Twister: Caught In the Storm

[Arial]

However, in another comment you said that unless I talk about Darby and his belief of the rapture infiltrating the church, I should start another thread.

I never said any such thing. I have explicitly told you that Darby is not the topic of this thread and you continue to try and overtake someone else's OP to proselytize.

 

[Arial]

Why wouldn't you read the article first. 1. It isn't long. 2. You would understand what I mean when I say the argument is weak. Again, I am not saying what they are saying is wrong, but the argument they make is weak, while the Dispensationalists have a much stronger argument. He also completely misrepresented the Olivet Discourse, further weakening the arguments.

I did not post the link because of an argument that was being made. I don't care about it anymore than I care about the one you are making, I posted it because it verified what I had said concerning Darby and how that teaching overtook the MODERN church. I was forced to do even that because you ignored what I had said in order to, I guess, to simply use it as a jumping off point to avoid the OP topic and change it to what you wanted to talk about.

 

[Arial]

Brother Dolcino was rather open about his beleif in a rapture. He lived so long ago though that there aren't many records left. However, in another comment you said that unless I talk about Darby and his belief of the rapture infiltrating the church, I should start another thread. So how does that mean that Darby is not the subject of the OP? I would say the heresy of preterism is much more dangerous and damaging. There is a reason why preterism is considered a heresy. It actually changes the nature of Christ and the gospel. Unless you all of a sudden believe in a works based salvation and believe that interpretations of prophecy completely control the destination of one's soul, I don't see how it is any more dangerous and damaging then amillennialism.

MOD HAT: OFF TOPIC. Violation of Rule 4.3. Any comments that attempt to derail the thread in this way are subject to deletion.

 

[Arial]

For the rapture, look up brother Dolcino, who taught of the rapture during the middle ages. (Prior to the 14th century.) It was actually rather developed as well. The belief was that his followers would be raptured prior to the tribulation, and would spend the tribulation in paradise. Once the tribulation ended, God would send them back to be missionaries and ambassadors for Him, to those still alive. (Something like that.) So they didn't teach a rapture to heaven, but a separation between his followers and the tribulation/wrath falling upon the world. They would not face the wrath of God.

MOD HAT: Off topic. Violation of Rule 4.3

 

[Arial]

So, as far as I am aware, there are no beliefs that simply came out of his teaching, if you actually look into how he came up with his beliefs. Kind of like how Calvin took scripture and Augustinian beliefs, among other historic tradition, in forming/presenting his beliefs. Darby spent time studying scripture, and church beliefs. Consider that someone else presented a dispensational like treatise on eschatology before Darby came up with his beliefs. There is a historical tradition. Just as amillennialism has a historic tradition, and preterism DOES NOT. Darby is just the one who systematized beliefs that already existed. Not to mention one can actually find the word dispensation in the Bible, used as he uses it.

The rapture is not a heresy, it is a teaching that has been shown to quite possibly have scriptural support. You presented a weak argument through a link that was much weaker then the Dispensational argument. (Quite a bit weaker, actually.) I still haven't decided where I fall, because, having looked into some of what the ECFs had to say, I have opened up to the possibility of a mid-trib, or pre-wrath rapture. God removing the church prior to Him inundating the world with His divine wrath. That wrath which would wipe out all life on Earth, other than His being merciful and cutting it short. This isn't persecution, or simple tribulation, but God's wrath. That which is not the destiny of a child of God.

MOD HAT: Off topic. Violation of rule 4.3

 

[Arial]

Brother Dolcino was rather open about his beleif in a rapture. He lived so long ago though that there aren't many records left. However, in another comment you said that unless I talk about Darby and his belief of the rapture infiltrating the church, I should start another thread. So how does that mean that Darby is not the subject of the OP? I would say the heresy of preterism is much more dangerous and damaging. There is a reason why preterism is considered a heresy. It actually changes the nature of Christ and the gospel. Unless you all of a sudden believe in a works based salvation and believe that interpretations of prophecy completely control the destination of one's soul, I don't see how it is any more dangerous and damaging then amillennialism.

OFF TOPIC. Violation of Rule 4.3

 

[Arial]

Why wouldn't you read the article first. 1. It isn't long. 2. You would understand what I mean when I say the argument is weak. Again, I am not saying what they are saying is wrong, but the argument they make is weak, while the Dispensationalists have a much stronger argument. He also completely misrepresented the Olivet Discourse, further weakening the arguments.

Now, again, the rapture does NOT find its roots in the teachings of Darby. That is why I say that you should do some research. Then you would stop commenting with falsehoods. The rapture has had some for of existence within the church, whether accepted or not, for over a millennia. Much further back then preterism, which doesn't even have a historic tradition within the church. Futurism has a historic tradition in that it is premillennial. The future part is added to that, but it is premillennial which has a historic tradition going back to the 1st/2nd century, and actually back into the Old Testament. Amillennialism has a historic tradition going back to St. Augustine, who came up with it because he had a falling out with the premillennialists of the day.

One of the copies of the Pseudo Ephraim, which is dated as between the 5th and 8th centuries, speaks of the rapture, not as the rapture in using the word rapture, but as a gathering up. When reading what it says, it is speaking of a rapture. There are other versions of the pseudo Ephraim that do not have this, but the fact that there is a manuscript dating back to that time frame that has it, means that the idea existed in some form within the church. Again, I said that the rapture is one of the ways presented for God separating the church from His wrath. There were other ways that existed throughout church history as well. One of the things used by those who spoke of a rapture of sorts is the 10 plagues in Egypt, where God eventually, before His wrath was poured out on Egypt, put a separation between Egypt and Goshen. So for some (all?) church fathers, this is a cause for consideration/reflection, considering we are talking about God pouring His wrath upon the world, and they believed God would not pour out His wrath on His adopted children.

MOD HAT: Off Topic. Violation of Rule 4.3.

 

[Eleanor]

For the rapture, look up brother Dolcino, who taught of the rapture during the middle ages. (Prior to the 14th century.)

The "rapture" (catching up) is apostolic teaching (1 Th 4:16-17).

 

[Hazelelponi]

I gave up on the specifics of future events. So many theories. I wouldn't be surprised they are all wrong if you get detailed.

Jeremiah 14:14:

"And the LORD said to me: “The prophets are prophesying lies in my name. I did not send them, nor did I command them or speak to them. They are prophesying to you a lying vision, worthless divination, and the deceit of their own minds."

 

[Josheb]

What we have in probably the majority of our churches today is that pre-trib, premil, rapture teaching. It is taught with authority and as an indisputable fact. It is supported by selective Bible passages isolated from the full counsel of God. No other possibilities are considered or examined. It is promoted by those we should be able to trust, famous preachers, J MacArthur and Hal Lindsey among them. This has been going on since Darby first brought it into the open in the 1830's. All generations since have been inundated with it. Generation after generation who knows nothing else............

Yep. It's all very sad. Be careful what you pray for. You might just get it .

 

[Arial]

Yep. It's all very sad. Be careful what you pray for. You might just get it .

I was in first grade during the Korean war. We had safety drills in case of a bomb. It scared the daylights out of me. There were a lot of low flying military planes in the skies back then, and every time I heard one, it set off the fear response. Then there was the era of the cold war when a whole generation grew up feeling hopeless, and fearful of nuclear war and radiation. People built bomb shelters on their property.

Imagine how a child fields, or even a young adult, when every new event and new tech advancement is presented as the Rapture is any minute. The dread of it. Children do not have a comprehensive understanding of sin, and teenagers and the young are often in the midst of committing sins, the fear of being left behind while their parents disappear. The thought of being snatched up into the air and carried away (it might even bring to mind the violence of a tornado) must be frightening---even if it is supposedly a good thing.

 

[Eleanor]

I was in first grade during the Korean war. We had safety drills in case of a bomb. It scared the daylights out of me. There were a lot of low flying military planes in the skies back then, and every time I heard one, it set off the fear response. Then there was the era of the cold war when a whole generation grew up feeling hopeless, and fearful of nuclear war and radiation. People built bomb shelters on their property.

Imagine how a child fields, or even a young adult, when every new event and new tech advancement is presented as the Rapture is any minute. The dread of it. Children do not have a comprehensive understanding of sin, and teenagers and the young are often in the midst of committing sins, the fear of being left behind while their parents disappear. The thought of being snatched up into the air and carried away (it might even bring to mind the violence of a tornado) must be frightening---even if it is supposedly a good thing.

Supposedly?

 

[Josheb]

I was in first grade during the Korean war. We had safety drills in case of a bomb. It scared the daylights out of me. There were a lot of low flying military planes in the skies back then, and every time I heard one, it set off the fear response. Then there was the era of the cold war when a whole generation grew up feeling hopeless, and fearful of nuclear war and radiation. People built bomb shelters on their property.

Imagine how a child fields, or even a young adult, when every new event and new tech advancement is presented as the Rapture is any minute. The dread of it. Children do not have a comprehensive understanding of sin, and teenagers and the young are often in the midst of committing sins, the fear of being left behind while their parents disappear. The thought of being snatched up into the air and carried away (it might even bring to mind the violence of a tornado) must be frightening---even if it is supposedly a good thing.

Yep. I'm a little younger than that but I remember folks with bomb shelters and (useless) air raid drills in grade school. I can't say I ever felt fearful about any of it, though. It all seems silly or senseless to me, especially after I learned what damage an "H-bomb" actually did. Living outside of DC was a death sentence (and no politician was going to work there if the threat was real). We home-schooled our kids so I met kids raised in the DP pre-trib rapture model quite a bit. Tried to be respectful but there were a few occasions where parents took issue with the logical necessity of their DP beliefs or the many contradictions between what they said they believed and how they lived. I once even had a fairly well-known man (involved in the Family Research Council and other Christian lobby efforts, a professor at a well-known Christian university completely lose his composure at a Thanksgiving dinner when I asked him about something he'd said.

"I do not expect anything I have done to have enduring consequence or significance."

Imagine living life that way. Imagine living life that way as a lobbyist and university professor. He thought the cultural mandate a relic.

 

[Arial]

Supposedly?

"Supposedly" in the mind of the child. As in "This is a good thing. How come I'm so scared?!"

 

[Hazelelponi]

I was in first grade during the Korean war. We had safety drills in case of a bomb. It scared the daylights out of me. There were a lot of low flying military planes in the skies back then, and every time I heard one, it set off the fear response. Then there was the era of the cold war when a whole generation grew up feeling hopeless, and fearful of nuclear war and radiation. People built bomb shelters on their property.

Imagine how a child fields, or even a young adult, when every new event and new tech advancement is presented as the Rapture is any minute. The dread of it. Children do not have a comprehensive understanding of sin, and teenagers and the young are often in the midst of committing sins, the fear of being left behind while their parents disappear. The thought of being snatched up into the air and carried away (it might even bring to mind the violence of a tornado) must be frightening---even if it is supposedly a good thing.

I didn't grow up with any of this. I didn't have any of this fear, not even of the bombing or anything.

I wasn't born until late in '68 and by the time I had any real memories I don't think any of this was much of a thing anymore, though I remember vividly world politics with Reagan, but none of that was frightening even though we were close at one point to real war.

There was never even one air raid drill when I was in school. Just practice fire drills (always fun).

I grew up without fear in the world. Things happened, but there was never fear attached to it. I may have been too dumb to be afraid at points... Lol .. but I really wasn't afraid of anything in the world. (Product of being born in the USA I have always thought).

Nothing was ever presented to me as things to be afraid of, so I wasn't I suppose.

Now that @Arial explained this way it makes more sense.

I can't imagine tying everything negative that happens in the world as a potential event where you might lose your family.

That would be frightening for a child. I see now why it's upsetting to you sister, to see others promoting the falsehood. It makes sense now.

My only religious and otherwise hangups surrounded the way I looked, but that's not a Christian thing.

 

[Eleanor]

I didn't grow up with any of this. I didn't have any of this fear, not even of the bombing or anything.
I wasn't born until late in '68 and by the time I had any real memories I don't think any of this was much of a thing anymore, though I remember vividly world politics with Reagan, but none of that was frightening even though we were close at one point to real war.
There was never even one air raid drill when I was in school. Just practice fire drills (always fun).
I grew up without fear in the world. Things happened, but there was never fear attached to it. I may have been too dumb to be afraid at points... Lol .. but I really wasn't afraid of anything in the world. (Product of being born in the USA I have always thought).

Nothing was ever presented to me as things to be afraid of, so I wasn't I suppose.
Now that @Arial explained this way it makes more sense.
I can't imagine tying everything negative that happens in the world as a potential event where you might lose your family.
That would be frightening for a child. I see now why it's upsetting to you sister, to see others promoting the falsehood. It makes sense now.
My only religious and otherwise hangups surrounded the way I looked, but that's not a Christian thing.

Your personality is so beautiful, that is all I would ever be able to see.

 

[TMSO]

I never said any such thing. I have explicitly told you that Darby is not the topic of this thread and you continue to try and overtake someone else's OP to proselytize.

Proselytize, I don't think that word means what you think it means. I believe the word you are looking for is educate. What am I pointing out? Darby isn't the root of the rapture, as it shows up throughout church history, even if not mainstream. Not sure how that is proselytizing?

 

[TMSO]

I did not post the link because of an argument that was being made. I don't care about it anymore than I care about the one you are making, I posted it because it verified what I had said concerning Darby and how that teaching overtook the MODERN church. I was forced to do even that because you ignored what I had said in order to, I guess, to simply use it as a jumping off point to avoid the OP topic and change it to what you wanted to talk about.

Yes, but the link doesn't verify what you say about Darby being first, or even being the roots of the teaching. History does not bear that out. Now dispensationalism may have overtaken the MODERN church, but the rapture has been in the church for a very long time. And out in the open, though so long ago that it is lost to history, except that some historian wrote it down during the middle ages. I am writing to correct the inaccuracies that make this a hit piece on Darby. There are a lot of lies out there. Again, this does not make him right or wrong.

 

[TMSO]

The "rapture" (catching up) is apostolic teaching (1 Th 4:16-17).

I believe so, but the OP says that to just pick a couple of verses is wrong. I think it lines up with how God treated Israel during the 10 plagues in that he separated Goshen from Egypt about half way through. (Hmmm...) So more scriptural support as strong as the interpretation of prophecy used by some in eschatology. What I would like to know is how the idea that God will separate the church, His children, from His damning wrath is somehow unscriptural, that is to say as is recorded in the OP, not keeping with the full counsel of God.

 

[TMSO]

What we have in probably the majority of our churches today is that pre-trib, premil, rapture teaching. It is taught with authority and as an indisputable fact. It is supported by selective Bible passages isolated from the full counsel of God. No other possibilities are considered or examined. It is promoted by those we should be able to trust, famous preachers, J MacArthur and Hal Lindsey among them. This has been going on since Darby first brought it into the open in the 1830's. All generations since have been inundated with it. Generation after generation who knows nothing else. And we can see from what happened to "Dale" in the tornado, how deeply it sinks into the psyche of a person, so that removing it is next to impossible. It is as though their very Christianity depends centrally on that one belief. It is a hill they are willing to die on.

And as I said, there is no sound biblical support for it. If any wish to dispute that and give their sound biblical support you have the floor. But please don't use a quoted scripture here and another there, removing them from the surrounding context and the full counsel of God. And by the full counsel of God I mean, make sure they don't contradict anything else.

Since you want the OP, then here is the question. How is it not keeping with the full counsel of God? How do you know that it is isolated from the full counsel of God? Do you have any scriptural support for that? No links, your own support since that is what you ask for. "If any wish to dispute that and give their sound biblical support..." Please, give some sound biblical support. Make sure it doesn't contradict anything else. (You asked for OP.) All I intended to do was correct inaccuracies in the OP.

Can you show that "no other possibilities are considered or examined? I mean, I have two beliefs because I examined, and many people here say I am dispensationalist. Is there a reason why you are pushing us not to trust John MacArthur or others? Do you have a place to stand on that that is rock solid? You say a lot here that is completely subjective, right down to using that movie. Since I can't ask you to prove it isn't biblical, negative assertion, I will ask you to prove that it is biblical to believe that God will pour out the winepresses of his overwhelming wrath on His elect, adopted children.