Peter, who traveled with Paul, taught and addressed the same people as Paul. Peter wrote the church in his letters. Peter was called a rock by Jesus and Jesus told him that on this rock I will build my church. Peter taught the church the second coming resurrection, after which he inform them how to live because the heavens were going to pass away. In this context of eschatology he then informs us that people twist what Paul teaches on this matter…. goes on to state that these people twist the rest of Scripture as well and then calls them wicked.
Knowing this we come to understand how messed up the views are that present speculation, opinion and assumption as main precepts of their doctrine. Here are some examples of doctrine derived from speculation:
—Jacobs trouble is the great tribulation
—The temple will be rebuilt
—The anti-Christ will make a covenant with many
—The sacrifices and offerings will again be reinstated
—The restrainer is the church or Holy Spirit rather than a restraint
If these doctrines were more than speculations then we would be able to compare Scripture to Scripture to derive with the same conclusion. However, all of these concepts are pure speculation resulting in no Scriptural support.
The concept of the “Rapture” has a different flavor. Because the Word of God addresses this event in other terms such as the “resurrection of the dead,” we cannot say that this event doesn’t exist. It is true that the word “rapture” doesn’t exist in the Word of God. The purpose for coining the word has an agenda in which to create another gospel. That is the teaching of duel returns of Christ.
The Post Tribulational view in its purest sense is taught in Acts 1:9-12. Here Jesus models His return. He leaves the Mount of Olives to the Sky/Clouds and then to Heaven. The disciples are then searching the sky for more when they are questioned by two men. They are then told that Jesus will return in “like manner” that He left. So the purest sense of the Word is Jesus returning from heaven to the sky/clouds and the to the Mount of Olives.
I find it interesting that the disciples are questioned in their staring into heaven looking for more. Today man is still searching for more, and fills in what they think are blanks. Just because the Word doesn’t state something doesn’t give us license to make up whatever we want and indoctrinate the masses. We need to take a stand against speculation and return to a pure doctrine.
The word “rapture” was first used in the application of eschatology with the direct purpose to deceive. Perhaps the person who first used it didn’t have that deceptive intention, however when you do not love the truth, you will be pushed around by any wind of doctrine by the great deceiver.
The word to describe the “resurrection of the dead,” is harpazio in the Greek. This word is correctly translated to “taken” in English. Why then do we need a “Latin” term to define this word? It is true that the Catholic church uses Latin, but their official stance on the term “rapture” is that it confuses people concerning the return of Christ. How true! The term rapture was first coined circa 1600 and meant kidnapped and raped. Today that term is used to describe a conjured event of a return of Christ prior to when the Word states the resurrection of the dead happens.