 |
|
|
"something will happen that brings about the war which will end the world as we know it... There will be a vicious cycle of storms and earthquakes that lead to the final battle the world has awaited."
-- Dotson Meade, 1999
|
|
| |
Preterism: Word games on Rapture
Posted on Monday, November 24 @ 06:38:37 PST by Virgil |
|
Biga submitted: "Brother Dr. Birks is trying to prove that “harpazo” is about spiritual movement, not a physical one and in addition the Greek word does not contain any indication of direction. Some examples listed, the case of Philip, the case of hireling and wolf, and the rapture of Paul or his friend. The main point that the rapture occured in spiritual sense, and did not affect the body.
Altough anyone can be convinced that all “caught” can refer to spiritual event (when we see the main point of the parable), no one convinced us that why does a physical exclude a spiritual one. The problem with word play that listing all references of a word in the Bible, does not prove that we have no exceptions. The word list in all cases – proves only possibility and not uniformity. If anyone sees divine inspiration also in grammar, please check the problems of Greek grammar/language in many NT letters. In addition, the aramaic versions of NT (Peshitta, Pesitto) use the word “netkhep”, meaning „to seize, to snatch”. The same aramaic word appears in Acts. 27.15 (a really physical seize of a ship) or in Acts. 6.12 (physical seize of Stephen by Jews). And what does prove that the Greek world hasn’t preverb? Aramaic hasn’t at all as the Greek has, and for example, in my language there are no word „rapture”, it does exist only with preverb. ( Elragadtatás :-) )
But there is a problem with Paul’s account of Third Heaven. Paul was – no matter that in body or not in body – only temporary in the Paradise. Since Paul did not resurrected in that point into the heavenly body and did not got back his original body after the event – he could raptured only spiritual way like John in Patmos. In a vision or in a dream. But how can be concluded that the rapture of 1Thess. 4.17 is also a temporal rapture? Where is it in the text of 1Thess 4 that the believers changed and then went back to the everyday life? Paul told that the rapture occured with the resurrected dead. These dead aren’t spiritually “dead”, 1Co. 15.18, 19 explains that the earthy life and physical death in the subject. These dead people were the relatives, friends, brother - dead in Christ - and their destiny after death was in question in the mind of thessalonian people – who had strong pagan influence about after-death filled with fear. If the rapture was only spiritual we have a very interesting scenario: dead in Christ resurrected and got incorruptible body, en route they met with the raptured saints and then, the raptured returned to the Earth, spiritually changed, the dead remain in heaven. Does the Bible contain this scenario? The resurrected dead were together with the raptured people and were ever with the Lord. Look a little bit closer this phrase, “ever with the Lord”. What does it mean? If the rapture was only spiritual, then the “with the Lord” has also spiritual meaning here. But were the christians with the Lord before rapture? The christians already in spiritual unity with Christ, “But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.” (1Co. 6.17), “Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?” (2Co. 13.5), “But of him are ye in Christ Jesus” (1Co. 1.30). If the rapture was only spiritual, what news the comfort of 1Thess 4 does contain? Will the believer feel better the unity after the spiritual rapture? I think 1Thess 4.17 is a very serious promise and new information, not only an affirmation of the already known spiritual unity.
The critic who stands again the physical rapture fights against a picture of saints flying into the space. It is the next word game with the “air”. Why did not use the author the world “ouranos” here? Let us realize that a rapture does not require flying into sky. The spiritual-physical rapture does not require for a body to fly up. The body can simply disappear and the invisible new uncorrupted body emanates to the Lord. Does it sound impossible? Some examples in the Bible:
Luk. 24.31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.
Gen. 5.24 And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.
Jdg. 6.21 Then the angel of the LORD put forth the end of the staff that was in his hand, and touched the flesh and the unleavened cakes; and there rose up fire out of the rock, and consumed the flesh and the unleavened cakes. Then the angel of the LORD departed out of his sight.
Surely will be anyone who questions the above passages, but as we see, the angels (who are like resurrected men) could also disappear. The way of Christ is in Acts. 1.1 was also not visible on the sky. Christ simply disappeared – “a cloud received him”. Therefore we don’t need the "aer-ouranos" word play because the raptured were simply disappeared in the “aer”. If a spiritual-physical rapture occured at Parusia, we don’t need to doubt that it was a spiritual meeting - not a physical one. By the way I don’t understand how anyone imagines a physical meeting in the sky? Of course, it is a heavenly meeting of raptured saints in the spiritual body. But this interpretation does not mean that they did not disappear also physically in that minute when the old body lost! Please remember to episode written in Acts. 16.26 and 27 where God clearly demonstrated that He capable to seize His children from the wrath. After such events why it is unusual to believe that the christians were waiting for a likewise event?
Only in this place, the physical means more than spiritual, because there are no such thing “only physical rapture” when we talking about a non-temporal event. Only spiritual can exist – these are the visions and dreams - but only physical not. If a man raptured into the another realm and never come back, then his body changed, the old disappear and the new spiritual body travels to the Lord.
Brother Michael has problems with the Pella episode. Why did the christians leave the city if they could raptured with divine fly into sky? Why were they warned to run? The great tribulation is not the coming. Thess. 4.17 is strictly about the exact time of coming. (“For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven “) The Mt 24 chapter is clear that the running, the great tribulation is only the sign of the coming, because “So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.” If rapture ever happened, it was after the fleeing. Not to mention that it is an error to bound the rapture event to the siege of Jerusalem – saints could be everywhere on the evangelized “whole word” worth to rapture.
There are problems also with the Jn. 14 account. I don’t think Jn. 17.15 can used to prove there was no rapture because – as futurists already explained – “taking out of the world” is about the missionary time, the apostles had complete their task before Parusia. In this time they were not miraculously seized from the world but it does not exclude the hope and comfort of thessalonian passage. Identifying world with earth here also can be an error, the world here does not mean the physical planet but the world order, note 1Jn. 2.14-17, 1Co. 5.10 („for then must ye needs go out of the world.”) They were not removed from OT world, they must lived and worked in that circumstances while their work will be done.
In addition it is doubtful to believe that the heavenly places were the New Jerusalem. Christ said „that where I am, there ye may be also” and we know Christ was on the right hand of the Father after the ascension. Therefore the heavenly places, where Christ is, cannot be New Jerusalem spiritually descended on the Earth. Why Christ did need to prepare places to disciples in New Jerusalem? It is not so natural that the disciples/apostles already had places in the earthy New Jerusalem? They were not saints free from the judgement elected before times? What places were in New Jerusalem for them, whose majority were already dead before New Jerusalem exists at all? Heavenly places, where Christ is, where Father is, where the angels are - must be the place in another realm, after the death. New Jerusalem was a promise to all people in Christ – to the Church - heavenly places and rapture were a promise to the remained saints after the tribulation. The first one is an eternal kingdom to all, the last one is temporal promise connected to the Parusia at AD 70.
The promises of 1Thess 4.17 is about a memorable spiritual meeting with the Lord. According to spiritual rapture view, the saints returned and continue their lives and building the Church. I would like ask again what version is more probable:
1. The saints raptured and returned, continue their lives and nobody told about these experiences anything.
2. The saints raptured both spiritually and physically (disappear) and only guessing remained about their fate in that great turmoil.
The dramatic classification of “first class” and “second class” christians does not help to solve the problem. If anyone uses this definition, what does it really mean? Who are a first class or second class christian? I can’t imagine such distinction. We are talking about real people, taken from life. Only one day in the war or tribulation could be enough to become spiritually blind and crying for relatives instead of watching the signs. It does mean that these people remain second-class? I think not. They become saints more later in their lives even if they didn’t see the Parusia. The saints after completing their task leaved the world but all information and teaching were available to the great majority remained here. They were not second class christians, they were scared and sad people who continue and advancing their lives in Christ after Parusia. Even more, I think they never knew the truth about the saints because this "blindness" made more easier to continue the life. They lived in hard times, it could be very harmful to know what really happened. They got the New Jerusalem as the saints got the heavenly places in the heaven.
Perhaps we all are in the trap of words, what is literal, what is physical and what is spiritual. I don’t believe in only-physical rapture visible on the sky, I don’t believe in a temporal, forgotten spiritual change, I would like talk with preterists about a possibility of a spiritual rapture including physical disappearance.I think all saints disappeared and the oral traditions saved only the never-happened, mythical acts of them or simply their death. They disappeared and nobody heard of them anymore. And it was good for the young Church. Of course, it is a scenario.
Cheers,
Gabor"
|
| |
|
|
Average Score: 3
Votes: 1
 |
|
|
^^Go to Top -  E-mail to Friend -  Print -  View PDF -  Subscribe -  Comments RSS
Re: Word games on Rapture (Score: 1)
 by Sam on Tuesday, November 25 @ 05:39:11 PST
(User Info | Send a Message) | The author wrote, "We are talking about real people, taken from life. Only one day in the war or tribulation could be enough to become spiritually blind and crying for relatives instead of watching the signs. It does mean that these people remain second-class? I think not. They become saints more later in their lives even if they didn’t see the Parusia. The saints after completing their task leaved the world but all information and teaching were available to the great majority remained here. They were not second class christians, they were scared and sad people who continue and advancing their lives in Christ after Parusia. Even more, I think they never knew the truth about the saints because this "blindness" made more easier to continue the life. They lived in hard times, it could be very harmful to know what really happened. They got the New Jerusalem as the saints got the heavenly places in the heaven. " Ed Stevens bases his case on the "lack of evidence" or "silence". What is "silent"? Well, the historical record is silent. That is, there is no empirical evidence for the "big three." Ed's argument is, therefore, empirical. However, one can ask on these grounds, "where is the empirical evidence for a mass disappearance?" Since there is none, one must concoct the above quotation in order to explain. But, this is just speculative. What is happening, then, is that one speculation (Ed's) and another speculation (spiritual) are competing speculations as to "what happened" after A.D. 70 and why we have no "writings" concerning the "rapture." I deal with this in my book Misplaced Hope, also quoted by Ed. Briefly, I am not an empiricist, but a presuppositionalist. That is, I do not need historical evidence for Samson or Abraham in order to believe that they were real people. The Bible is truth, period. When one plays on the empirical field, one has unwittingly played into the empiricist's hands. Thus, Ed's argument here is unsatisfying. Basically, Papias and Polycarp and Clement, each born before A.D. 70 knew nothing about any "rapture" from any of the "scared" people-turned-Christian. These apostates who did not make the rapture were so afraid that even after they turned to Christ they STILL kept it hush hush to their leaders, elders, and fellow saints. This is just as equally speculative, but no more than what the quote offered above. While I personally have no problem with Ed's view (I admire Ed a great deal), I do not like the way some have taken it to be a "proven" thing. It isn't. Far from "proven" it rests on empirical grounds concluding with a speculation based on what "might" have happened. Much work needs to be done here, but I am not in the least afraid of the empirical Christians who use "history" and "Fathers" against Preterism. The danger, however, with Ed's view is that he is playing on their field with their rules and trying to offer something to them that sounds plausible to an opposing team. When they step up to bat on their field with their rules, my fear is that the score, in the end, will be a blow-out...and the Rapture Theory team will be cleaning the dugout.
Samuel Frost |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
Re: Word games on Rapture (Score: 1)
by large-hammer on Wednesday, November 26 @ 10:47:34 PST
(User Info | Send a Message) | One area of caution:
It was stated that at this "rapture," Christians would be ever "with the Lord." It was affirmed that prior to this, they were already spiritually "with the Lord." The argument was that this "with the Lord" is physical.
However, we need to be careful here. Some of these concepts are tricky. There is a lot of already...not yet going on. You definitely have to get your definitions straight within the proper contexts. For instance: "salvation is nearer than when we believed." You might ask, "What is this 'salvation' that they didn't already have? Weren't they already 'saved'?"
If you ask this question, you are thinking of salvation in some modern evangelical sense (apart from its historical context).
There are many examples of already...not yet. Some places speak of Jesus as having already defeated death or having already subjected the rulers, authorities and powers. Others speak of it as something to come.
These things must be taken into consideration.
Marcus Booker |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
| 
|
