"The Rapture"

[anthony1054]

Alot of my friends are Protestant and they firmly believe in "The Rapture." I know this is a relatively new doctrine and that its only known in non-denominational branches. What is the Eastern Orthodox Church's view on this doctrine?

[choy]

Alot of my friends are Protestant and they firmly believe in "The Rapture." I know this is a relatively new doctrine and that its only known in non-denominational branches. What is the Eastern Orthodox Church's view on this doctrine?

It's unpatristic and has no basis in tradition.

[anthony1054]

Alot of my friends are Protestant and they firmly believe in "The Rapture." I know this is a relatively new doctrine and that its only known in non-denominational branches. What is the Eastern Orthodox Church's view on this doctrine?

It's unpatristic and has no basis in tradition.

I thought as much, how can I convince my Protestant friends that it is not a legit doctrine?

[Achronos]

So did this solely come from John Nelson Darby or do I have it wrong?

[dhinuus]

I thought as much, how can I convince my Protestant friends that it is not a legit doctrine?

https://sites.google.com/site/syrianorthodox/home/articles/rapture

[JamesR]

Try showing them the passages in Thessalonians which specifically say that Jesus won't come until AFTER the Anti-Christ and all the evil has passed, which clearly contradicts the Rapture view that we will all be "disappeared/rapture'd" before all the evil happens.

[Timon]

So the "Left Behind" books arent prophetic literature written by modern day Church Fathers???

[primuspilus]

Try showing them the passages in Thessalonians which specifically say that Jesus won't come until AFTER the Anti-Christ and all the evil has passed, which clearly contradicts the Rapture view that we will all be "disappeared/rapture'd" before all the evil happens.

Thats actually not what the Rapture is about. The Rapture is a theory that before (or during, or after) the tribulation, the Christians will be removed from the Earth and the Earth handed over to the Anti-Christ for a time before the 2nd coming of Christ. The 2nd Coming and the Rapture are two distinctly different events, both of which are fiercely ascribed to by dispensationalists.

IIRC, the Rapture started by the visions of some Scottish girl in the 17th century. I could be wrong about that though. I know Fr. Damick did a talk on it a while back that was quite good.

[genesisone]

Try showing them the passages in Thessalonians which specifically say that Jesus won't come until AFTER the Anti-Christ and all the evil has passed, which clearly contradicts the Rapture view that we will all be "disappeared/rapture'd" before all the evil happens.

You've got the right idea, and this works if you really do know the Scriptures better than the person with whom you are arguing discussing the matter.

But quite frankly, you (generic) alone aren't likely to change those minds.

All of us have our own style in dealing with others. I would feel comfortable saying something like, "Is this something Christians have always believed? If so, I'd like to do some further reading. Can you recommend some authors or commentators from say, the fifth and tenth centuries who would help me understand your position?" Some will just shut up and carry on apart from you. The more sane ones will consider what you have said and may begin to investigate true historical Christianity.

[Knee V]

Telling them that the doctrine wasn't invented until the 1830s likely won't mean much to them. They will likely say that the apostles believed in the doctrine, as evidenced by the "fact" that it is in Scripture, and the church lost the doctrine for all those centuries.

As far as ways to counter the belief to them... 

I find that passages used to defend the Rapture doctrine fall into three categories: 1) passages that require a series of logical steps in order to arrive at the conclusion that it is referring to the Rapture; 2) passages that require one to already believe in the Rapture in order to see it in the text; 3) poor exegesis/poor critical reading.

1) One example is "the marriage supper of the lamb" in Revelation. Because they are in heaven, and because the next passage still describes people being on earth, and because Christ returns several chapters later, and because Revelation is clearly chronological, and because this passage is clearly literal, it therefore means that those people were caught up to heaven prior to Christ's return and this demonstrates the truth of the Rapture.

2) One example is also in Revelation, chapter 4, I believe: "Come up hither..." If one had never heard of the Rapture, one would conclude that God is going to show John a vision of heaven and future events. But because one already believes in the Rapture, one is able to insert the Rapture into that text and imagine that that passage shows the Rapture.

3) One example is Matthew 24/25 in the Olivet Discourse. "One will be taken and the other will be left." It is easy to separate that verse from the rest of the passage and conclude that during that period of tribulation there will be people taken, and imagine that they are taken to heaven. But a proper and complete reading of the text indicates that those who are taken are taken to destruction and judgement.

[sprtslvr1973]

So did this solely come from John Nelson Darby or do I have it wrong?

I believe you are right, along with strong advocacy by American Cyrus Scofield

[sprtslvr1973]

Has anyone heard that Ireneaus held this belief?

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Faith Issues (Moderator: Michał Kalina) > Topic: "The Rapture"