It is dissatisfactory to read the plant of work force that are normally trusty in their treatment of Scripture, when it come ups to their publicity of a "pre-tribulation rapture," that is , a approaching of Jesus before the approaching of Christ. See our blood brother in Oregon, caput of the Berean Call ministry. Over and over his publications define New Testament Christian Religion and its enemies. But on the topic at manus he looks to fall woefully short of exemplifying his "Berean" philosophy. The blood brother actually sees "clear distinctions" between the ecstasy and the 2nd coming. He reported on these differentiations respective old age back.
For one, he states that at the rapture, Jesus makes not return to earth, but at the 2nd approaching He does. As proof, he offers the words of Jesus Of Nazareth in Toilet 14:3: "I will...receive you unto myself that where I am you may be also." Further, he cites Alice Paul (I Thessalonians 4:17): "...caught up to ran into the Godhead in the air. And so shall we ever be with the Lord."
Certainly our blood brother makes not propose that Jesus Of Nazareth stays suspended "in the air", that is, the ambiance above our earth, constantly for those seven years. We all presume that at this point, when the saints are gathered, Jesus Of Nazareth either travels back to Heaven, or finishes His journeying by coming to earth. Now both of the quoted statements only state us that when we travel forth here we go to be with Jesus, and stay with Him forever. No other point, especially geographical, can be extracted. So the statement is from silence. Since the textual matter makes not state here which manner Jesus Of Nazareth goes, it is assumed that He travels up, to suit the theory.
True "Bereans" hunt the Scriptures day-to-day "to happen out whether these things be so." My blood brother Berean necessitates to compare Bible with Bible here: For example, take a expression at Saint Matthew 24:30 and 31, and then compare it to the transition he utilizes in the Thessalonian letter. In both transitions are clouds, angels , a trumpet, and a gathering. Matthew's textual matter is acknowledged to be about the concluding coming, while the pre-trib people state Alice Paul was talking about a ecstasy seven old age earlier. But what differentiation can be drawn? See :
I Thessalonians 4:16-17: "For the Godhead Himself will descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the cornet of God. And the dead in Jesus will lift first. Then we who are alive and stay shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to ran into the Godhead in the air.
If we add in more than of Paul's supposed pre-trib instruction from I Corinthians 15:52, we happen that that "trumpet" is the last trumpet. But that neckties it in with Disclosure 11:15, where the 7th and concluding cornet is sounded at a clip that is clearly the end of all things. There cannot be another cornet after this. Yet Saint Matthew 24, supposedly written about a time period seven old age in the future, adverts another trumpet! The figure of trumpets doesn't "add up."
Here's Matthew: "...after the tribulation...the mark of the Son of Man will look in Heaven ...they will see the Son of Man approaching on the clouds of Heaven . And He will direct his angels with a great sound of a cornet and they will garner together his chosen from one end of Heaven to the other."
Paul knew the instructions about the 2nd coming of Christ. He knew that they involved angels, trumpet, clouds, and a gathering. Are it likely that, in this baffled Thessalonian church, he would present the same nomenclature used for the 2nd approaching of Jesus Of Nazareth without spelling out his meaning, that this "coming" is separate from the other?
Further, in Acts Of The Apostles 1:9-11, normally considered a "second coming" promise, Jesus ascends into heaven, and a cloud have Him out of their sight. Angels promise that when Jesus Of Nazareth descends it will be in the same manner, as Toilet repeats: "Lo he come ups with the clouds, and every oculus shall see Him" (Revelation 1:7). It suits the pattern. Jesus Of Nazareth come ups down, and in the linguistic context of Acts, He put up His kingdom. And like a magnet drawing nails, His ain are drawn to Him at that time.
Why did the Christian church bargain into the necessity of two 2nd comings? Why aren't both of these events ever described side by side? How do such as great Book people purchase into a philosophy that demands that they wrest textual matter after textual matter to make it fit?
Seems like this is a greater enigma than the instruction itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment