The best explanation of "HELL" that I've found

I think that once one accepts that Jesus wasn't speaking in symbols when he spoke to either the thief on the cross or Mary Magdalene, then option number three becomes the most likely.

Obviously, Jesus spoke symbolically ("Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days." John 2:19). However, I believe that in this instance, Jesus was giving that thief a promise that would encourage him through his crucifixion. Giving him what would be a symbolic promise wouldn't have encouraged the thief as much as one that was literal.

Another thought is that we need to recognize that the original language was in Greek (I know you know this). Therefore, when it was translated into English for the first time, it was translated with commonly held beliefs in mind. What I'm saying is that the first English versions translated it wrongly and all the other versions have followed because of the same belief.

Think about it. Here is the sentence without the comma:
"Jesus answered him 'I tell you the truth today you will be with me in paradise.'"

Now, if one believes that people go to their eternal destiny the moment they die, you will punctuate that sentence accordingly.

Its as simple as that. I'm not suggesting that all English versions are in a conspiracy to promote a certain doctrine. I'm suggesting that the first English version reflected the belief that people go to their eternal destiny when they die.

 

Here are some reasons why I don't believe the Bible teaches the doctrine of the rapture.

First, the second coming of Jesus is referred to over 1500 times in the Bible, and in an average of one verse in every 21 in the New Testament alone. In none of these passages does the Bible refer to Jesus' second coming as an event that happens in secret. The Bible DOES say that it will happen unexpectedly but never in secret.

In fact, Jesus warns the disciples about claims that Jesus has returned in secret. Matthew 24:26, 27: "So if anyone tells you, 'There he is, out in the desert,' do not go out; or, 'Here he is, in the inner rooms,' do not believe it. For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man."

The point here is that nowhere in the Bible is Jesus' coming referred to as an event that happens in secret.

Another reason why I don't believe the Bible teaches is that simply, this is the only chance we have at eternal life with God.

The Bible is more than just a collection of stories, prophecies, hymns, poems and religious history. The Bible is first and foremost an invitation, an appeal. To read the Bible is to be immediately confronted with the way of life and the way of death. You are invited, urged to choose God and participate in His plan for your life, and warned that to do otherwise is to leave you unprotected from the ultimate consequences of sin–an eternal death from which there will be no return.

Even more, the Bible presents making this choice as not only important, but urgent. (Hebrews 3:15; 2 Corinthians 6:2) Delay is never advocated, and procrastination is portrayed as dangerous and tantamount to disaster. By the time a person dies, their decision will have been irrevocably made for or against God–there is no second chance after death. (Hebrews 9:27) Before Jesus returns at His second coming every person still living will have made their decision irrevocably for or against God–there will be no second chance after Jesus returns. (Revelation 22:11,12) About that the Bible is unmistakably clear.

Unfortunately, the doctrine of the rapture completely misses this. It describes Jesus second coming as a secret coming whereby he catches away all those who are ready for Him at the time, leaving behind billions of others to live through a seven-year tribulation during which they will have a second chance to get ready for His third coming.

That's why the rapture doctrine is so dangerous. Not simply because it teaches that Jesus' second coming will be secret (when the Bible is silent on that). But even more so because billions of people who rely on the rapture doctrine may be counting on a second chance to turn to God, a second chance that doesn't exist! True, during this life God provides us with many chances. But once Jesus returns, it's over. The parable of the wheat/tares and the goat/sheep is clear on this.

One of the foundations for the rapture doctrine is the prophecy found in Daniel 9:24-27. Daniel 9:27 is the last part of the Bible's most compelling prophecy which foretold the exact year of Jesus' baptism and death, and even revealed the meaning of His death–500 years before He was even born. Sir Isaac Newton referred to this prophecy as "the foundation stone of the Christian religion."

To summarize, proponents of the rapture doctrine have taken the last time sequence of this prophecy, removed it from where they say the first part is fulfilled, and moved it to the end. This time sequence is what they call the 7 years of tribulation.

However, it doesn't make sense to say that the first part of this prophecy is fulfilled in a certain moment, then the last part pulled away and said to be fulfilled at a later date. The prophecy itself doesn't lend itself to that interpretation. All the time sequence of that prophecy is fulfilled at the same time. It is a whole, a time sequence that is fulfilled in its entirety at the same time. That makes sense to me. (I can give a lot more on this, but don't want to use up this space for that).

The last reason why I don't see the Bible teaching the doctrine of the rapture is that there is no distinction between the Jews and Christians in God's eyes. He will not treat them differently. To see this, we need to have a correct understanding of the history and role of the Jews.

Because of the lack of space, the rest is on the next post.

 

A good understanding of the Jews and their place in God's plan begins with a single word – conditional.

When you were a child did your parents ever say to you something along this line,"if you don't stop fighting with your brother, then you'll have to go to your room and be by yourself, but if you two get along, then we'll take you to the beach." Whether or not they said it exactly like that, you get the point. Most of us are acquainted in one way or another with the "if...then" formula. In other words, the consequences we receive will depend on the choices we make and the actions we take.

Well, from the very beginning that's the way God has related to man. The "if...then" formula was established in the Garden of Eden story–"if you eat the forbidden fruit, then you will die; if you obey, then you will live. Don't misunderstand, God's love for man was never conditional. But then that's just the point–because God's love for us is unconditional, His promises and warnings are always conditional. The "if...then" formula is ingrained in Scripture. It characterizes the entirety of God's relationship with man as well as every prophecy He ever gave about any nation, including Israel. (Jeremiah 18:7-11)

Now note the application. God told Israel that if they would obey Him, then they would remain His chosen people, "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation." (Exodus 19:3-6) The subsequent history of Israel's relationship with God, however, followed a very repetitive pattern–they disobeyed God, God grievingly gave them up to their enemies and they suffered, they repented of their sin, God delivered them from their enemies and prospered them, they disobeyed God, and so on, over and over again throughout their history, right up to their overthrow and captivity in Babylon in the sixth century B.C.. Nehemiah 9 It's a record of Israel's unfaithfulness contrasted with God's patience and mercy, and a classic demonstration of the "if...then" formula.

Enter the greatest prophecy of them all: Daniel 9:24-27. God granted Israel 490 years to return to Jerusalem, rebuild their city and temple, and prepare for the coming of the Messiah. When the Messiah came, He would "make reconciliation for iniquity" and "bring in everlasting righteousness." In other words, the Messiah would make eternal salvation available to them. God even specified the exact time of the Messiah's baptism and death, so they could recognize Him for sure when He came. And sure enough, it all took place right on schedule, just as prophesied–Jesus was baptized in 27 A.D., exactly as the prophecy said. Only when He came, His own nation of Israel rejected Him, even crucified Him. Ironically, they crucified Him in the exact year it was prophesied He would die–31 A.D.!

The prophecy also foretold that Jerusalem would be destroyed and that God would rescind the Jewish nation's role as His chosen, missionary people. (Daniel 9:26,27) This part of the prophecy might never have been fulfilled, due to the "if...then" formula that applies to every prophecy God makes concerning a nation. (Jeremiah 18:7-11) If they had accepted Jesus and followed Him, then Jerusalem might never have been destroyed. But they not only rejected Jesus outright and then crucified Him, but they also began killing the prophets Jesus subsequently sent to offer them forgiveness for having done the unthinkable. (Acts 7:57;-8:1) By killing the prophets who were making a last appeal to them, Israel as much as said: "So, God, what is it about our decision to be completely and forever disassociated from that Jesus of Nazareth that You don't understand?!" Finally, grievingly, God accepted their decision and turned to the Gentiles to carry His gospel of salvation to the world.

Jesus wept over Jerusalem. (Luke 19:41-44) He agonized that they had spurned every divine overture and rejected every prophet God had sent to them, including Himself, God's own Son. (Matthew 23:37) True to the divine "if...then" formula, Jesus announced to the Jews that their temple would thereafter be desolate of the divine presence. (Matthew 23:38,39) Furthermore, He sorrowfully told them, "The kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it." (Matthew 21:31-43) This verse is monumental to understanding this. Jesus is here transfering the title of God's kingdom away from the Jews and giving it to Christianity.

From that time forward, national Israel no longer figures into Bible prophecy. And this fact of Bible truth lays the ax to the pillar of the rapture theory. God created a new "Israel" out of people from all races and cultures who put their faith in Jesus and His sacrifice for them. Galatians 6:14-16 The New Testament calls this spiritual Israel "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation," the very same designation God used for national Israel in the Old Testament. 1 Peter 2:9; etc. The true Jews in God's eyes are no longer people born through lineal descent from Abraham, but those who are of faith and belong to Christ. Galatians 3:26-29; etc. If you are a loyal and obedient follower of Jesus, then in God's reckoning you are more Jewish and more a member of Israel than if you could trace your geneology all the way back to Abraham.

Which is why the literal restoration of the political kingdom of modern Israel is just that, a political event, not a spiritual fulfilment of Bible prophecy. Even if the Jewish temple were to be rebuilt, it would not be a spiritual fulfillment of Bible prophecy. There are no more Bible prophecies concerning literal, national Israel yet to be fulfilled. Because on the testimony of the New Testament writers, and of Jesus Himself, being a member of Israel is no longer a matter of geneological descent, but of spiritual faith and belonging to Jesus.

That doesn't mean that God has cast off individual Jews from the opportunity of salvation. God loves Jews, even as He loves Arabs, American, Russians, and all other nationalities. Romans 11:1,2 "God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son that whosoever [including the Jews] believeth in Him might not perish but have everlasting life." John 3:16

These are several reasons why I don't see the Bible teaching the doctrine of the rapture.

 

Sorry VOR, just saw this. No, one must remain a Saint to be raptured.

 

But isn't that unusually misleading for Jesus? Wouldn't you agree that's out of character for Him to sugar-coat a promise, even with the best intentions?

 

An interesting point, and it does have merit. I agree that commonly held perceptions could very easily affect translation efforts. While I don't agree those influences are enough to change major points of doctrine, I must concede that minor points could differ based on the effects those perceptions potentially have.

 

Turbo, I'm confused about your repeated use of the term secret. Where are you getting that term? Have I used it?

 

Okay, I understand your point about the danger of people waiting for a 'second chance', that being pre-trib rapture that may never come. But let me ask you this: if there is no pre-trib rapture (and there may not be), what is your take on the tribulation period?

On your argument regarding Daniel 9, I'm sorry to say I'm lost. I've stared at the passage for about 90 minutes now, and I can't see anything in it referring to the rapture of the church at all. It seems to be referring to the Antichrist, Jerusalem, and the tribulation period. Am I missing something?

On your assertion that Israel plays no further role in Biblical prophecy, I have to admit I'm at a loss. What, then, is your understanding of the prophesied treaty the Antichrist makes with Israel that if I understand correctly begins the seven year tribulation? I agree that the Jewish people are no longer God's most favored. The New Testament says, "There is no Jew or Gentile," meaning the playing field is now even.