1
   

HISTORY OF "THE RAPTURE"

 
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2008 09:21 am
ALL WELCOME< COME TO THE LIGHT!!

(Little midget lady in Poltergeist)
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2008 12:26 pm
[quote="dlowan"]I see absolutely nothing in your quotes to support any such thing as a rapture or catching away or whatever you choose to call it.[/quote]

I did not say that I, personally, felt these scriptures supported the idea of a rapture. I tend to get the idea of the rapture from these verses:


Quote:
Jesus Christ said, "Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left" (Matthew 24:40).


Quote:
"For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 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. Wherefore comfort o­ne another with these words. But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write to you. For yourselves know that the day of the Lord so cometh like a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then cometh sudden destruction upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. But you brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief" (1 Thessalonians 4:16 - 5:4). ...................more on the link below

http://www.whitehorsemedia.com/articles/details.cfm?art=50
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2008 06:51 pm
Setanta wrote:
neologist wrote:
As for Sola Fide:
"Indeed, as the body without spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead." (James 2:26)


I am appalled to think that i agree with you on an issue of religious doctrine.
That and coffee and Bar B Que.

Not bad
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2008 07:03 pm
Barbecue is never washed down with coffee, Thats just wrong.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2008 07:42 pm
farmerman wrote:
Barbecue is never washed down with coffee, Thats just wrong.
But Set won't pop a brew.

You come over and help me break down his resistance.

Or

I guess I'll give him a Coke
0 Replies
 
Pauligirl
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2008 08:56 pm
neologist wrote:
farmerman wrote:
Barbecue is never washed down with coffee, Thats just wrong.
But Set won't pop a brew.

You come over and help me break down his resistance.

Or

I guess I'll give him a Coke


Only if it's beef barbecue. If it's pork (and it should be) sweet tea is the thing. Required by law south of the Mason Dixon line. And if it's done right, it's as close to rapture as you'll ever get.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2008 09:43 pm
Personally, I'll go for an India Pal Ale. But, so long as we're all fillin' our bellies.

That reminds me. I was over t' Joe Sixpack's place the other day . . . .
0 Replies
 
Rockhead
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2008 10:07 pm
I'm goin to Pauligirl's, ya'll do what ya think's best...
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2008 05:11 am
yeh, Im kind of a sweet ice test thing myself.
Gettin to be that season soon.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Mar, 2008 12:41 pm
Pauligirl wrote:
neologist wrote:
farmerman wrote:
Barbecue is never washed down with coffee, Thats just wrong.
But Set won't pop a brew.

You come over and help me break down his resistance.

Or

I guess I'll give him a Coke


Only if it's beef barbecue. If it's pork (and it should be) sweet tea is the thing. Required by law south of the Mason Dixon line. And if it's done right, it's as close to rapture as you'll ever get.


I'll go along with that, so long as you put cole slaw on my bar-b-q pork sammich . . .
0 Replies
 
Pauligirl
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Mar, 2008 01:51 pm
Setanta wrote:
Pauligirl wrote:
neologist wrote:
farmerman wrote:
Barbecue is never washed down with coffee, Thats just wrong.
But Set won't pop a brew.

You come over and help me break down his resistance.

Or

I guess I'll give him a Coke


Only if it's beef barbecue. If it's pork (and it should be) sweet tea is the thing. Required by law south of the Mason Dixon line. And if it's done right, it's as close to rapture as you'll ever get.


I'll go along with that, so long as you put cole slaw on my bar-b-q pork sammich . . .



Anything else would be a sacrilege.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 Apr, 2008 10:02 pm
Arella is correct that the word 'rapture' derives from I Thes 4

1 Thessalonians 4:13-17

13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with Him.
15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
16 For the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the Archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 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.


In the Latin translation , the word 'caught up' in verse 17 is the root of the English word 'rapture'.

Nearly all Christian sects have historically believed in the Second coming of Christ, until very recent times.

The differences of opinion on the 'rapture' question for Bible believing Christians of today is normally not 'IF' but usually 'WHEN' this 'catching up' associated with Christ's coming will take place.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Apr, 2008 06:21 am
A dubious proposition, given that the original epistle would not have been written in Latin, but in Greek. It is made more dubious by the fact that contemporary texts of the bobble which are popular with and accepted as "inerrant, divinely inspired scripture" by Protestants have been translated from Greek sources, not Latin. This type of fuzzy logic, though, is typical of the bobble-thumper.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Apr, 2008 08:23 am
well, even if RL were correct, then the concept of the "rapture" would be a more recent revision of an interpretation of scripture. Therefore its tradition, not scripture , thats being honored.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Apr, 2008 08:25 am
It's wishful thinking raised to the "dignity" of revealed truth.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Apr, 2008 11:38 am
farmerman wrote:
well, even if RL were correct, then the concept of the "rapture" would be a more recent revision of an interpretation of scripture. Therefore its tradition, not scripture , thats being honored.


It's not the concept, but the timing as well as ancillary events interpreted to coincide with that timing , that you are referring to .

The basic idea of a 'catching up' at the Second Coming was taught in the NT, as I referenced.

'When will that happen? and what will happen before/afterward?' Those are different questions than the basic : Will it happen?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Apr, 2008 11:50 am
RL
Quote:
The basic idea of a 'catching up' at the Second Coming was taught in the NT, as I referenced.

'When will that happen? and what will happen before/afterward?' Those are different questions than the basic : Will it happen?


Its being interpreted as saying what you assert. Theres nothing that contains all the specifications and the actual concept of a "rapture". Its all manufactured at a later date. Since the NT is supposed to be the fulfillment of the OT, wheres the connection at all? Nothing in written history seems to predate the time prior to Dr Darby.

The concept keeps gaining "legs" but its entirely circular. Its no different than the "Tradition equals scripture" basis of the Catholic Church.

When all the Evangelicals care to critique the Ctholics and their underpinnings based upon I and II Timothy, theres a loud outcry as to the "whore of Rome's" worship of men. As it turns out, the rapture is just another tradition in search of Scriptural base.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Apr, 2008 04:14 pm
farmerman wrote:
RL
Quote:
The basic idea of a 'catching up' at the Second Coming was taught in the NT, as I referenced.

'When will that happen? and what will happen before/afterward?' Those are different questions than the basic : Will it happen?


Its being interpreted as saying what you assert. Theres nothing that contains all the specifications and the actual concept of a "rapture". Its all manufactured at a later date. Since the NT is supposed to be the fulfillment of the OT, wheres the connection at all? Nothing in written history seems to predate the time prior to Dr Darby.

The concept keeps gaining "legs" but its entirely circular. Its no different than the "Tradition equals scripture" basis of the Catholic Church.

When all the Evangelicals care to critique the Ctholics and their underpinnings based upon I and II Timothy, theres a loud outcry as to the "whore of Rome's" worship of men. As it turns out, the rapture is just another tradition in search of Scriptural base.


Whenever you wanna stop being vague, and discuss precisely what 'specifications' you are talking about, then maybe we'll get somewhere.

I have no idea what you objecting to.

The concept (catching away) is clearly referenced in the passage I cited. The details that you are asking about probably aren't , but I have no idea what details those are until you quit circling.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Apr, 2008 04:29 pm
" The specifications" are the individual inclusive features that define the "Rapture". It all appears to be modified scripture and, even with that portion of the LAtin derived text you quoted, it was apparent that were dealing with modifications of a text within which the very word isnt even used but must be discussed sort of euphemistically.

I know that you know that the concept was a very late addition to a specific dogma. When do you think it was added to the creed of the religions that confess a belief in such a thing?.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Apr, 2008 06:33 pm
In fact, the OT contains much to discredit the rapturist. I refer to

Psalm 37 10,11: "And just a little while longer, and the wicked one will be no more;
And you will certainly give attention to his place, and he will not be.
11 But the meek ones themselves will possess the earth,
And they will indeed find their exquisite delight in the abundance of peace."

Psalm 37: 28, 29: But as for the offspring of the wicked ones, they will indeed be cut off.
29 The righteous themselves will possess the earth. . "

Proverbs 2: 21, 22
'For the upright are the ones that will reside in the earth, and the blameless are the ones that will be left over in it. 22 As regards the wicked, they will be cut off from the very earth; and as for the treacherous, they will be torn away from it."
And they will reside forever upon it.

All of which seems to be the reverse of rapturist thinking
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/10/2024 at 01:34:28