The Rapture: And Other Silly Things Christians Get Consumed With

konroh · Dec 3, 2013

In 1 Cor. 10:11 the Greek says, upon whom the ends of the ages have come. This can mean culmination, but it doesn't preclude the fact that there is not a future end. The fact that it's plural makes this point. It is not the singular telos, it is the plural, tela.

My point about syntéleia has reference to Heb. 9, not 1 Cor. 10

The idea that Christ appears at the culmination of the ages is not the idea that it's the termination of the ages, cf. Strong's

4930 /syntéleia ("culminating end, finish") is not strictly "termination" but rather "consummation" (completion) that ushers in a new time-era/age (Mt 13:39,40,49,24:3, 28:20).
[The KJV is misleading by rendering 4930 (syntéleia) as "the end of the world" (i.e. when it occurs with aiōn, "age/epoch"). This expression actually means "at the "consummation of the age," i.e. when it reaches its intended climax (consummated conclusion).]

So in neither 1 Cor. 10 or Heb. 9 is there definitive proof that there is no future fulfillment of the end.

I'll have to respond later about the restoration of the end. Off to watch "Catching Fire" with my wife. Peace.

john832 · Dec 3, 2013

PlainWord said:

Dear Konroh,

Thank you for the wonderful compliment. Yes, I don't have a doctorate in theology but I am not uneducated. I have a college degree and am a former Naval Nuclear Engineer who graduated at the top of my class. I guess what sets me apart is I can actually read and don't have any false doctrines that have been pounded into my heads by self-proclaiming religious leaders who are as blind as a bat. Boasting aside, I feel not the least bit put down because there were many among the religiously educated during Christ's day that had everything wrong. Apparently, not much has changed in 2,000 years....

Got to run, more later.

I also went to college, but I can't see where it hurt me much.

konroh · Dec 3, 2013

As a Naval Nuclear Engineer you can understand how ridiculous I would sound trying to spout off how stupid all the Nuclear Engineers are, how they don't get it right, they don't know plutonium from radium. Yes, I would be very stupid.

In the same way, it's stupid to study the Bible without availing oneself to the education of so many. Not everyone who gets a doctorate degree in Theology agrees, in fact they can vastly disagree, but there are many things they agree upon, and there are certain interpretations of Scriptures which all sides reject. It is ludicrous to believe that without availing oneself to fine commentaries that have been written, 2000 years of scholarly thinking on all subjects, examining the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic, understanding the hermeneutical principles which lead all sides to their conclusions, that one can reject all this.

I'm not saying that one person cannot understand the Bible through the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit without outside sources. What I am saying is that many cults have been started exactly because one person thought they had the truth and it was radically different from everyone else. Mormonism has Joseph Smith, Christian Scientists have Mary Baker Eddy.

The Reformers did not stand alone, they stood together. If a Christian right now believes they have the truth, and somehow the Holy Spirit in 2000 years of indwelling and enlightening saints didn't reveal that truth yet, then that Christian should humbly respect that he or she may be wrong.

PlainWord · Dec 3, 2013

Further to our discussion Konroh,

I think far too many scholars and Christians in general forget that there is an eternal state after the Millennium and another period of Satanic influence and temptation after he is released when the 1,000 years are over. This is because "we" are so focused on our generation and/or time frame, specifically the pending Tribulation period. Let's face it, there are several common things to both periods as we have a resurrection, a return of a deity (Christ first, then God), a change in the earth, a Satanic deception of the nations whereby he tempts people to worship him, the sound of a trumpet, an establishment of a new era of Law or Divine ruling and worshiping and judgment(s). Therefore, it is critical to discern which period is being discussed, as both periods are discussed by Christ, John, and certainly Peter. I would argue that Paul also discusses both periods.

My "proof" against there not being a Pre-Trib Rapture is not that Jesus discusses a gathering and not a resurrection in His Olivet Discourse in a vacuum, rather that the Rapture is NOT taught as a stand alone lesson by anybody!!! It is a theory that is pieced together from multiple passages that don't all go together, from misinterpretation of scripture and by ADDING events that are not taught PERIOD!! For example, there is not ONE SINGLE verse in the Bible that teaches the Lord returning twice or that He does a U-Turn and takes anyone back to heaven or goes back Himself. That is an irrefutable fact, yet preachers all over the world have no problem in teaching this as a fact when such fact cannot be found.

1 Thes 4 does NOT teach that those who are "alive and remaining" are "resurrected!!" First, they are not Dead so can't be resurrected unless you think Christ kills them first so He can then bring them back in glorified bodies? Paul's point is NOT that the dead are first to get resurrected bodies, his point is the dead are first to be with Christ. Why do so many Christians have such a hard time reading and understanding scripture the way it is worded? I don't get it, I really don't. If is says "apple" you see "pear."

Scripture is literature. Words have meaning. Context is important. The best way I found to study any literary work is to break each paragraph or topic down and list out the facts. Let's do this for 1 Thes 4:13-17 to see if this helps us.

13 But I do not want you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning those who have fallen asleep, lest you sorrow as others who have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus. 15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. 16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.

1. Some who sleep (are dead) have hope, others don't have hope.
2. The above fact is something Paul wants believers to understand.
3. If we accept that Jesus died as a fact, then we are to accept that God will bring the dead in heaven when God returns.
4. The dead are with Christ before the living.
5. Jesus descends from heaven with a shout, voice of Michael, and with the Trumpet of God. The Dead in Christ are resurrected first.
6. Those who are alive are caught up into "clouds" either into the sky or atop of a high place such as a mountain.
7. Those who are with the Lord, (the resurrected and the caught up alive) will then always be with the Lord.

We do not know if the resurrected or those alive who are caught up are transformed into spiritual bodies as the text here does not say. We also do not know if everyone who is in heaven returns with the Lord or just those martyred as indicated by Rev 20:4-6.

Also, nothing from the above states that the Lord returns to heaven or if He continues to earth.
There is no timing given here relative to the Tribulation. However, if you read ahead a couple of verse to 1 Thes 5:2 you see Paul referencing the "Day of the Lord" which is clearly Post Trib.

PlainWord · Dec 3, 2013

konroh said:

The problem with your argument is there hasn't been 2,000 years of Rapture doctrine, there has been 200 years. I come from an Evangelical background and had the Rapture pounded into my head from cradle until I was old enough to really dig into the issue myself. I have read many opinions and arguments concerning the Rapture from men who hold doctorates. I find none of their arguments compelling because they are not based on fact, they are based on assumptions and biases.

If you start out with a world view belief in a Rapture, you tend to interpret scripture to fit this belief. Because you do so, you lose objectivity and ability to discern. I'd go further and argue that you stop challenging the Rapture as it becomes accepted Biblical dogma in one's mind thus if anyone challenges the validity, its like challenging something sacred like the virgin birth and one becomes defensive, digs in and refuses to open their eyes and minds to re-study the issue.

konroh · Dec 3, 2013

Rom 8:18For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us.

There is nothing in this passage which precludes that the glory to be revealed in us is heavenly only, it very much can refer to a 1000 year millenial earthly glory. In fact, the idea of creation being set free from corruption seems to imply that this creation will enjoy a millenial glory where the Creator will consummate this earth and this earth will be set free from sin. That this will have ultimate fulfillment in the creation of a new heaven and new earth does not preclude the reality that creation has the pangs of childbirth waiting for the consummate age it was created for.

2 Pet. 3:13 does make a strong case that we eagerly await the final fulfillment of the day of the Lord, where everything is done away with, and we can dwell in absolute righteousness. Peter speaks of the ultimate cleansing by fire. The reason he does this is because he had previously mentioned how the world was destroyed by water in the Flood, God will not destroy it this way again. While this passage doesn't mention the millenium specifically, it is interesting that Peter has previously alluded to the idea of 1000 years being as a day. Could he be quietly alluding to a millenium? Very undefinitive, so I won't speculate, but this passage does not contradict a millenium.

1 John 3:1-2 and 1 Co 15 absolutely equate restoration with immortality. The pre-millenial viewpoint believes that all Christians will absolutely enjoy Christ in glorified bodies. The fact that this will be on the earth and in heaven for 1000 years doesn't pose a problem in understanding these passages. Rev. 21 speaks of eternity, it doesn't negate the reality of Rev. 20.

I brought up Rev. 20 because to you Rev. 20 is an uncertain prophetic riddle. There is no 1000 years, there is no physical resurrection, these have to be allegorized to fit an Amillenial perspective.

In summary, while the church is an entity upon which "the ends of the ages" has come, there is no verse that necessitates understanding it as having no age afterward. In fact, many verses speak to a future fulfillment, Rev. 20 being the capstone. It sharpens my thinking to interact with the amillenial viewpoint, and I appreciate the dialogue, though I may disagree, I don't disrespect.

konroh · Dec 3, 2013

I profoundly agree that Pre-trib is not a stand-alone doctrine. I think there have to be principles that govern interpretation before pre-trib is arrived at. Generally, an understanding of the distinction of Israel and the Church lead one to Pre-millenial understanding. Then there is the principle of literal interpretation which drives an understanding of seeing a difference between passages that have the Rapture and passages that have the Revelation of Jesus Christ at His second coming. There are enough differences that I think this distinction is warranted.

And one of those differences is that the Rapture has the resurrection of the dead in Christ and the tranlation of living saints (technically not a resurrection). I agree that the idea that those who are alive are changed into glorified bodies is not explicit, it is implicit. This is primarily because it is impossible to assume that the dead in Christ who come back with Him and are then risen first, receiving glorified bodies, somehow precede those alive who do not then also get glorified bodies. If we are gathered and they have glorified bodies and we're in the clouds in the air (sorry, mountaintop is just not an accepted understanding by any commentary or scholarly opinion) without glorified bodies ever to be with Christ it absolutely makes no sense. It doesn't matter whether Christ comes back down to earth or not, if He does come back down to earth then when do we get glorified bodies, when we die? Impossible. Improbable. Unacceptable. That is why this passage has to be linked to 1 Cor. 15 and then also John 14:1-3 where clearly we go to the Father's house in heaven when Jesus returns for us.

You have no explanation for when we get transformed bodies. The traditional understanding of post-trib theory is at least consistent and recognizes that we have to get glorified bodies here. Their problem is that they have no one in non-glorified bodies who isn't dead who can then populate the millenium. Your problem is you have no idea when we will get glorified bodies. But the text is clear, we get them at the Rapture.

Also, 1 Thess. 5:2 references the "Day of the Lord." As seen from 2 Thess the "day of the Lord" has to encompass the judgment during the Tribulation period as well as the blessings of the Millenial period. It does not begin after the Trib, it begins during the Trib.

Elin · Dec 3, 2013

konroh said:

Heb 9 was not the subject, 1Co 10:11 was the subject.

"Ends (tela = goal, culmination) of the ages" can, and does, mean there is no future end, for it does not allow for another age.

Tela is the goal, culmination, fulfillment of all the different parts of the plan, of all that God has been doing for his people throughout all previous ages.

There is nothing else that can be fulfilled, culminated or attained in any future temporal age, because
it's all done.

That new time/era/age would be eternity, ushered in after the completion of all that God has been doing throughout all previous ages.

There is nothing else in the plan that can be fulfilled in time.

And added to the meaning of tela is no NT teaching anywhere that presents a future temporal age after the church.

It's all a house of cards, derived from uncertain private interpretation of prophetic riddles.

konroh · Dec 3, 2013

Upon whom "the ends of the ages" has come can very easily mean that the church age is the recipient of the end of the age as far as the first Advent of Christ, and also as receiving the 2nd coming of Christ, and also with a view that there is still a fulfillment of the age with a 1000 year reign of Christ.

Rev. 20 literally interpreted teaches a future temporal age after the Church. Premillenialism is not an uncertain private interpretation of prophetic riddles. Virtually every Christian denomination has scholars who believe in it, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist, Charismatic, Evangelical, Catholic, etc. You may protest, but it's a lot like kicking against the goads.

PlainWord · Dec 3, 2013

Why yes, God knows everything and planned everything. But does this equate to a Rapture to avoid Satan's Great Tribulation? I think not. God is obviously going to test Israel and Judea to see if they will follow Satan or wait for Him so why would He not similarly test the church?

Of course the church will be tested. Of the 7 churches, 5 are warned pretty emphatically, with one being told specifically that if they don't repent, they will go through great tribulation and their children will be killed. Does this sound like a Rapture of the church to you? Only one church was promised that they would be kept from this test. So, what happens to the other 6 churches?

PlainWord · Dec 3, 2013

Have you ever considered that God inspired the Bible to allow Satan enough wiggle room to operate because it is obvious that God will allow Satan to tempt the World, not once, not twice but three times. Satan can do nothing without God's permission. Therefore one must really read and learn the Word and understand it for what it says and not fabricate things it does not say.

Satan will tempt Christians. We see two places in Rev that Satan not only tempts the Saints, but that he defeats/overcomes them. If there was a Rapture there would be no saints to tempt. Of course if you maintain the Rapture position, then these Saints must be Tribulation era Saints, in other words, brand new saints with NO scriptural roots. It would not be a very fair fight the devil taking on brand new believers now, would it?

We know Satan deceives as Jesus spends a great deal warning us about it in the Olivet. But if you believe in a Rapture, then Jesus is also warning new believers who probably haven't had time to even read the warning as they were fleeing the Abomination, again, not a very fair fight.

If there is to be a Rapture, then Revelation has absolutely no meaning to the Christian world. Is the Bible written primarily for believers or unbelievers? Are warnings given to those who aren't expected to be reading the Word or to those who are?

If the church is to be the replacement for Israel or at a minimum, receive blessing of escaping the Tribulation while Israel doesn't, wouldn't the church then be given a more prominent place in heaven? Not one gate is named after the church or any church leader. They are all named after the 12 tribes. The church came into being to make Israel jealous, to win them back. That was the primary reason why after 4,000 years the Gentiles were suddenly given a place.

PlainWord · Dec 4, 2013

Please don't attempt to pigeon hole me into any traditional thought. I study the Word of God far more than I do man's interpretation of it. Will "experts" stand next to me at the judgment and take the fall for their false teaching to me. Even if they did, will that fly, or are each of us expected to study the Word on our own? We all have to give an account and I if I come up short it won't be because I followed some crazy nonsense that runs contrary to the Word. Christ says He comes AFTER the Tribulation and He never corrects this statement into allowing for an earlier return, in the clouds or otherwise. It would not be Christ-like to fool his children. Can you say, RED FLAG???

It should be obvious to anyone that all those going into the final heaven, the eternal state will need and have glorified bodies, right? Would you agree with that? When I read 1 Cor 15:50 and on, that's what I see Paul discussing. Death is the final enemy Christ defeats, not the first. Christ reigns for 1,000 years. We are still on earth and while it would be great to have glorified bodies (those of us here), I don't see a practical need let alone a clear teaching that we will have them. Can you find me two passages that discuss us being changed? If so, I'm dying to hear. If not, then we have one passage and one time frame where we know we will be in glorified bodies. So why are you so quick to jump to the conclusion that 1 Cor 15 is talking about millennium instead of eternal state?

Test EVERYTHING. That's what I try to do. Satan loves to trip up believers. He gets a huge kick out of it.

As for "air" verses "mountain top" I don't see a big difference in the big picture. I can accept that it could be the sky. What irritates me is people who use the gathering in the air to justify that we are then off to heaven. To me that's a tremendous leap and has ZERO Biblical basis.

I'm sorry, I'm a stickler for the truth and the Word of God. Man's opinions don't sway me. Only the Word sways me. The Rapture is such an enormous event that to not find it taught by Jesus when He says twice that He has taught us all things, is a really big hang-up for me. If the Rapture was real and Christ was returning for it, He certainly would have told us and not waited for Paul to teach it. Mystery or not, I see no benefit in delaying such an important topic by roughly 30 years when the event is some 2,000+/- years away. I see no reason to code it. The Rapture doctrine smells of Satan to me in a big way.

Satan kills 1/3 of the world at the 6th trumpet. Just who will the 1/3 be? I see no reason for Satan to kill unbelievers when they are his already. But I see every reason for him to rid the world of Christians to further his ONE WORLD rule objectives. The fact that 33.32% of the world claims to be Christian today is way too close for comfort. If you added up all the armies of the world you don't come close to 200 million soldiers so they must be demonic as it seems from the description.

If God did not teach a Rapture and Christ didn't that means man or Satan is behind the Rapture notion. It also means that God will be furious with those who listen to something He didn't teach especially when they claim he did and especially if Satan is behind it. This would equate to idolatry in my view, believing Satan over God. We know how God feels about Idolatry and we know it is a key piece of the end times and punished severely. I'm just saying, everyone needs to test everything that isn't clearly in the Bible especially in these last days when Satan's influence is reaching a peak.

konroh · Dec 4, 2013

Thanks for being real and sharing some of the reasoning behind your thinking. I don't take that lightly. I too do not want to believe something just because it's been taught to me, I want to see it in Scripture. For me, the pieces add up: Rapture and implicit translation of saints in 1 Thess. 4, clear resurrection bodies in a twinkling from 1 Cor. 15, Jesus returning and taking us to heaven in John 14.

I can understand your point that a lot of Rev. seems inapplicable if most of it is future, but that to me is like saying that most of Daniel when it was written was inapplicable. How many people understood Daniel and said there's going to be a Greek guy who's going to take over the world, but his kingdom will be split in four, then there will be a Roman empire after that and then the Messiah will come? In the same way I see God's sovereignty on every syllable of Revelation, the great revealing of God's final consummation of this earth and everything and everyone in it. It is unacceptable to me to talk of Satan's wrath and power without it being understood that God is over and above everything. It is His seals, His trumpets, His bowls, His apocalypse. Amen.

I'll give you a counter to the idea of Satan being behind the Pre-trib Rapture theory. There have been many cults, many crazy Christians, many crazy predictions about Christ's return. They've all proven false and I believe they will continue to prove false. If Jesus didn't know the day or hour while He was on the earth then no one can. But you know something funny about all the crazy cults and crazy theories, they don't believe in a Pre-trib Rapture. There have been lots of Post-trib and mid-trib cults that believe that we're in the Tribulation, there have been lots of cults that don't believe in a future millenium, there have been many cults that believe they as the Church are the true Jews and God's chosen people, but they've all gone down or proven false. If Satan really wants so many to believe the Pre-trib Rapture lie, why aren't there more crazy cults espousing this? Now I grant you that because Pre-trib has gone somewhat mainstream in evangelical circles, it can't now be defined as a cult doctrine, but that's exactly my point. Your idea that Satan has now got the 1/3 of people he can kill in the Tribulation contradicts the fact that God is behind the Tribulation. It's His 70th week of Daniel, it's His purifying of earth before He comes, it's His showdown with the devil.

I'm not saying there aren't crazy Pre-trib theorists who see the Rapture around every corner, God knows they need to wise up. I was raised in a church that was probably too Rapture crazy, definitely too demon-under-every-rock crazy. I'm glad for the balance I see in Scripture, that greater is he who is in me than he that is in the world, and that whether Christ comes today or in 1000 years, He'll keep His promise.

beautisunshine · Dec 4, 2013

John_S said:

Actually, some churches teach these teachings to their people and it is very sad. It is not what any church teaches. It is what the Bible teaches. Its not what any man, priest or pastor teaches. It is what the written word of God says. I believe the Bible is what we are to compare what every man, woman, pastor or priest says. I believe if it is not written in the Bible it is not from God.

Do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world - John 4:1

Actually, we are saved by accepting Jesus into our hearts and confessing he is Lord.

If you declare with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved
Romans 10:9

Hope this helps a little bit.

Richie_2uk · Dec 4, 2013

This must be an all high new record now right? wonder how many threads all regarding the Rapture? What gets me? why don't people when posting about certain things, actually look in the threads lists to see if the topic is there? then they can reply, answer and take part, rather starting a new thread on the same matter?

I would love to see a survery done on all the threads just to see how many repeated threads on the same topic.
As a Christian I don't bet, but just as a saying, I bet the most highlighted topic would be about the rapture. then sexual immorality, Gays, homo sexuals.

zone · Dec 4, 2013

konroh said:

there's no gap, man.
there just isn't.
the 70th followed the 69th.

konroh, i'm absolutely horrible with dates (Biblical dates)...i did miserably in math and numbers are Greek to me for the most part

the conflicting datings of books and so on; changing calendars, has all been intimidating for me.

but i'm determined to dive in again to the 70th week

the same way i skipped over the Book of Daniel because it was too complicated, when i just sat down with it and got out history and matched it, it wasn't as hard as i thought (even though i only scratched the surface and there's still TONS to read) - the little bit i did just cleared the way to dispense with any idea that Daniel is unfulfilled....huge chunks of it in our future type-thing.

can we do a thread on just that 70th week and see what it was?

i've previously been satisfied to know that it (Daniel 9 - 490 years - 7x70 etc) was completely fulfilled in the 1st century, and that it is about Jesus, not The Antichrist or satan or the future. but matching exactly the Law and the feasts and the captivities and decrees and stuff has been challenging.

it's got to be a matter of lining up the events in Christ's life with that critical period - the 70th week; using all the appointed days and whatnot from the Law, and history and stuff. like i said, it's been something i keep putting off going all the way into because of the math & datings that conflict...but since actually reading through the book of Daniel itself, and seeing history match...it might not be as hard now.

the Day of Atonement might be a good place to start, because if Jesus didn't fulfill that, we're in bad shape, seems to me.

can we reason through this together?

because i wanna be able to have even more detail on those crucial years, and settle the 70th week issue.
is it possible to just set aside (on one thread) the idea that any part of the 70th week is not fulfilled, and see what happens?

if it doesn't match, anybody who wants to take back part of the 70th week and place in the future will do so.
but surely, if all the things in the Law were types, and pointed to Jesus, and the 70 weeks were determined for ending all of Israel's transgression, by the Coming of their Redeemer...it MUST have a match in Christ's life.

if any part of that 70th week is undone, we're toast.

......

example in new thread coming (70th week fulfilled):

so, was Jesus not the fulfillment of the Goat at His baptism; then the Lamb at the Cross?

Leviticus 15
The Scapegoat
20"When he finishes atoning for the holy place and the tent of meeting and the altar, he shall offer the live goat. 21"Then Aaron shall lay both of his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over it all the iniquities of the sons of Israel and all their transgressions in regard to all their sins; and he shall lay them on the head of the goat and send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a man who stands in readiness. 22"The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a solitary land; and he shall release the goat in the wilderness

then we know about the Lamb sacrificed at Calvary.

because i'm looking at this right now - from a dispensational site, which still places that 70th week in the future (i think i know why now - we can look at that on the new thread):

"The high priest normally does not perform the Temple sacrifices, but during the week leading up to Yom Kippur, he serves beside the priests, and on the Day of Atonement performs all of the services alone. He stays the entire week before Yom Kippur in the Temple area, and is sprinkled twice with the ashes of a heifer to make sure he has not somehow become unclean by touching a dead body (Num. 19:1-13)."

they go on to say (which i totally disagree with):

"The Fulfillment

The Day of Atonement foreshadows two significant events: Jesus’ sacrificial death, and Israel’s repentance at the Messiah’s return. “They will look at Me whom they pierced” and repent, the Lord declares in Zech. 12:10. God will deal with the nation’s sins and remember them no more (Isa. 43:25; Jer. 31:34). Isaiah prophesied that the nation would be born spiritually in a day (Isa. 66:8; Rom. 11:26-27). This will be the prophetic fulfillment of the Day of Atonement as Israel comes face to face with its Messiah at the end of Daniel’s “70th week” (Dan. 9:24-27), a seven-year tribulation period that begins with the rise of an evil world ruler known in Jewish theology as Armilus and in Christian theology as Antichrist...."

- - Jesus in the feasts of Israel

but what if that's wrong?

what if THIS is what happened?

if it is, we should be able to make it match, because everything the law typified would HAVE to come together in Jesus.

okay....new thread.
hopefully all the future gap and half-gap stuff can wait (lol...doubt it)

zone

PlainWord · Dec 4, 2013

I'm glad you can kinda see why I arrived at the conclusions I've come to. But, 1 Thes 4 doesn't say a Word about any translation of living saints and 1 Cor 15 doesn't say a word about any return of Christ or gathering together. How can you put these two pieces of scripture together?? They are so very different.

Let's examine 3 major accounts of the Lord's Return:

[TABLE="width: 365"]
[TR]
[TD]Event[/TD]
[TD]1 Thes 4[/TD]
[TD]1 Cor 15[/TD]
[TD]Mat 24[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Saints coming from heaven[/TD]
[TD]x[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Lord Coming[/TD]
[TD]x[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]x[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Angel(s)[/TD]
[TD]x[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]x[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Trumpet[/TD]
[TD]x[/TD]
[TD]x[/TD]
[TD]x[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Dead in Christ Resurrected[/TD]
[TD]x[/TD]
[TD]x[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Alive Caught up/Gathered[/TD]
[TD]x[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]x[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Meet in clouds in "air"[/TD]
[TD]x[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]x[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Always be with the Lord[/TD]
[TD]x[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Timing Given[/TD]
[TD]No[/TD]
[TD]No[/TD]
[TD]Yes[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Tried to paste from Excel but hopefully you can see this ok. As you can see only 2 events align from 1 Thes 4 to 1 Cor 15 and they are a trumpet and resurrection. We expect there to be a trumpet and resurrection when God comes for final judgment and establishment of new heaven and earth, don't we? There are 5 things in common between the Olivet Discourse and 1 Thes 4. Five compared to Two!!! So why do you (and others) disconnect Mat 24 and 1 Thes 4 when they have 2.5 times more in common as compared to 1 Thes 4 and 1 Cor 15?

We know from Rev 20 that there will be another resurrection after the millennium so that explains the resurrection of 1 Cor 15. And the only place in the Bible where "LAST" is combined with "Trump" or "Trumpet" is 1 Cor 15. Last means last, there are no more after this!! If you look at 1 Cor 15:50 you see clearly that Paul is talking about flesh not being allowed in the Kingdom of God. He is NOT talking about Christ's millennial reign.

PlainWord · Dec 4, 2013

50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption.

51 Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed--

52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. (this is the only place "last trumpet" is used together) For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. (this is the only place where living are changed)

53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

54 So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written: "Death is swallowed up in victory."

55 "O Death, where is your sting? O Hades, where is your victory?"

56 The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law.

57 But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

The critical question here is WHEN does this happen? Does it happen before the Tribulation or before the eternal state of heaven? Ask yourself this, is the Kingdom of God the eternal heaven state or Christ's temporary millennial reign????

We have two major things Paul is teaching here that cannot be found anywhere else in the Bible (At least I haven't seen them elsewhere):

1. A Last or Final Trumpet being sounded.
2. A "changing" of the living.

Then we have this:

26 The last enemy that will be destroyed is death.

Assuming the living are changed at a Pre-Trib Rapture, are all Christ's enemies destroyed at this moment? Heck no!! So why is Christ destroying death before He destroys the rest of His enemies?? I know the argument, He only partially destroys death at the Rapture, he finishes the job of destroying death at the end of the Millennium. If so, why isn't this taught? Where is the caveat? Where is the final resurrection and end of death taught if not here???

I'm sorry, I just don't see 1 Cor 15:50-56 as being related to 1 Thes 4:13-17. There are far too many differences and the context of 1 Cor 15 sure seems heavily weighted to eternal state and NOT pre- millennial state.

55 "O Death, where is your sting? O Hades, where is your victory?" 56 The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law.

Sin doesn't stop at the Lord's return. We have sin during the millennium. Satan is loosed at the end of the 1,000 years and we know he deceives the world again. Therefore sin and death have not been defeated. Therefore this passage is NOT tied to Christ's initial return but final judgment and final victory!!!

Elin · Dec 4, 2013

konroh said:

Yes, but according to your own hermeneutic, its meaning is what Paul meant, not what it could mean.

Was Paul saying there is another temporal age after the church?

If so, he forgot to mention it, or tell us about it, anywhere else in his writings.

So in addition to there being no NT teaching of such, your own hermeneutic does not allow that interpretation.

So? . . .is not the same also true of its opposite?

You need a better plumb line.

Couple of obvious things:

1) Since God said in his defense of Moses to Miriam and Aaron that he gave prophecy in riddles
(dark sayings) to all prophets but Moses (Nu 12:6-8), on what basis do you say all prophecy is literal?

2) Prophecy is not teaching. . .because riddles, apart from interpretations given in the Bible (as in
Da 2, 4, 7, 8; Eze 12, 15, 16, 17, 23, 24, 31, 37; Rev 12, 13, 17) are of uncertain meaning.

As long as we understand that you are kicking against the goads of what is certain in the NT,

while I am kicking against the goads of uncertain private interpretation of prophetic riddles (Nu 12:6-8).

A future temporal kingdom is a house of cards. . .built on uncertain private interpretation of prophetic

riddles, and nowhere found in the certain teaching of the NT.

Elin · Dec 4, 2013

zone said:

This sprinkling is not found in Scripture.

And Nu 19:1-13 is making the water of cleansing, with no mention of sprinkling ashes of a heifer.

It has nothing to do with the Day of Atonement.

The Rapture: And Other Silly Things Christians Get Consumed With

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

beautisunshine

Guest

Richie_2uk

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Banned

Banned