John Young

"The Rapture" (Part one: A word about "the rapture". Part two: What is the rapture, Where do the Major Christian Frameworks place the rapture and why.) Part one: A word about "the Rapture". As we study The four returns of Christ as outlined, we are going to intentionally not speak too much about the rapture directly nor make it the primary focus, as Revelation is not about the Rapture, nor is specifically stated as an event in the book of Revelation. The Rapture and its order in the events is actually spoken of more by apostle Paul than by anyone else and that only briefly with the intent to give peace of mind to church age believers. The timing of Paul's church rapture in many theologies are then overlaid on to passages such as Matthew 24, and the book of Revelation. Not based on the contextual method of study but rather on incomplete similarities and theological assumptions of what constitutes a rapture and to whom it actually applies. Because the word "rapture" does not appear in English scripture (Its the Latin word for "Catching away" something, as in reference to a Kidnapping or theft, or as in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 "caught up" together). The Timing and Placement of the rapture in various rapture theories therefor is heavily dependent on other terminology that they associate with happening with or as being the rapture itself, such as The call of "Apostle john to heaven", "The falling away", "The ascension of the two witnesses" "The return of Christ after the tribulation", "The reaping of earth by the angels", "The gathering of Israel/ or the elect", "The resurrection", and etc. Depending on their assumed associations of the given theology "the Rapture" will be placed in any one of these assumed locations with little more proof given than stating "this is also that". Another tactic that is often done in rapture theologies is the rearrangement of the Book of Revelation to suit their given preference. Sometimes the Book is broken into two, three, or even four or more, sections and then placed in a parallel timeline or mixed and matched arrangement of chapters in order to get the preferred result. Otherwise the natural chronological and progressive flow of the book becomes inconsistent with their rapture placement and other theology assertions. Given the diversity and variant opinions, and assumptions on the rapture, and the tampering of the book's natural flow and manipulation of terms, (Not just among heretics, or "Christians" in general, but also among otherwise good fundamental Baptist) the question needs to be asked, Why would otherwise contextually consistent Christians chose one view over the other? and additionally divide over the issue? To the simple it seems a frivolous thing to divide over a few years or on something "no one can agree on or prove definitively and we have no control over anyway". However, as with most theology, what is on the surface to the simple, as non issue, or matter of preference, is actually a defining issue. Where you place the rapture will ultimately determine which theology as a whole you will allow to teach you the Bible. In general Rapture theologies do not exist in a vacuum but are the end result of an overall Biblical framework and understanding the reasoning behind them belongs to them of full age (That is why Revelation is the last book in the Bible!). Unfortunately because of the emotional and sensational nature of end times events in general, and OUR rapture most specifically, it is most often one of the very first things a young and unlearned Christian wants to learn or is concerned about. (given a show of hands most of us would have to agree this was true for us as well). Because of this were we emotionally lock in our placement will determine what we decide is theologically correct in our later development and study. There are also many who were told a location but later changed their position after "much study" (usually meaning a charismatic and skilled teacher picked apart a flawed version of their told placement in favor of the teachers preferred placement) but do not change their previous framework. Given time the framework must change with the rapture theology in order for the person to remain theologically consistent. So if "the timing of the rapture" is the only thing "we disagree on"...give it time and the rest will also change. Either that or the person is not an honest biblicist and is fine with picking and choosing theology with no theological constancy or is choosing to remain ignorant, simple, or detached from study, in favor of his chosen crowd of fellow Christians. So what does this all have to do with "The Four Returns of Christ" as outlined? Simply put, the major Frameworks in Christianity place the Rapture at one of these key points in the Return of Christ and confuse the simple to where they feel that they cannot understand the overall events and timings and therefor need a chart or skilled teacher to untangle the book of Revelation. It is the hope of this study to untangle the book of Revelation from artificial frameworks in favor of the bible's natural and consistent contextual flow. In so doing I hope to show, among other things, the simple flow of the book and events do not need to be rearranged, that the Rapture's correct placement is Pre-tribulational, and that the correct framework is dispensational in nature (in a later study I would like to look at the various errors within the certain dispensational views that cause many to forsake the truths of its basic bible principles for another framework. However that study will probably be a while off.) and lastly to show and teach the events in a way that can be grasped by the simple christian so that they can start off on a good theological footing. In part two we will look at the assertions of what the rapture is biblicaly, the reason for it, and according to the various frameworks, the Rapture placements and their fixed associations with their given theological Framework and why one must follow the other in order to be theologically consistent. Until then is their any clarification or additions that anyone would like to ask or add that would be helpful to the study so far?

Is that stuff were they take all the rotten veg covered in mites and grind it all up? we call that compost here.

The first Adam was Spiritually Safe because he was innocent and righteousness on his own merit before God and then was lost because he fell from his own innocents. This means he could no longer stand before God in his own grace. When we as children lose our innocents we then can no longer stand righteous before God and must submit to another's righteousness. Matthew 18:10 Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. Romans 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. The second Adam still stands in his own righteousness and we who are saved from our fall stand with him in his righteousness and not our own. Jude 24-25 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, 25 to the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.

Such sudden change is probably the result of not being grounded in their professed doctrines in the first place. So when they were confronted with the Post trib view they were not able to explain the verses used in light of their professed theology. Rapture theology is considered an "end-result" theology. Which means it is built on the theology that comes before it and those who learn it don't realize its foundation doctrines so don't convert to the other theologies all at once. Don't be surprised if they come out in a year or two as believing the Church replaces Israel as a nation and that God has given up on Israel as a nation and other views. Their new Post-Trib view, and the teachings of the one they learned it from will eventually change their foundational dispensational views will slowly change to conform to Reformed covenant theology.

If you could "lose" or CHOSE TO LEAVE eternal Salvation then an all knowing God would have never given it to you in the first place. Ephesians 1:4 according as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Acts 15:18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Timothy 2:19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. John 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand. Ephesians 4:30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. Hebrews 4:3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

Just remember Post-Trib rapture comes from the Reformed Covenant theology that says Israel and the church is the continuation of the same national covenant. (They believe God switched from the physical nation in the OT to a spiritual nation in the NT, and that the physical no longer has rights to the convent). This means that when Christ returns to gather the elect "after the tribulation" they believe this means the rapture of the church and not the regathering of Israel. They believe "elect" is referring to the church believers and the rapture. So every thing referring Christ returning with the angels is to "rapture the church" and then deposit OT saved Israelites from heaven back to Israel. They believe The return of Christ is the gathering of the elect is the same as the Rapture of the church and the 144,000 come from heaven to earth. Pre-trib rapture comes form Dispensation theology which states the church and Israel are separate covenants and both continue into the NT. They believe The Rapture of the church, the return of Christ, and the regathering of Israel are all separate events. The believe the return of Christ with the angels "after the tribulation" to gather the elect means to gather the 144,000 Israelite to Jerusalem. The Rapture of the church however occurs by the Spirit leaving earth before "Jacob's trouble" (Israel's tribulation week).

"President Trump Participates in the Announcement of the Guidance on Constitutional Prayer in Public Schools"

That seems to be the Method of Operation for the Golobal warming politicians. To forbid safe Harvesting/burning/clearing/grazing and then blame Global warming when the overgrowth dies/dries and catches fire.

So technically we do vote for pastors in our Political elections!

"Aside from Sunday morning services....." In regard to the tittle, if the question is to which service time would be most "required" or commanded, then Sunday Evening service would be more biblical than Sunday morning, as it fulfills the request of Paul and its the only service time Jesus attended after his resurrection. However in regard to requirements, Christians aren't required to to do anything they don't want to. What they SHOULD do is a different matter.

Merry Christmas and a happy New Year!

Glad to hear about your first sunday. I'm looking forward to hearing more future updates about the church and your ministry there.

Amen. I was saved at a similar age as well but not baptized until 16. At five I had no doubt that Jesus Died for me and would take me to Heaven if I trusted in him. I would even witness to others about What Christ did and their need to trust in Christ. It was only the doubt of others that could not believe such a young child could have genuine faith that caused me to struggle and doubt my salvation.

Hell is an English word, Sheol is an Hebrew word, and Hades and Tartarus are Greek words. It would not be wrong to translate them from the native language to the English equivalent. Many modernist try to uses the foreign words as a way to teach concepts not actually used in the Bible but the pagan cultures the word came from. Sometimes they are used spimply to convey particular aspects of Hell but it can run the risk of adding the pagan ideas of hell that the bible does not actually teach.

Is that the one in Rosalia, Wa? I know it well and have been praying that they would get a pastor. I'll be praying for your church and that the lord will bless your work there.