And the New Madrid faultAmerica as we know it may not exist in those days...Yellowstone's Super Volcano is long past due to go off...
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And the New Madrid faultAmerica as we know it may not exist in those days...Yellowstone's Super Volcano is long past due to go off...
And the fault in my area..don't know what they call it..but there is a fault line that runs all the way to Ashville and it is said it's worse than the one in California..And the New Madrid fault
I think so. I think Satan has always had one plus a spare of candidates down thru history. I think Hitler was one.It seems to me that the AC could be visible and active on the world stage while we are still here, as someone we suspect could be him, but it won't be known for certain until after we are gone. When he signs the seven-year covenant, he will be revealed to be the AC--that's what I think "revealed" means: he is officially "outed." But I don't see where the Bible forbids him from being a public person and a likely person before the moment of "revealing." I could be wrong, lol.
No because a covenant or peace treaty doesn't ensure peace. Broken treaties litter the landscape of history.whoa, lots of reading, I will admit I didn't read all of it, however...... since there will be peace for 3.5 years..... one could argue that the tribulation doesn't begin until half way through the 7 year peace treaty........idk
Simple. Ask him/her if the AC has been revealed as promised.Another way of asking this question would be...
How do we answer someone who believes we are already in the Tribulation?
The first 3.5 years of the tribulation will see the seal and trumpet judgements, with over half the worlds population killed.whoa, lots of reading, I will admit I didn't read all of it, however...... since there will be peace for 3.5 years..... one could argue that the tribulation doesn't begin until half way through the 7 year peace treaty........idk
LOL, "some other events". BTW, I totally agree with your point about believing the rapture isn't a salvation issue.My wife is saved, but doesn't really believe in the rapture. That's not a problem. The important thing is that when she is taken up, she will believe in the rapture then.
Her future beliefs are that we will have "heaven on Earth someday." I told her that some other events will happen before then.
Yes, because rejection of rapture stems from not taking the literal-historical-grammatical interpretation of the Bible, so yes other doctrinal views are usually affected also.LOL, "some other events". BTW, I totally agree with your point about believing the rapture isn't a salvation issue.
That said, I have come to understand that rejection of the rapture doctrine often leads to other more serious problems. Perhaps most notably, Replacement and/or Kingdom Now (or Dominionism) theology are there waiting in the wings, ready to steer believers off on some truly frightening theological tangents. Whether promoted by hard-core Calvinists or the NAR, these become open doors to rather more significant errors where issues of soteriology are more likely to involved.
It seems to me that the AC could be visible and active on the world stage while we are still here, as someone we suspect could be him, but it won't be known for certain until after we are gone. When he signs the seven-year covenant, he will be revealed to be the AC--that's what I think "revealed" means: he is officially "outed." But I don't see where the Bible forbids him from being a public person and a likely person before the moment of "revealing." I could be wrong, lol.
I think with her, she is looking at the whole picture and the wonderful end results of the new heavens and new Earth, and not only the return of the Lord. She may have read Isaiah 60 & 61: and Rev 20 thru 22. BTW sawas, you call it "the rapture doctrine." In what sense do you mean it is a doctrine?LOL, "some other events". BTW, I totally agree with your point about believing the rapture isn't a salvation issue.
That said, I have come to understand that rejection of the rapture doctrine often leads to other more serious problems. Perhaps most notably, Replacement and/or Kingdom Now (or Dominionism) theology are there waiting in the wings, ready to steer believers off on some truly frightening theological tangents. Whether promoted by hard-core Calvinists or the NAR, these become open doors to rather more significant errors where issues of soteriology are more likely to be involved.
Hey Phil - Sounds like I might have ruffled your feathers some, which was definitely not my intention. Certainly in the context of this thread, the simplification of pre-Second-Advent (or pre-Millennial) events as "some other events" just happened to strike my funny-bone. Sort of like saying, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, yada, yada, yada." It just made me laugh out loud (LOL). But, truly, no offense was intended toward you personally.I think with her, she is looking at the whole picture and the wonderful end results of the new heavens and new Earth, and not only the return of the Lord. She may have read Isaiah 60 & 61: and Rev 20 thru 22. BTW sawas, you call it "the rapture doctrine." In what sense do you mean it is a doctrine?
Also, when I said "some other events will happen before then," I was not trying to lesson them: they are truly VERY IMPORTANT EVENTS. And there is no "LOL" as you say about it. When she is translated with all believers she will not only believe it, she will experience it.
And, sawas, after reading your statement above, to put it nicely, I think you are making a mountain out of a mole hill.
What a nicely worded response.Hey Phil - Sounds like I might have ruffled your feathers some, which was definitely not my intention. Certainly in the context of this thread, the simplification of pre-Second-Advent (or pre-Millennial) events as "some other events" just happened to strike my funny-bone. Sort of like saying, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, yada, yada, yada." It just made me laugh out loud (LOL). But, truly, no offense was intended toward you personally.
To your other points, all I can say is that this is the Rapture Forum, so you can expect that most here (me included): (a) take the Rapture Doctrine seriously and (b) wish to better understand, communicate, and defend it's importance and implications to both believers and non-believers alike. Most would, at the very least, promote it on the basis of 1 Thessalonians 1:18 (Wherefore comfort one another with these words.). Implicitly, the lack of understanding of this doctrine can be expected to be accompanied by distress. The context of that chapter suggests that such distress would be experienced by Christians facing the prospect of enduring the Tribulation. In my opinion, if that was a relevant point to be made to a 1st century church, it is highly relevant today. If you wish to argue that rejection of the Rapture Doctrine can't also lead to other more serious doctrinal errors, I would be happy to discuss that with you further.
Note: I use the word doctrine in it's natural, literal sense: a principle or position or the body of principles in a branch of knowledge or system of belief (Merriam Webster). Also, various Bible versions (such as the NASB and NIV) translate didachē as "teachings", rather than doctrines, which is utilized in the KJV.
Thanks, Phil, you bet and likewise.Thanks for responding sawas. No offense taken.