The Rapture

URAVIP2ME said:

Although there is No rapture mentioned in Scripture, there is resurrection mentioned. Those that rule with Jesus in heaven [Rev 5vs9,10] are resurrected right after death [1st Cor 15].

Click to expand...

URAVIP2ME said:

Those that will be part of the humble,mild, meek to inherit the earth are not resurrected until Jesus 1000-year reign over earth. [Acts 24v15] such as the earthly resurrection Daniel looked forward- 12vs 2,13.

Jesus gave an illustration at Luke 19 vs11-15 showing the kingdom or royal government would not immediately appear on earth in the apostle's day. Jesus as the nobleman would first go away to a far country [heaven] and return in kingdom glory after receiving the kingdom or royal kingdom power.
[Daniel 7vs13,14; 2v44]

How Jesus would use that governmental power is described for us at Isaiah 11v4 and Rev 19vs11.14,15. Jesus will use the words of his mouth as a sharp executioner's sword to destroy the wicked as Psalm 92v7 says.

So, as Matthew 16v27; 25v31 says Jesus will come in 'glory' to intervene into mankind's affairs to separate living people one from another. The people at Jesus right hand of favor, so to speak, keep on living, and remain alive, right here on earth into the start of Jesus peaceful millennial reign over earth.
Proverbs 2vs21,22; 10v30.

Click to expand...

Much which you quoted above is in a figurative language and is very spiritual in natural and not literal First of all Jesus is already here. He is with in us.

Second of all none of these verses speak of "the non-biblical term "second coming", or rapture. Heaven is NOT a white fluffy cloud, nor is it a far away place somewhere beyond the moon or Milky way, nor is heaven up literally or even physically; heaven it the realm of God who is a spirit who dwells everywhere.

Please do not give me a verse reference if your point is so valid quote the scripture; I am not going to take up my valuable time to look up your argument. I do not believe the 1000 year reign is a literal thousand years; the language of scripture is symbolic especially in the Book of revelation which is the most spiritual book in the Bible; beside God does not live in man years. Not all who believer will rule in reign, those who rule and reign will become Kings and priest for the remainder of mankind God never called; so much for you rapture.

Muffled said:

I have already given the scripture for the Rapture. Here is one for the second coming:
Re 22:20 He who testifieth these things saith, Yea: I come quickly. Amen: come, Lord Jesus.

Click to expand...

I see no term "second coming" in this verse; or any where else in the Bible? The second coming of Christ is not a biblical phrase. It has no scriptural warrant. Many texts speak of the coming of Christ, the coming of the Son of man, the coming of the Lord or similar phrases.

The word "second" never occurs with a word that can be translated "coming.

" Let us consider a few passages. "For as the lightning comes out of the east, and shines even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be" (Mat. 24:27).

"We which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep" (I Thes. 4:15).

"And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming" (II Thes. 2:8).

"Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waits for the precious fruit of the earth, and has long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain" (James 5:7).

"Be also patient; establish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draws nigh" (James 5:8).

These texts, and many others, all include the English word "coming." But the preachers, when preaching from these texts, always ADD the word "second" to each one, and proceed to preach on "the second coming of Christ"!

They invariably add the word "second" to every "coming" in the New Testament, and then add the "second coming of Christ" to nearly every chapter in the Bible - even in the Old Testament. Adding "second" to the word "coming" does violence to the meaning every time.

Jesus did not say, "the second coming of the Son of man." James did not say, "Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the second coming of the Lord." Peter did not ask, "Where is the promise of His second coming?" Paul did not say, "Then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall ... destroy with the brightness of His second coming."

There is no justification whatever for adding "second" to any of these inspired passages. I have all the confidence in the world that the Holy Spirit inspired them to be written exactly as they should be written - without the word second!

You will have to rewrite the entire New Testament to support the doctrine of the "second coming" of the Lord. The "second coming" is not a biblical expression and first occurred among Christians as late as the middle of the second century after Christ. I can not emphasize too strongly that the word "second" is NEVER used in Holy Writ with the word "coming." That is the simple and plain and incontrovertible truth, and this fact is elementary and basic to a correct understanding of the coming of the Lord!

Benoni said:

Much which you quoted above is in a figurative language and is very spiritual in natural and not literal First of all Jesus is already here. He is with in us.
Second of all none of these verses speak of "the non-biblical term "second coming", or rapture. Heaven is NOT a white fluffy cloud, nor is it a far away place somewhere beyond the moon or Milky way, nor is heaven up literally or even physically; heaven it the realm of God who is a spirit who dwells everywhere.
Please do not give me a verse reference if your point is so valid quote the scripture; I am not going to take up my valuable time to look up your argument. I do not believe the 1000 year reign is a literal thousand years; the language of scripture is symbolic especially in the Book of revelation which is the most spiritual book in the Bible; beside God does not live in man years. Not all who believer will rule in reign, those who rule and reign will become Kings and priest for the remainder of mankind God never called; so much for you rapture.

Click to expand...

Jesus according to Hebrews [9v24] was resurrected to heaven to appear before the presence or person of God for us.
Isaiah [57v15] puts God dwelling in a high and holy place......


Absolutely, none of the verses I used speak of the non-biblical..... that was my point.

The sheep-like righteous people of Matthew chapter 25 are alive at the time of Jesus 'glory' or Jesus taking action on behalf of the living sheep-like people who are alive on earth and remain alive on earth, and as verse 46 b says the righteous go into life eternal. Or, as Proverbs 2vs21, 22 says the living upright 'remain' alive on earth....the wicked are removed from earth.
The wicked are forever destroyed says Psalm 92v7.

True. Not all are called to be kings and priests, or what would be the point of being a king or priest. Kings take care of governmental needs of subjects.
Priests take care of spiritual needs. Although the kingdom of God is in heaven it rules over earth, or rules over those called that want to be the humble, mild, meek ones to inherit the earth says Psalm 37v11,29.

Jesus will bring this about says Isaiah 11v4; Rev 19vs11,14,15 by the words of Jesus mouth being as sharp as an executioner's sword and Jesus words will execute the wicked. Jeremiah 25vs31-33 says they will be as manure on the face of the earth.

Benoni said:

I see no term "second coming" in this verse; or any where else in the Bible? The second coming of Christ is not a biblical phrase. It has no scriptural warrant. Many texts speak of the coming of Christ, the coming of the Son of man, the coming of the Lord or similar phrases.

The word "second" never occurs with a word that can be translated "coming.

" Let us consider a few passages. "For as the lightning comes out of the east, and shines even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be" (Mat. 24:27).

"We which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep" (I Thes. 4:15).

"And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming" (II Thes. 2:8).

"Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waits for the precious fruit of the earth, and has long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain" (James 5:7).

"Be also patient; establish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draws nigh" (James 5:8).

These texts, and many others, all include the English word "coming." But the preachers, when preaching from these texts, always ADD the word "second" to each one, and proceed to preach on "the second coming of Christ"!

They invariably add the word "second" to every "coming" in the New Testament, and then add the "second coming of Christ" to nearly every chapter in the Bible - even in the Old Testament. Adding "second" to the word "coming" does violence to the meaning every time.

Jesus did not say, "the second coming of the Son of man." James did not say, "Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the second coming of the Lord." Peter did not ask, "Where is the promise of His second coming?" Paul did not say, "Then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall ... destroy with the brightness of His second coming."

There is no justification whatever for adding "second" to any of these inspired passages. I have all the confidence in the world that the Holy Spirit inspired them to be written exactly as they should be written - without the word second!

You will have to rewrite the entire New Testament to support the doctrine of the "second coming" of the Lord. The "second coming" is not a biblical expression and first occurred among Christians as late as the middle of the second century after Christ. I can not emphasize too strongly that the word "second" is NEVER used in Holy Writ with the word "coming." That is the simple and plain and incontrovertible truth, and this fact is elementary and basic to a correct understanding of the coming of the Lord!

Click to expand...

No there is no reference to it as being a second coming, however that does not alter the fact that it is. The book of Revelation predicts things that will happen after Jesus had already left earth. So this coming is not in reference to his first sojourn upon earth as Jesus and necessarily denotes a second coming.

I think it is necessary to look at each passage individually but it may well be true that the events are all connected as a scenario which can be termed the Second Coming, just as the Rapture is not one single event but a scenario of events.

It is possible that some references may be illegitimate but if you wish to say that they all are then you will have to give proof for each one.

I definitely disagree with this assessment. Until you can prove there is only one coming, stating that you have a correct understanding appears premature.

I didn't know there was support in the bible for the rapture or the trinity.

Muffled said:

It is difficult to understand what your criteria is for being "twisted."

Click to expand...

I'm not so naive as to expect the people I describe as "twisted" to see themselves that way.

Regardless of whether the notion of the Rapture is twisted, it does not appear in the scriptures -- at least, not in the form it's taught by present-day Evangelicals and prophecy enthusiasts. If it did, it's likely somebody would have noticed it before the 19th century.

Smoke said:

I'm not so naive as to expect the people I describe as "twisted" to see themselves that way.

Regardless of whether the notion of the Rapture is twisted, it does not appear in the scriptures -- at least, not in the form it's taught by present-day Evangelicals and prophecy enthusiasts. If it did, it's likely somebody would have noticed it before the 19th century.

Click to expand...

The question could be whether it is your own perceptions that are not appropriate. I have my granddaughters painting hung upside down and have gotten used to it that way but my granddaughter noticed right away. Perhaps you have just gotten used to your perceptions as being normal for you.

You needed to add this qualification because I have already provided the scripture and the evangelicals use the same passage. I include other passages that they do not and that tends to alter the concepts quite a bit. Also I don't think evangelicals interpret that scripture correctly.

Actually this fits in quite well with the theory of progressive revelation, ie that God tells us things when we need to know them. As we get closer to the event it is more likely that He will reveal more.

logician said:

I didn't know there was support in the bible for the rapture or the trinity.

Click to expand...

That is a question of perspective. The doctrines contain many elements some of which are supported by the Bible and some are not. As a scientist ( I make the assumption that you are or at least accept a scientific perspective) you are aware that there are many scientific theories that looked good at the time but have either been disproven or found not to completely explain the facts. This happens with biblically based doctrines as well.

Muffled said:

No there is no reference to it as being a second coming, however that does not alter the fact that it is. The book of Revelation predicts things that will happen after Jesus had already left earth. So this coming is not in reference to his first sojourn upon earth as Jesus and necessarily denotes a second coming.
I think it is necessary to look at each passage individually but it may well be true that the events are all connected as a scenario which can be termed the Second Coming, just as the Rapture is not one single event but a scenario of events.
It is possible that some references may be illegitimate but if you wish to say that they all are then you will have to give proof for each one.
I definitely disagree with this assessment. Until you can prove there is only one coming, stating that you have a correct understanding appears premature.

Click to expand...

Yes Revelation does talk of future developments such as the action to be taken by Jesus at Rev 19 vs11,14,15.

Jesus used an illustration to his disciples at Luke [19vs11-15]
Doesn't that illustration show time would elapse between the time Jesus left earth for a far country [heaven] and return in kingdom 'glory' the glory time of Matthew 25vs31,32?

Since Revelation shows it is just the words from Jesus mouth that will be felt then we are Not talking of a physical or visible return, but action taking place.
-Isa 11v4. At John [14v19] Jesus is clear the world would see him No more.

URAVIP2ME said:

Yes Revelation does talk of future developments such as the action to be taken by Jesus at Rev 19 vs11,14,15.

Jesus used an illustration to his disciples at Luke [19vs11-15]
Doesn't that illustration show time would elapse between the time Jesus left earth for a far country [heaven] and return in kingdom 'glory' the glory time of Matthew 25vs31,32?

Since Revelation shows it is just the words from Jesus mouth that will be felt then we are Not talking of a physical or visible return, but action taking place.
-Isa 11v4. At John [14v19] Jesus is clear the world would see him No more.

Click to expand...

That sounds like a valid claim until you read this verse:
Acts 1:11 who also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye looking into heaven? this Jesus, who was received up from you into heaven shall so come in like manner as ye beheld him going into heaven.

Muffled said:

Actually this fits in quite well with the theory of progressive revelation, ie that God tells us things when we need to know them. As we get closer to the event it is more likely that He will reveal more.

Click to expand...

If people who believed in the Rapture actually did claim that they had received that teaching in a new revelation, it would be more credible than their present pretense of having found it in the Bible.

Muffled said:

That sounds like a valid claim until you read this verse:
Acts 1:11 who also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye looking into heaven? this Jesus, who was received up from you into heaven shall so come in like manner as ye beheld him going into heaven.

Click to expand...

....and how did they see Jesus received up to heaven? Wasn't it in a cloud?
A cloud of invisibility hid Jesus from their view. Didn't Jesus already inform us at John [14v19] that the world would behold him no more?
Otherwise, why would the disciples ask Jesus for a 'sign' at Matt 24v3?
In order for us to know the 'sign' Jesus describes its many features or events that would be happening on a global scale so that we would know when we would be near the end times of all badness on earth before Jesus ushers in Peace on Earth toward men of goodwill.

Smoke said:

If people who believed in the Rapture actually did claim that they had received that teaching in a new revelation, it would be more credible than their present pretense of having found it in the Bible.

Click to expand...

I think you have it backwards. The Rapture finds people not vice versa.

The credibility of those claiming to hear from the Holy spirit is considered by many scholars to be less than the credibility of the BIble. I tend to agree. It is easy for poeple to think they are hearing from the Holy Spirit when they are not. So the Bible says to test every spirit to see if it is from God.

URAVIP2ME said:

....and how did they see Jesus received up to heaven? Wasn't it in a cloud?
A cloud of invisibility hid Jesus from their view. Didn't Jesus already inform us at John [14v19] that the world would behold him no more?
Otherwise, why would the disciples ask Jesus for a 'sign' at Matt 24v3?
In order for us to know the 'sign' Jesus describes its many features or events that would be happening on a global scale so that we would know when we would be near the end times of all badness on earth before Jesus ushers in Peace on Earth toward men of goodwill.

Click to expand...

He asecnded into a cloud in a physical body. The descent to earth will be the same.

He didn't inform us because we weren't there (that we know of). He informed His disciples. THe verse itself explains what He is talking about: John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world beholdeth me no more; but ye behold me: because I live, ye shall live also.
This is talking about His death and resurrection..

The question proceed from the statements that Jesus made in Mt 23:
Mt 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, that killeth the prophets, and stoneth them that are sent unto her! how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

The verse does indicate that Jesus will be seen again by using the word "until."

Physical bodies do Not go to heaven according to 1st Corinthians 15v50 because flesh and blood [physical] can Not inherit God's kingdom.
What is sown in a physical body verse 44 is raised up [resurrected] in a spiritual body in order to go to heaven.

Right, John 14v19 the world will behold Jesus no more... No more as in never again.

And isn't the "until " the time of Jesus 'glory' of Matthew 25v31?

One can see or discern with the mind's eye so Matthew 23v39 is not contradicting John 14v19. Or, as Ephesians 1v18 says to see with the eyes of understanding or heart.
Seeing or beholding with a spiritual eye.
Isn't that why Jesus gave the 'sign' of Matthew chapter 24 because his presence would not be visible to the physical eye but can be seen or discerned by what is going on around us.

Revelation 19vs11,14,15 shows what Jesus words will do in a literal way on earth.
Jesus rules from heaven and his armies are heavenly angels.

All will see the results or effects of Jesus taking action. Jeremiah 25.

URAVIP2ME said:

Physical bodies do Not go to heaven according to 1st Corinthians 15v50 because flesh and blood [physical] can Not inherit God's kingdom.
What is sown in a physical body verse 44 is raised up [resurrected] in a spiritual body in order to go to heaven.

Right, John 14v19 the world will behold Jesus no more... No more as in never again.

And isn't the "until " the time of Jesus 'glory' of Matthew 25v31?

One can see or discern with the mind's eye so Matthew 23v39 is not contradicting John 14v19. Or, as Ephesians 1v18 says to see with the eyes of understanding or heart.
Seeing or beholding with a spiritual eye.
Isn't that why Jesus gave the 'sign' of Matthew chapter 24 because his presence would not be visible to the physical eye but can be seen or discerned by what is going on around us.

Revelation 19vs11,14,15 shows what Jesus words will do in a literal way on earth.
Jesus rules from heaven and his armies are heavenly angels.

All will see the results or effects of Jesus taking action. Jeremiah 25.

Click to expand...

You know so much and understand so little. Jesus did not go directly to Paradise but to the stars (at least in that direction) which are called heaven or the heavens where He still lives in His body and from where He will return. Only His spirit which is the Spirit of God exists in Heaven. I have to keep telling you the differences between things that have the same names. There is a spiritual Kingdom of God and a physical Kingdom of God. Flesh and blood does not inherit the spiritual kingdom.

No one is ever raised up in a body to go to Heaven. The resurrection is into the physical Kingdom of God but the body is not one that dies and Paul has no other way to decribe that. Spiritual body is an oxymoron.

Wrong, no more as in not until He returns, except for the Disciples who see Him after the resurrection. This is born out by
Mat 24:30 and then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

To get this back into the context of Jesus returning to earth, there is the question of recognition. It is possible for people to see Jesus and not know it is Him. Only believers would actually know Him.

No, as explained above.

There is no contradiction. The sight will be of a physical Jesus. John 14 does not extend the physical Jesus beyond the resurrection but it does not deny that possibility either. After all in 70 years the disciples would all be dead and all Jesus is talking about when He talks about the coming of the Paraclete is the immediate future. However Mat 23:39 has a fulfillment that is spoken about in the Revelation of Jesus. There is a first fruit rapture before the general Rapture.

The sign precedes the coming. I get my exit sign on the highway before I come to the exit. It tells me the exit is coming soon. The sign is not the exit.

This is true for a time, however rulership is not the same thing as visiting. If you are trying to say that Jesus isn't presenting Himself on earth to everyone as having returned, I would agree with that.

There is a first 'resurrection' -Rev 20v5,6. It does not say rapture.

Jesus 'brothers' [Matt 25v40; 1st Cor 15v50] are not the same as the sheep of Matt 25v32.
Jesus 'brothers' have the earlier or first resurrection. [Rev 5vs9,10 heavenly]
The living sheep of Matt 25v32 can remain alive on earth and can continue to live on earth right into the start of Jesus peaceful 1000-year reign over earth with everlasting life in view on a paradisaic earth followed by those like Daniel [12vs2,13] that looked forward to an earthly resurrection on resurrection morning, or during Christ's millennial-long day, to be part of the humble meek to inherit the earth or earthly realm of God's kingdom.
-Dan 2v44; 7vs13,14
Matt 5v5; Psalm 37vs11,29,38
-Romans 6v7
-Acts 24v15.

URAVIP2ME said:

There is a first 'resurrection' -Rev 20v5,6. It does not say rapture.

Jesus 'brothers' [Matt 25v40; 1st Cor 15v50] are not the same as the sheep of Matt 25v32.
Jesus 'brothers' have the earlier or first resurrection. [Rev 5vs9,10 heavenly]
The living sheep of Matt 25v32 can remain alive on earth and can continue to live on earth right into the start of Jesus peaceful 1000-year reign over earth with everlasting life in view on a paradisaic earth followed by those like Daniel [12vs2,13] that looked forward to an earthly resurrection on resurrection morning, or during Christ's millennial-long day, to be part of the humble meek to inherit the earth or earthly realm of God's kingdom.
-Dan 2v44; 7vs13,14
Matt 5v5; Psalm 37vs11,29,38
-Romans 6v7
-Acts 24v15.

Click to expand...

You can't reason from the null hypothesis. If I don't say anything about you does that mean you don't exist? Hardly.

Prove it.

I have already disproved this.

This is hogwash. 2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall be dissolved with fervent heat, and the earth and the works that are therein shall be burned up

RE: 2nd Peter 3v10

There are three heavens and three earths mentioned in chapter three: old, now, new.

Verse 5 mentions the heavens and earth of 'old'.
During the time of Noah's day God did not destroy the literal heavens and the literal earth itself was not destroyed. The world of wicked mankind perished [vs6] or were destroyed in the flood waters off the face of the earth giving earth a new start.
After all, the earth abides forever- Ecc 1v4 B; Psalm 78v69;104v5,35
And God would not destroy his own home or heaven itself.-Hebrews 9v24

Verse 7 mentions the heavens and earth which are 'now' or since the time of the Flood.
Verse 7 explains fire in the sense of fiery judgment which is perdition or destruction of wicked or ungodly men. So as with the Flood of Noah's day it is talking about the symbolic heavens and earth or wicked earthly society as it was bad in the day's of Noah.
Both heavens and mountains are used in Scripture to symbolize ruling over.
Wicked heavens are shaken described at Hebrews 12 vs25-29.
The upright 'remain' -Proverbs 2vs21,22; 10v30; Psalm 92v7; 37vs11,29,38

Verse 13 mentions a 'new' heavens and a 'new' earth where righteousness dwells.
So just as the 'old' earth was made 'new' after the Flood, so too the new heavens and earth will be 'new' as God promises at Revelation 21vs4,5 that all things will be new.
A new governmental heavens or God's kingdom ruling in the hands of Christ Jesus over a new earthly society of survivors starting with the sheep-like ones of Matt 25vs31,32.
-Daniel 7vs13,14; Isaiah 9v7.

So the 'now' governmental heavens will pass away, and the 'now' earth filled with Satan's 'woe' [Rev 12vs9,12]' and the 'now' earth whose bad works will be burnt up in the sense that God will bring to ruin all those that are ruining the earth. -Rev 11v18 B.

URAVIP2ME said:

RE: 2nd Peter 3v10

During the time of Noah's day God did not destroy the literal heavens and the literal earth itself was not destroyed. The world of wicked mankind perished [vs6] or were destroyed in the flood waters off the face of the earth giving earth a new start.
After all, the earth abides forever- Ecc 1v4 B; Psalm 78v69;104v5,35

Click to expand...

However Noah was not saved by staying on the earth but by entering the ark which floated on the waters of Judgement above the earth and returned to earth after the waters of judgement abated.

So also The raptured are saved by staying in the New Jerusalem floating above the earth and the fires devouring those left on earth and only descends when the fires have abated.

Jesus says otherwise but the length of time is so long that it would seem like forever.

As for continuity on earth, most people will perish but there is a possiblity that a number of people do not. The people who have not been raptured and remain on earth do not have eternal life and are not free from evil, so after a thousand years the devil raises them up against the Holy people but they are destroyed and there is no longer an evil remnant.