|
|
Preterist
Rapture
According to
the "Preterist Rapture" view, the top tier of Christians were removed from
the earth in A.D.70
|
RAPTURE REMOVAL |
NO RAPTURE REMOVAL |
|
|
|
-
Ed
Stevens:
Silence Demands a Rapture "A rapture easily explains why no Christian after AD 70 mentioned the occurrence of the parousia (they weren't around to document it). So when a non-rapture preterist asserts that the rapture preterist has a "documentation problem," it leaves three fingers pointing back at him. The non-rapture preterist has three other events to find documentation for (parousia, resurrection and judgment). "
-
Walt Hibbard:
Five Views of the AD70 Rapture - "..Mr. Ian Harding of Australia. I see his refinement of "The Literal Rapture Expectation" view, which I have called simply "The Perfect Is Heaven" view, as the only preterist view of the rapture and related events that meets the full requirements of scripture."
-
Walt Hibbard:
Reply to Sam Frost's Analysis and Critique
of Taken to Heaven in AD70: Blessings Expected a the Parousia By Ian D.
Harding - "At
this point I think it is only fair, open and honest to urge the “heaven now”
preterists to return to sanity in their eschatological studies. If they
choose not to do so, they are laying themselves wide open for ridicule and
laughter from the entire futurist community and many preterists as well –
and even worse will do insurmountable damage to the preterist cause, and to
the credibility and honor of the Lord Jesus Christ, the very One whom
preterists strive to honor in virtue of their adopting the preterist
viewpoint! "
-
Gabor Gombor:
Word Games on the Rapture
- "The critic who stands against 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. "
-
Arthur Melanson:
What About the First Century Rapture? -
"About this time
Ed Stevens, after long study, wrote and published a book,
Expectations Demand a Rapture.
Walt Hibbard wrote one foreword for Ed’s book, we wrote the other. The book has met with intense opposition. Nevertheless, it is a breakthrough of major proportions. It’s not that Ed has discovered the rapture; that knowledge is as old as Scripture, but it is a major breakthrough in seeing and understanding what the first century Christians knew and understood. It’s a breakthrough that has the power to give fresh, accurate insight to the preterist movement."
-
Earnest Hampden-Cook
"JOHN xxi. 21-23. - It is possible to see in this passage a suggestion that the "rapture" or "translation" of the saints at the coming of the Lord would not exempt their earthly bodies from death, but would mean the ascension of their spirits, their real and innermost selves, to Heaven in new and glorified bodies, resembling that in which the Lord Jesus ascended."
-
James Stuart Russell
"We naturally enough say, were such an event as the sudden and simultaneous disappearance of a number of prominent persons from our town, or village, or neighbourhood, to take place, what a sensation it would cause, what alarm and consternation. It would be reported all over the land, it would be the topic of conversation in every company. Very true; but suppose all this occured when the country was in the occupation of a foreign army, when the invaders were marching through the land, leaving devastation and ruin everywhere in their track. Suppose the metropolis in a state of siege, captured, burnt to the ground; fire, famine and slaughter raging, in every quarter; all social order convsulsed amid the agonies of an expiring nation.
What sensation would the disappearance of some, of the members of a despised sect excite in such circumstances? Would they be missed? Or if missed would it be thought unaccountable? Amidst the fearful signs and portents of that tremendous crisis the disappearance of the Christians might pass without notice."
|
-
Dan Harden:
Response to Walt Hibbard's Support of Ian Harding's Book
- "..(O)ur
spiritual condition is drastically different from those of the pre-Parousial
saints, based solely on the fact that our High Priest returned and brought
back with Him our completed atonement. Christ has made us whiter than
snow, blameless before the Lord, despite our shortcomings. What was a
promise / deposit for the pre-Parousial saints is a reality for us today --
even while living on Earth. Our going to Heaven when we die is BECAUSE
of these fulfilled promises. We don't look forward to them being
fulfilled in fullness when we die, or else we would never be qualified to
make it on our own, for we are unable to do so on our own. Indeed, if
we didn't have glory in fullness already, we couldn't go to Heaven at all,
for God cannot abide anything less than perfection. But our entrance
into Heaven is assured because we already have Eternal Life in fullness
NOW!"
-
Sam Frost:
An Analysis and Critique of
Taken to Heaven in A.D. 70: Blessings Expected
at the Parousia
"One begins to
see that Harding’s definitions of what we do not have yet is rooted in an
empirical bias. That is, we can’t “see” it, so it cannot be so.
We still suffer, we still die, we still groan and we still are subject to
error when it comes to seeing God. In fact, Harding has reduced
theology while on earth to “vague spiritual and mental conceptions” (322).
That is, “There is in the present, the perception an acknowledgment of true
and good things – the things of God, and the person of Christ, etc., but the
perception is unclear, obscure, puzzling” (321). In heaven we will see
God “face to face” but on earth our knowledge is “very imperfect” (321) of
God. "
-
Nathan
DuBois:
My Response to Ed Stevens' Book "Expectations Demand a
Rapture" "I
promised Ed Stevens my critique on his book and I will do my utmost to be
thorough and precise in everything he has written and everything I espouse.
I will respond in the order that Ed has presented the arguments in this
book, from preface to conclusion. I, from the beginning, admit this is an
area where I have a strong stance
against a physical rapture. As I have stated to many of my friends in
correspondence and debate, a proper understanding of exactly what the first
century Christians
did expect is important in our understanding of the whole gospel and
it's place in our lives toady. This is an important issue, not to salvation,
but to the knowledge of our Lord God and His plan for mankind in this world,
which human kind will inhabit forever."
-
Dr. Kelly Nelson Birks:
Response to 'Silence Demands a Rapture'
- "the Thessalonians, who could not
conceive of the nature of the harpazo at Christ’s Parousia in the least (and
we don’t do a very good job of it either), would begin to grasp that the
meeting with the Lord was to be a personal meeting “within” the believer."
-
Preterist Rapture Challenge - "If you believe that the Rapture took place in 70 A.D. at the alleged Second Advent of YAHSHUA, IMMANUEL, YAHWEH of Nazareth the Mashiyach (a.k.a. Jesus Christ) please take this challenge."
|
IS SILENCE A GREATER ARGUMENT FOR OR AGAINST THE A.D.70 RAPTURE-REMOVAL?
Silence Demands a Rapture - Ed Stevens "A rapture easily explains why no Christian after AD 70 mentioned the occurrence of the parousia (they weren't around to document it). So when a non-rapture preterist asserts that the rapture preterist has a "documentation problem," it leaves three fingers pointing back at him. The non-rapture preterist has three other events to find documentation for (parousia, resurrection and judgment). "
'Silence Demands a Rapture' FORM -
Text of All User Posts "Why are there not any stories or rumors or handed down oral tradition that alludes to the missing people?. I find it very hard to believe that NO ONE would say, "Write that down!" This all sounds a little far fetched to me. I'm a full preterist but I think we really need to be careful when we think too hard!"
What do YOU think ?
Send an email with your comments to
todd @ preteristarchive.com
Be sure to include the article name.
They will be posted shortly
upon receipt
- Date:
- 14 May 2002
- Time:
- 19:46:26
CommentsSilence is a greater argument AGAINST the view.
- Date:
- 16 May 2002
- Time:
- 02:16:55
- Remote User:
CommentsThere is no historical record of the Church vanishing from the earth in A.D. 66. This silence suggests that the Church was not literally raptured. The Bible tells us that the Son of Man was to gather His elect in A.D. 70, not in A.D. 66 (Matt. 24:31), and that His elect remnant was to survive beyond A.D. 70 and reign on Earth as Israel's posterity. (Isa. 1:9; Rom. 9:27-29; 11:5; Rev. 5:10). There are historical records from multiple sources of Apostolic Christians living beyond A.D. 70. Conclusion: Silence, the Bible, and history agree that the Church was not literally raptured. Case closed. --Dave Green
- Date:
- 16 May 2002
- Time:
- 04:20:04
- Remote User:
Comments""It is also possible that the number of folks 'snatched away' might have been smaller than we think. ....There might not be a large number of true saints left at the time of Christ's return. (Matt. 24:10-24; Lk. 18:8)"" --------------------The above argument was suggested as a possible explanation as to why there was no historical record of the Church vanishing in A.D. 66. The rapture of a small group could have escaped the historical record. ......Response: If indeed there was "not a large number of true saints" in A.D. 66, why should anyone expect to find historical evidence of their activities immediately afterward? It is altogether reasonable that the writings and activities of such a small group were simply not preserved in history. The "New Testament" writings have survived only because they are divinely, providentially and supernaturally preserved. It is a fact that apart from the God-breathed "New Testament," early Church history is FILLED THROUGHOUT WITH GAPING GAPS --from the very beginning to well into the second century. Relying on uninspired writings, one could as easily infer from silence that a "rapture" happened in A.D. 40, or 50, or 80, as in A.D. 66. Extra-scriptural "silence" "demands" only this much: That it took the Church about 100 years of steady increase before it finally began to become a consistent subject in non-inspired histories. --Dave Green
- Date:
- 16 May 2002
- Time:
- 14:11:58
- Remote User:
CommentsThe same reasons that drew all of us (or most of us) away from the rapture doctrine still hold now that we are preterists. Simply put, it is unbiblical. I see no reason now to re-fabricate this idea of a rapture.
- Date:
- 17 May 2002
- Time:
- 16:37:25
- Remote User:
CommentsWhat happened to the old adage, " Speak where the Bible speaks, and be silent where the Bible is silent?" A physical rapture of only the most "true" believers is an invitation to false doctrine and another cult! Remember the Mormon and Jehovah Witness beliefs? It also brings to mind the exploitation of the fear of not being "good enough" to be allowed entrance into heaven that the church in its various forms have used to control people in times past....and present. Jesus' kingdom has never been about the physical, why start with this now?
- Date:
- 18 May 2002
- Time:
- 13:31:10
- Remote User:
CommentsIMO silence is about as helpful for the rapture theory as it is for the postponement theory! TracyV
- Date:
- 24 May 2002
- Time:
- 12:57:35
- Remote User:
CommentsActually, while I am a man who respects Ed very much, and even having once done a series of radio programs with him for almost 5 months as my co-host, I find myself wondering if it is not one of the cardinal logical fallacies to "argue from silence." Still, Ed knows his stuff, and I guess this can be viewed several ways. Fact is, the Scriptures don't really seem to give clear-cut information on this "rapture." I also don't agree with Ed Stevens or Dr. Birks on their view of ECP (eternal conscious punishment), but hey--they got the degrees! (-:
- Date:
- 29 May 2002
- Time:
- 07:42:15
- Remote User:
CommentsIn my opinion the biggest problem, (a deadly problem i would add), with the whole idea that " "TRUE Christians" (?) were raptured, leaving on earth those who were NOT TRUE (?) Christians lies in the following: Christ would have left His Kingdom in the hands of " NOT TRUE Christians". In other words UNBELIEVERS, that is what "NOT TRUE Christians" are by definition, are the "foundation" of today's church !!! May i suggest instead, that the "silence" is due to the non existence of any PHYSICAL rapture; leaving us to ponder what is truly meant by " to be caught up" ?
- Date:
- 06 Jun 2002
- Time:
- 20:11:09
- Remote User:
Commentsif the church was present at the time of Christs comming there would be an abundance of written evidence.however the church at that time doesn't seem to have produced any writings hailing the establishment of the new kingdom,the fall of the old covenant and the reciept of the promises to the fathers!they were the church who had seen.the church who hadn't seen were the blessed that jesus spoke about.
- Date:
- 15 Sep 2003
- Time:
- 11:23:18
CommentsEd's current rapture position is not from silence, as is well known, but rather from expectations! The expectations of first-century saints came from teaching like this: "When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with him in glory." (Colossians 3:4) I didn't realize it for quite some time, but the non-literal rapture position puts preterism into an indefensible position. If we don't see the truth of the literal rapture we can self destruct logically. Unbiased thinking is called for. Arthur Melanson
Date: 12 Oct 2005 Time: 23:18:08
Comments:
How refreshing to read the accounts of history and find the fulfillments
before our very eyes! Great article and site folks! Keep it coming.
D. Farquhar
Date: 24 Oct 2005 Time: 12:40:25
Comments:
In Rev 7:9-17, it speaks of a great multitude which no man could number from
all nations, people, kindred and tongues that had come out of 'great
tribulation' as those who had washed their robes, and made them white in the
blood of the Lamb...
If all or a vast majority of Christians in Jerusalem had fled to Pella, then
who are these people that were killed and came out of great tribulation ??
From my understanding of the article above, pretty much only non-believing
Jews died in the siege of Jerusalem, 66-70 AD.
Neronian persecution of Christians throughout the empire ??
TractorMan
|