Explicit Messianic Prophecy

Ray - don't be drawn into that one.

Carson's speculations fail if all you find is a premillenial view established by the early church.

"You know - as in the Bible". Carson is asking if by the time the RCC had cranked up the dark ages - to its zenith pitch - whether you STILL find the premillenial view of the 2nd coming and the rapture of the church believed just as we find it in 1Thess 4 -- even in those dark RCC-controlled ages.

Of course one might ask Carson why his own church will not come out and endorse his views on "no literal millenium"...

In Christ,

Bob

 

Carson,

Was 16th century Jesuit Francisco Ribera a "rapturist"? See Christian Churches of God document: http://www.logon.org/english/s/p095.html

 

Carson Weber,

Does the church have a footnote or a regulation that if you read any Pretribulation and Kingdom Age material you might be put in Hell; or just the threat and guide for your soul by way of your Roman Catholic imprimatur? Perhaps it is factored into "Canon Law."

The Roman Catholic Church has a choke hold on you soul, but first of all through your thinking process. Don't think for yourself, Carson, the Catholic church will do it for you.

 

Yes, 1830! The main difference between Ribera's futurism and Bob and Ray's futurism seems to be the addition of the pre-trib rapture. Steve Wohlberg, in his book The Left Behind Deception opines that Ribera's Jesuit teachings lay dorment for 300 years until they were adopted by certain Protestant sects. Ribera's Futurism has now evolved into the pre-trib rapturism so popular in American evangelical circles. From chapter 3, The Evil Empire of Jesuit Futurism:

 

Carson Weber,

'Please, do not tell something that is not true. Most of us know that the R.C.C. only places their imprimatur on the books that they deem worthy of reading for your spiritual understanding.' The rest of the books come from the separated brethren who only have half of it correct. Notice you have stepped into your world, the world that you have chosen to live in, a world of spiritual isolation and deception. We cannot even get you to try to refute what God's Word has said; you merely submit for us, your party line.

 

Here, Ray. Let me just answer for you. You can't answer Carson's question that he has asked over and over again.

If I am wrong, prove it. If you post once more without providing an answer or that you are looking for an answer, Carson stands as correct, or at minimum, you yourself are totally unjustified.

Now, provide that answer.

 

Grace Saves,

In the letters of Ignatius he is writing to the Church at Tralles in Asia and says, 'Dearly loved by God the Father of Jesus Christ, elect and worthy of God, at peace in flesh and spirit through the sufferings of Jesus Christ, who is our hope when we rise to be with Him . . . ' Ignatius as you know was an early follower and an Apostolic Father. He believed that Christ will come for His church in the rapture. {I Thess. 4:17} Ignatius died in 110 A.D.

In the teaching of the twelve apostles called the "Didache" the writer said, 'Watch over your life; do not let your lamps go out, and do not be unprepared, but be ready, for you do not know the hour when our Lord is coming.' Again, the teaching of the church as to the gathering of the saints into Heaven.

During the Dark Ages the R.C.C. had such a strangle hold on the peasant people that they had to adhere to Catholicism. The unnamed, underground saints always believed in the rapture of the church, but not all. The remnant will always believe the truth.

 

The end time teachings that became popular after 1830 have one source, the Catholic Counter-Reformation. Catholic and Protestant churches should return to what they taught and believed before the Jesuit Ribera.

He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again with glory to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.
Nicene Creed

[ October 26, 2003, 05:52 AM: Message edited by: John Gilmore ]

 

Carson and John - no need to "play dodge ball here". Your view "fails" once we get to a pre-millenial LITERAL 2nd coming rapture. Obviously these sources are AFTER the first century when you "claim" the 2nd coming happened along with its 1Thess 4 rapture.

Game over.

As for the "pre-tribulation rapture" - unfortunately for your case so far - there are those denominations (like mine) that don't believe in that BUT are STILL premillenial 2nd coming, premillenial rapture.

Ray has posted the "smoking gun" that leaves your argument for a 19th century introduction of a literal millenium and a premillenial 2nd coming, premillenial rapture as a late-comer a baselessAs assertion. Not only does the Word of God show these to be sound doctrines - but the RCC was unnable to wipe out all mention of it in the early centuries. (thanks againt to Ray for his post)...

As I said - game over. (But thank you for stepping up to the plate and making an effort).

Actually this is the best exchange I have seen the RC posters engage in with arguments supporting their view. I am amazed they can do that.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Until the 1830s, most Protestants considered the current Pope to be the Anti-Christ not some future one-man Anti-Christ. When the Rapturists adopted Ribera's theory, they simply changed the timing of rapture to occur before, rather than after, the tribulation caused by the future one-man Anti-Christ.

 

This is a weakness in the pretrib rapture - premillenial position both historically and from the text.

Carson can expose this all day long and avoid the problem that the pre-millenial second coming support both historically and from scripture is outstanding and strong AND it negates his position.

That is why I have argued for focusing on the pre-millenial aspect of the problem and not getting into pre-trib or mid-trib scenarios that have less historic support and are problematic from the point of scripture.

If Carson is successful and focusing just on those aspects - I know he can make a good case for it.

In Christ,

Bob

 

k

So when Ray brings in 2nd century sources that hold to the truth of a FUTURE return of Christ - future to the 2nd century author - you counter with a 3rd century source that has finally "gone into some error" on that point.

Truly an "evolution" in thinking was taking place over the centures.

As Paul said in Rev 20 "I know that AFTER my departure wolves will come in speaking strange things".

You make the point well. The farther you get from the first century sources - the more error creeps in.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Carson Weber,

Sitting at the desk where you sit has provided for you a clear explanation of the Roman Catholic view of theology.

Where you fall on your face is when you wilfully neglect to answer our questions and blow them off as so much Protestant confusion.

Now my question. If all of the dead, sinners and saints are to be raised from their graves on the Last Day, as you claim, why did God guide the Apostle Paul to pen these words. Only ' . . . the dead in Christ {only the dead who are in Christ} shall rise' and not the unbelieving world? [I Thessalonians 4:16d]

Those who are in Christ are people who have been regenerated by the Holy Spirit and are the blood bought believers who are the sons and daughters of the living God. [I John 3:2] If all dead both saved and unsaved are raised at the same time, then it would be inappropriate for the Spirit of God to infer this in the light of the unique word picture, 'the dead who are in Christ.

Because of the dead in Christ wording, your one judgment fits all, is a theological error.

Second question. If the bodies of all the dead are raised for the end time judgment, then why does John say, 'But the rest of the dead . . . ' in Revelation 20:5a?

Now without allegorizing away the Lord's truth, please, try to answer these two questions. And don't forget in I Thessalonians 4:17 you are allowed to use the literal interpretation, while in the last book of the Bible you have been given permission to us both a literal and allegorical interpretation of what Almighty God is saying.

And if you have problems answering these two questions, you might consult Catholic Convert and/or thessalonian.