Post-Trib Views That Cancel Each Other
Here are two popular arguments against the Rapture that cancel each other out. (1) The Rapture is a recent concept invented by American Christians in only the last hundred years or so and has never been believed or taught up until then. (2) The word Rapture doesn't even appear anywhere in the Bible so it's all made up.
(1) This is what's known as a straw man argument. The validity of the Rapture or any other Biblical doctrine shouldn't be accepted or rejected by its popularity. The validity of all things should be checked through Scripture. It doesn't matter what other Christians say or how many of them have said it or when, the only thing that matters is what the Bible says.
(2) The word Rapture itself doesn't appear in the Bible because our Bibles are written in English. The word Rapture itself was carried over into our vernacular when the Bible was still being read from the Latin translations. It comes from 1st Thessalonians 4:17. The original Greek used the word "Harpazo" which means to be "caught up" or "snatched up and taken" or "seized by force and taken" and so our English translated the word "Harpazo" into the words "caught up" but the Latin translation was "Rapere" or in some cases "Rapturo". So the subject of this event became known as "The Rapture Of The Church" long before the English translations were even in circulation.
So as you can see, these 2 arguments cancel each other out. They try to say that only Americans in the last 100 years or so believed in the Rapture and yet, the word itself comes from the Latin Bible which has been in circulation since the 4th century!!! This is probably why I've heard many Protestants who are against the Rapture say, "The Rapture is a Catholic doctrine. It's not Biblical." But I've also heard many Catholics say that the Rapture is a doctrine that they don't agree with because it came out of the Protestant Reformation. LOL!!!
(1) This is what's known as a straw man argument. The validity of the Rapture or any other Biblical doctrine shouldn't be accepted or rejected by its popularity. The validity of all things should be checked through Scripture. It doesn't matter what other Christians say or how many of them have said it or when, the only thing that matters is what the Bible says.
(2) The word Rapture itself doesn't appear in the Bible because our Bibles are written in English. The word Rapture itself was carried over into our vernacular when the Bible was still being read from the Latin translations. It comes from 1st Thessalonians 4:17. The original Greek used the word "Harpazo" which means to be "caught up" or "snatched up and taken" or "seized by force and taken" and so our English translated the word "Harpazo" into the words "caught up" but the Latin translation was "Rapere" or in some cases "Rapturo". So the subject of this event became known as "The Rapture Of The Church" long before the English translations were even in circulation.
So as you can see, these 2 arguments cancel each other out. They try to say that only Americans in the last 100 years or so believed in the Rapture and yet, the word itself comes from the Latin Bible which has been in circulation since the 4th century!!! This is probably why I've heard many Protestants who are against the Rapture say, "The Rapture is a Catholic doctrine. It's not Biblical." But I've also heard many Catholics say that the Rapture is a doctrine that they don't agree with because it came out of the Protestant Reformation. LOL!!!
We're Going Home: The Rapture
The Anger Of Post-Tribulationists
