However, she does lay out the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America’s beliefs on it and as I am a member of the ELCA…
However, the verses she quoted are the same as those on which you and the other Rapturists base your beliefs. She, and I, interpret them differently than you.
[QUOTE=Psycho Pirate]
Diogenes, the concept of the Rapture is indeed in the Bible.
I believe in the “blessed hope” of the Lord’s return. I believe it is literal, it is personal, it will be visible, and it is imminent. It will be premillennial and pretribulational. Christ will rapture His Church prior to the seven years of tribulation, and at the end of the tribulation Christ will return with His saints to establish His thousand-year reign on the earth.
I Thessalonians 4:13-18 is not talking about the Second Coming in that of Jesus coming to reign on earth, but is indeed speaking of the removal of the saints before the tribulation. God always removes his people before judgment falls (Noah and his family before the flood, Lot and his family before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, etc.)
This is a reference to the parousia, the second coming, not a preliminary ascension of souls before some coming “tribulation.”
The word “wrath” is more accurately translated as “justice” and this verse refers to the belief that Jesus will save people from God’s eternal judgement and annihilation, not an earthly tribulation.
This refers to a trial before the second coming (specifically it refers to the persecution of Christians under Domitian at the end of the first century) not a post-rapture scenario in the future.
You’re wrong on pretty much every count. I appreciate that you’ve been taught this stuff but you should understand that rapture theology did not even exist until the 19th century, is not Biblical (although Bible verses are certainly misconstrued, cherry-picked and misrepresented in order to force an illusion of Biblical support), and is far and a way a minority belief in Christianity as a whole. There is nothing in the Bible which says anything about a rapture of souls before any tribulations. That is recent American contrivance with no tradition in the previous 1800 years of Christianity. It still plays no part in the vast majority of Christian doctrines.
That’s all well and good but the “pretrib” part is not in the Bible.
Again, not in the Bible.
This is just flatly incorrect. Read the whole thing in context. It’s just a reassurance that those who die before the second coming (which was believed to be imminent at that time) would still go to heaven.
This is a reference to the parousia, the second coming, not a preliminary ascension of souls before some coming “tribulation.”
The word “wrath” is more accurately translated as “justice” and this verse refers to the belief that Jesus will save people from God’s eternal judgement and annihilation, not an earthly tribulation.
This refers to a trial before the second coming (specifically it refers to the persecution of Christians under Domitian at the end of the first century) not a post-rapture scenario in the future.
You’re wrong on pretty much every count. I appreciate that you’ve been taught this stuff but you should understand that rapture theology did not even exist until the 19th century, is not Biblical (although Bible verses are certainly misconstrued, cherry-picked and misrepresented in order to force an illusion of Biblical support), and is far and a way a minority belief in Christianity as a whole. There is nothing in the Bible which says anything about a rapture of souls before any tribulations. That is recent American contrivance with no tradition in the previous 1800 years of Christianity. It still plays no part in the vast majority of Christian doctrines.
Baah…sorry about the redundancy. My first post above was submitted prematurely. The second is the one I meant to post.
quelquechose, I believe it will be soon because of what I see to be the deterioration of society and the overall lack of morals. It’s much more of an “anything goes, live and let live” way of life nowadays with no moral absolutes.
dropzone, we’ll agree to disagree then.
Diogenes, we’ll also have to agree to disagree. I imagine you find my “you are wrong” statements just as annoying as I find your “you are wrong” statements. Just because you say I’m wrong and interpret the verses incorrectly doesn’t mean I’m wrong (and vice versa). You seem to know a lot about the Rapture, but you have also been taught things (or have learned them for yourself, as have I) that have led you to believe that the Rapture is false. We’ve reached different conclusions. I am sure I am right. You are too. I could go through and “disprove” your verses and say you are taking them out of context, but what would be the point?
We’ll find out who’s right eventually. 
Ah, if only I had a hundred dollars for every year in which that kind of thing has been said. It wouldn’t surprise me if there wasn’t some healthy portion of the population of the planet saying just that kind of thing every year since civilization began.
JOhn.
Psycho, at the moment Diogenes is ahead on points, as he is arguing that all the verses you are relying on have different origins. So find some verses that he can’t refute, or rebut his arguments. The point of doing this is that if you don’t, he wins, by default if nothing else.
I agree that the Darby/LB premil Rapture is not IN the Bible (tho it’s not necessarily an invalid interpretation of the Biblical passages). However, I would say tho that the Rapture is in the Bible as part of the Second Coming as I differ from your defining the Rapture through Darbyist eyes. (I think Darby did coin the term, tho the Greek root harpazo “caught up” in I Thess 4 is connected to the Latin rapto.) We actually do agree on substance, but differ on details.
I guess it’s a question of how we define the “rapture.” I don’t dispute that the New Testament seems to indicate an ascension of souls as part of the second coming, I just dispute (as you said) that the Bible indicates anything like the Darbyist view of a premillenial ascension, or of any like event occurring before the parousia. The scenario outlined in the Left behind books is not in the Bible.
I guess I’m saying I pretty much agree with you down the line with the exception that I think of the term “rapture” as being strictly premillenial.
You’re correct about the etymology of the term, by the way.
Awesome! 
Oh, for the love of . . . why do people believe this? Or rather, why do people believe that it was ever any different? Folks have been saying this for as long as we’ve been talking; how come people haven’t figured out that nostalgia is deceptive? And how is life really “anything goes” anyway?
Well, we only have his word on this. For all I know this “parousia” he speaks of is really a lentil dish. When it comes to Greek theological terms, I don’t know my parousia from my homoiousios.
“Parousia” is a Greek word that means something like “appearing” or “presense.” In Christian theology it refers to the second coming. This is the event which is referred to in some of Psycho Pirate’s quoted verses and it’s a distonctly separate event from Darby’s rapture.
Don’t take my word for it. Read the passages yourself- in context- and decide if they refer to the second coming or to a preliminary rapture before the so-called “tribulation.”
The Rapture is the final album by Siouxsie and the Banshees which was released in 1995.
Oh, don’t get me wrong. I think the pre-trib rapture is a pretty weak, pretty heavily interpreted idea. But I guess I’m not quite sure how all the details of it work, and exactly how your model is different. Are you just arranging events in a different order?
“I’m going to make a place of everlasting torment and sentence anyone who doesn’t make an incredible leap of faith to suffer there, but I don’t want anyone to ge there”
That doesn’t sound quite true to me.
I guess in a way, I am.
Essentially, the New Testament indicates that that Jesus will appear in glory in the sky and that the faithful will ascend to heaven (the parousia). The crux of Darbyism, though, is that there will be a preliminary ascension when all the good Christians will be taken up, then a period of tribulation, then the official parousia and final day of judgement.
It is my contention (and the contention of the bulk of Christian tradition) that the Bible does not speak of a pre-trib or pre-millenial rapture, only of the second coming. There is not a Biblical basis for two distinct events separated by a period of tribulation.
So, by previous example, one “perfect” family will be saved. First, it was Noah and his bunch. Then Lot and his crew.
God, I hope it isn’t the McAllisters from down the street. They’re stupid. And they bug me. Plus he has an ugly car.
Well now it’s bugging me.
I mean, I’ve been fairly good all my life, except for the candy bar I stole when I was about 5. Oh, and the name-calling through middle school. Of course, there’s always the immense (almost disgusting) amount of fornication going on.
But now I’m thinking, what if the Bible, 292 years from now, is referencing Noah, Lot and that doofus Donnie McAllister?
“And God said to Donnie, 'Donnie, take those folk on your block and move them to high ground, ‘cause I’m gonna flood y’all again.’ And Donnie said to God, ‘God, I love my Pontiac Aztec, even if it is as ugly as my pimply ass.’ To which God replies, 'Donnie, you have a pimply ass ‘cause I thought you deserved it, you doofus.’”
And God said, “it’s all good, Donnie. I’m pickin’ up what yer throwin’ down. That’s right, I’m readin’ your mail.”
And He saw that it was good.
Wow, that story got a bit away on me. What was I pissed about?
I’m drunk and have to go sleep.
Yeah, you WISH! :rolleyes:
Donnie’s got an Aztec and he’s STILL getting saved? What the hell kind of God raptures somebody with that lousy taste in cars? “Behold my wrath, ye whom I have not chosen! You thought that when you got a free car you’d get something nice?”
Time of tribulation, indeed!
Hey, He raptured my Pacer. I saw it, too. The car was lifted up into the heavens.
Then it was unceremoniously dropped into a crusher.
Probably just like I will be.
:smack: :rolleyes:
There is not one specific verse that says, “Lo, Christ will return before the tribulation and rapture His church”. But there are many doctrines in the Bible that aren’t specifically laid out in one verse (the doctrine of the Trinity, for example). But these doctrines and concepts are still in the Bible.
I have read the whole thing in context. The church at Thessalonica was mourning those that had died, but Paul assures them not to act as those without hope. Those that sleep (have died) in Jesus (were saved before death) should not be mourned excessively. They as Christians have the hope of the resurrection. Those that are alive and remain when Christ returns will be changed, and will meet Him in the air. This is clearly speaking of the Rapture.
Also, what of God removing His servants before judgment, or protecting them from universal judgement as he did the tribes under Pharaoh in Egypt during the plagues, as well as Noah and Lot? What would be the purpose of having the faithful church suffer during the tribulation?
As FriarTed points out, the words “caught up” in this passage is ‘harpazo’, to pull up or seize by force. The Latin is where the term “rapture” comes from. This passage (as well as I Cor 15:51-52) are both “translational”, in that believers on earth will be translated and will receive new bodies like Christ. This is different from the second coming or advent spoken of in Zechariah 14:4-5 and Matthew 24:27-31 when Jesus comes with judgment and destruction.
My mistake. You are correct on this point.
I disagree. It is mostly translated as wrath, anger, indignation, or vengeance. This verse is similar to 1 Thess 5:9 “For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,”
I disagree. I believe these verses have a dual fulfillment. The short term (early persecution of the church), as well as a future fulfillment. Was Domitian persecuting “all the world”? No.
What about Revelation 19:7-8, 14 where the bride of Christ (His church) is in heaven with Him, and is prepared to return with Him to earth. How can the church be in Heaven and on earth? I believe the tribulation is the 70th week of Daniel, when God is dealing with Israel. The church was not present for the first 69 weeks. What is it doing there the 70th week?
In conclusion, we can poke holes in each others beliefs forever. There are countless websites out there that make arguments for both sides. They are BELIEFS. I see little point in debating them, but I didn’ t want to cease debating before making a few more points.
That is all I will be saying about this subject…probably.