven to prepare a place for us which He promises to return and take us to where He is which, is heaven, only He doesn't take us to where He is, instead He comes to where we are and doesn't even bring the place He prepared for us but instead goes back to heaven again with our spirits which, technically means we are all dead, for the body without the spirit is dead (Jm.2:26) to what then? Come a third time to do what exactly?

I don't think so.

 

[sawdust]

"I will come back" refers to the second coming from heaven to Earth so "you also may be where I am" means they are together at the Earth not at heaven.

Jesus went to heaven where He is preparing a place for us. That is where He is and to where He promised to take us. He did not promise to take us to where we are already. That would mean we are not being taken anywhere.

Remind me never to go on a road rip with you.

 

[Mem]

And, this will be no 'secret' event when He comes again. "All eyes will see Him." A thief in the night comes to take what you otherwise thought you might have secured. That is how He comes as a thief in the night to such as those, but scriptures declare that "that Day should not come on us like[wise]...," catching us unawares, but rather that, "we will go skipping out as calves..." (because we were secured in His sheepfold, abiding in His care, all along!) Wherever we may roam, we can't escape His Presence.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

And, this will be no 'secret' event when He comes again. "All eyes will see Him." A thief in the night comes to take what you otherwise thought you might have secured. That is how He comes as a thief in the night to such as those, but scriptures declare that "that Day should not come on us like[wise]...," catching us unawares, but rather that, "we will go skipping out as calves..." (because we were secured in His sheepfold, abiding in His care, all along!) Wherever we may roam, we can't escape His Presence.

What comes "as a thief in the night" is [not Jesus' Person Himself] an early-located time period. (i.e. the Trib yrs)




So says 1Th5:1-3 and elsewhere making the same point.




[Jesus Himself comes "as a thief. [period]"... with NO "in the night" phrase accompanying this when referring to HE HIMSELF / HIS PERSON--Rev16:14-16 (His Second Coming to the earth point in time, i.e. Armageddon time-slot), etc]

 

[ewq1938]

Jesus went to heaven where He is preparing a place for us. That is where He is and to where He promised to take us. He did not promise to take us to where we are already. That would mean we are not being taken anywhere.

After he comes back, TO THE EARTH, he does not say he takes anyone anywhere. We will be where he is, which is the Earth.

Joh 14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
Joh 14:3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.


Jesus said, "I go to prepare a place for you." that is regarding those who die while Christ is in heaven. Jesus will eventually leave heaven: "I will come again". That is the second coming and here is the important thing: "I will come again and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also."


So where is Christ after "I will come again and receive you unto myself"? Earth. He is no longer in heaven.


"I will come again and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also."


This is what Jesus said. This is what some think he said:


"I will come again and receive you unto myself AND TAKE YOU BACK TO HEAVEN; that where I am, there ye may be also."


He also did NOT say, "I will come again and receive you unto myself; that where I USED TO BE, there ye may be also."

He never said when he came back, that he was taking anyone to heaven. He comes again to Earth and where he is on Earth is where the church will be.

Also in the same chapter:

Joh 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.


Christ isn't returning to take anyone up to heaven to live with him and the Father but the opposite! The Father and Christ will end up coming here to make their abode on Earth with us! That's the opposite of the false pre-trib teaching!

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

2Th 2:2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
2Th 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

"THAT DAY" (v.3a) I placed in PURPLE (to address this point ^ ) refers back to the Subject in verse 2, not to the Subject in v.1.





So verse two is Paul addressing the matter of a "false claim" circulating (or that could ever be claimed) purporting "that the day of the Lord IS PRESENT [PERFECT indicative ('is already here / is already present'); TRANSITIVE verb in the Greek (which means that it is NOT defined as "is at hand" as your post suggests)]"



IOW, the false claim SAID NOTHING about "rapture" (that concept).




The Subject of rapture (v.1) is what PAUL is bringing to bear (in v.1) on the matter of the false claim (v.2).

So what you have explained is the exact opposite of what Paul is actually conveying here.


It is NOT the "our Rapture" can't happen until those two items occur (that is not Paul's point);
it's that the DAY OF THE LORD [the early-located TRIB-yrs] cannot be present apart from those two things in evidence... and of course they weren't.


Verse 3's "that day" refers to the one in verse 2, not to the Subject in v.1.

Distinct things.

Many people incorrectly conflate these.

The letter he mentions was what he said in the first letter to the Thessalonians. People misunderstood so badly what he said that he had to write again to correct them.

No, that is not what Paul is addressing in 2Th.

They did not misunderstand what he'd written in 1Th4, NOPE!

(He is addressing the matter of the "false claim," which he spells out what that is, in v.2)

 

[ewq1938]

"THAT DAY" (v.3a) I placed in PURPLE (to address this point ^ ) refers back to the Subject in verse 2, not to the Subject in v.1.

Paul is teaching that Jesus just can't return at any moment because there are two major events that have to happen first. The first letter was not clear on this, and it started the false Pre-trib rapture teaching.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Paul is teaching that Jesus just can't return at any moment because there are two major events that have to happen first. The first letter was not clear on this, and it started the false Pre-trib rapture teaching.

You're taking "an idea" and imposing that ONTO the text.

The text itself is not telling us that.





By conflating Paul's VERSE 1 Subject (our Rapture) WITH the "false claim" of verse 2 ("that the day of the Lord IS PRESENT [PERFECT INDICATIVE; TRANSITIVE verb in the Grk), and then when reading v.3a's "THAT DAY" you are SKIPPING BACK OVER AND PAST verse 2 (essentially IGNORING v.2's false claim's ACTUAL CONTENT--what it's ABOUT) to INSTEAD grab verse 1 to attach to this phrase in v.3a ('that day')--i.e. grammatical butchering--is the ONLY WAY you can come up with any remote compatibility with your "idea" you (and many other folks) are IMPOSING UPON the text (i.e. eisegesis).



--Paul's verse 1 Subject = "our Rapture"

--Verse 2 "false claim" = "that the day of the Lord [/TRIB YRS] is ALREADY HERE [PERFECT indicative--"at a specific point of TIME IN PAST, with results continuing into the present"--that's what PERFECT TENSE [indicative] *means*]"



Two entirely DISTINCT things: v.1 and v.2

Paul is saying, don't believe / be deceived by that specific false claim involving a time-period present and unfolding on the earth (v.2), "BY" [v.1] (by reason of the facts concerning) "our Rapture [IN THE AIR]" (i.e. "our episynagoges unto Him" UP THERE).




Two ENTIRELY distinct items which your viewpoint is conflating (when reading "that day" in v.3) as though they (v.1 and v.2) were the same thing.

They are not.





So, for the readers, try again explaining what you think verse 2's "false claim" WAS / IS ABOUT (the content of that false claim concerns an earthly time period being claimed as being "IS PRESENT / IS ALREADY HERE")