CrossLinks Topical Index - RA


rabbi : rabbi - Jesus; seated - rabbi
rabbi - Jesus : Mat. 26:25; Mat. 26:49; Mark 9:5; Mark 11:21; Mark 14:45; John 1:38; John 1:49; John 3:2; John 3:26; John 4:31; John 6:25; John 9:2; John 11:8; John 20:16
rabbi - seated : seated - rabbi
Rabbi Talks With Jesus, A : Ref-0137
Rabbi Talks With Jesus, A - A Rabbi Talks With Jesus : Ref-0137
Rabbi Talks With Jesus, A - A Rabbi Talks With Jesus - Neusner, Jacob. A Rabbi Talks With Jesus : Ref-0137
Rabbi Talks With Jesus, A - Neusner, Jacob. A Rabbi Talks With Jesus : Ref-0137
rabbit : rabbit - chews cud
rabbit - chews cud : Lev. 11:6

✪ The Hebrew phrase ‘chew the cud’ simply means ‘raising up what has been swallowed’. Coneys and rabbits go through such similar motions to ruminants that Linnaeus, the father of modern classification (and a creationist), at first classified them as ruminants. Also, rabbits and hares practise ‘refection,’ which is essentially the same principle as rumination, and does indeed ‘raise up what has been swallowed’. The food goes right through the rabbit and is passed out as a special type of dropping. These are re-eaten, and can now nourish the rabbit as they have already been partly digested.


Rabinovici, Schoschana, Thanks to My Mother : Ref-1371
Rabinovici, Schoschana, Thanks to My Mother - Kindle-0015 : Ref-1371
Rabinovici, Schoschana, Thanks to My Mother - Kindle-0015 - Thanks to My Mother, Schoschana Rabinovici : Ref-1371
Rabinovici, Schoschana, Thanks to My Mother - Thanks to My Mother, Schoschana Rabinovici : Ref-1371
rachaph : hovering - rachaph
rachaph - hovering : hovering - rachaph
Rachel : Bethlehem - Rachel buried; chronology - B.C. 1901 (circa) - Rachel dies - Benjamin born - Steinmann ; chronology - B.C. 1923 - Jacob marries Leah and Rachel - Steinmann ; Jacob - wives given ; Rachel - death of; Rachel - favored over Leah; Rachel - saddle not searched; Rachel - sons of; Rachel - sons of mail Bilhah; Rachel - tomb - mosque ; Rachel - weeping
Rachel - buried in Bethlehem : Bethlehem - Rachel buried
Rachel - death of : Gen. 35:19
Rachel - dies - Benjamin born - date - Steinmann : chronology - B.C. 1901 (circa) - Rachel dies - Benjamin born - Steinmann
Rachel - favored over Leah : Gen. 33:2
Rachel - given to Jacob : Jacob - wives given
Rachel - marries Jacob - date - Steinmann : chronology - B.C. 1923 - Jacob marries Leah and Rachel - Steinmann
Rachel - saddle not searched : Gen. 31:34; Lev. 15:9; Lev. 15:19-22
Rachel - sons of : Gen. 35:24
Rachel - sons of mail Bilhah : Gen. 35:25
Rachel - tomb - mosque : Gen. 35:19; Gen. 48:7; 1S. 10:2

"The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and cultural Organization (UNESCO) has officially voted to declare Rachel’s Tomb to be a mosque. It also called for Rachel’s Tomb and the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron -- the burial site of the other biblical patriarchs and matriarchs -- to be removed from Israel’s National Heritage list. The Palestinian Authority (PA) claims Rachel’s Tomb is holy to Muslims as the site of the Bilal Bin Rabah Mosque and demands control over both the Tomb and the Tomb of the Patriarchs, as well as the Temple Mount in Jerusalem." Ref-0057, January/February 2011, p. 41.


Rachel - weeping : Jer. 31:15; Jer. 40:1-2; Mat. 2:18

"Jeremiah 31:15 speaks of Ramah as the place of weeping because it was there the Babylonians gathered the captive young men of Judah before sending them into exile (Jer 40:1-2). There Rachel was said to weep for her children. Obviously, the matriarch Rachel had been long dead when Jeremiah wrote. So Jeremiah did not use her name literally (i.e., weeping from her grave) but rather symbolically, representing all of Jewish mothers. Thus Jeremiah states that Jewish mothers were weeping for their sons who had died in the war with Babylon and for the young men who were being taken to a distant land as captives. Jeremiah was referring to the deep pain of Jewish mothers at the loss of their young men to Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians. So the question is, Since Jer 31:15 refers to the Babylonian exile, how could Matthew cite the Slaughter of the innocents as fulfilling this text?" Ref-1272, p. 105. "The reason for Matthew's citation of Jer 31:15 was to show that Scripture had a continuing relevance. As David L. Cooper wrote, "Matthew simply applies the language of this prophecy to a similar situation of his day." Just as Rachel represented Jewish mothers who wept at the death and exile of their sons, so Jewish mothers once again mourned when wicked Herod murdered their children. And Rachel has continued to lament and has refused to be consoled for her children as they have been murdered by Crusaders, Nazis, and terrorists. Sadly, this is a Scripture that has had continued relevance for centuries." Ref-1272, p. 108. "[By quoting this text, Matthew] understood a principle in a biblical passage and then applied it to [his] contemporary situation. Thus Matthew recognized that Jeremiah wrote of the suffering of Rachel, the personification of Jewish mothers, at the exile. He, in turn, applied the principle that the Jewish mothers of Bethlehem still wept because of the suffering of their children at the hands of wicked Herod." Ref-1272, p. 108.


radioactive decay : radioactive decay - rate
radioactive decay - rate : Gen. 1:1

✪ Woodmorappe J., March 21, 2001. Billionfold Acceleration of Radioactivity Demonstrated in Laboratory. [https://www.AnswersInGenesis.org/docs2001/0321_acc_beta_decay.asp]. "When uranium decays to lead, a by-product of this process is the formation of helium, a very light, inert gas, which readily escapes from rock. Certain crystals called zircons, obtained from drilling into very deep granites, contain uranium which has partly decayed into lead [and released helium]. By measuring the amount of uranium and ‘radiogenic lead’ in these crystals, one can calculate that, if the decay rate has been constant, about 1.5 billion years must have passed. . . . However, there is a significant proportion of helium from that ‘1.5 billion years of decay’ still inside the zircons. . . . In fact, the results show that because of all the helium still in the zircons, these crystals (and since this is Precambrian basement granite, by implication the whole earth) could not be older than 14,000 years. In other words, in only a few thousand years, 1.5 billion years’ worth (at today's rates) of radioactive decay has taken place. Interestingly, the data have since been refined and updated to give a date of 5,680 (+/- 2000) years. . . . Another dramatic breakthrough concerns radiocarbon. It's long been known that radiocarbon (i.e. carbon-14) keeps popping up reliably in samples (of coal, oil, gas, etc.) which are supposed to be ‘millions of years’ old. However, with the short half-life of C14 it should decay to zero in only some tens of thousands of years at most. . . . Dr. Baumgardner sent five diamonds to be analyzed for C14. It was the first time this had been attempted, and the answer came back positive -- C14 was present. The diamonds, formed deep inside the earth, are assumed by evolutionists to be over a billion years old. Nevertheless they contained radioactive carbon, even though, if the billion-year age were correct, they ‘shouldn't have’. This is exceptionally striking evidence, because a diamond has remarkably strong lattice bonds (that's why it's the hardest substance known), so subsequent atmospheric or biological contamination should not find its way into the interior. The diamonds’ carbon-dated ‘age’ of about 58,000 years is thus an upper limit for the age of the whol eearth." Carl Wieland, Radiometric Dating Breakthroughs, Ref-0028, 26(2) March-May 2004, pp. 42-44. "In the case of radiometric dating the assumptions are: (1) we know the rock’s initial conditions, (2) the rock has remained a closed system for millions/billions of years, and (3) the radioactive decay rate of the isotope in question has remained constant all that time. All three assumptions are known to be unreliable,2 casting such doubt on radiometric dating that geologists, whether evolutionist or creationist, rarely accept a result without question. Instead, part of the standard dating procedure is to check the calculated ‘age’ against what is expected, and to change the assumptions so the result makes sense." Shaun Doyle and Tas Walker, BioLogos and the age of the earth: Pushing an anti-biblical doctrine [http://creation.mobi/biologos-age-earth] accessed 20121003. "Recent research by physicists has suggested that there is some correlation between changes in solar activity and radioactive decay rates. Jere Jenkins and Ephraim Fischbach (from Purdue University, Indiana), for instance, have found that there appears to be a correlation between the radioactive decay rate of 32Si and 226Ra on the earth and changes relating to the sun’s activity. . . . changes observed in decay rates is small, perhaps of the order of less than 1 percent over the annual cycle, but then any changes in the distance from the earth to the sun is also relatively small. . . . Although at present the identified size of changes are quite small, there are perhaps early observational indications that larger changes in decay rates are possible." Andrew Sibley, Variable radioactive decay rates and the changes in solar activity, Ref-0784 27(2) 2013, 3-4, pp. 3-4. We know about Abraham Lincoln through eyewitness reports and a written record. If something connected with Abraham Lincoln (the paper he wrote on, or his toenail) carbon-dated at 1,500 years we would not believe the carbon date over the historical evidence. We would know that something was wrong, even if we did not know exactly what. It is the same for Christians who believe the Bible. We accept that as a written record of eyewitness reports. We know that there must be a problem with any date that contradicts the biblical record, even if we don’t know exactly what. Tasman B. Walker, A Christian Response to Radiometric Dating, p. 45. Creation Ministries International [http://creation.com/images/pdfs/other/5292wiens_dating.pdf] accessed 20140208. See 2014020801.pdf ". . . the various isotope combinations used in the isochron method of dating are clearly discordant—they do not produce the same age for a given rock formation.5Second, the isochron method gives erroneous ages for rock formations of known age.6 Specifically, rocks gathered from recently erupted Mt. Ngauruhoe in New Zealand gave a K-Ar date of 270,000 to 3.5 million years, a Rb-Sr date of over 133 million years, a Sm-Nd date of nearly 200 million years, and Pb-Pb dates of 3.9 billion years—all this from rocks known to be less than 60 years old! Another example involves lavas from the Virunga Toro-Ankole regions of the east African Rift Valleys.7 Lavas from these rift valleys known to be Pliocene (<∼ 5 million years) or younger give a Rb-Sr isochron model age of 773 million years. Igneous rocks on the rim of the Grand Canyon give dates older than the igneous rocks at the bottom, contrary to their stratigraphic placement.8 Clearly, the model does not reliably reproduce the observational data and therefore must be modified or used with appropriate caveats." Vernon R. Cupps, "The Iconic Isochron: Radioactive Dating, Part 2", Institute for Creation Research, Acts & Facts. 43 (11). [http://www.icr.org/article/8371/] accessed 20141106. See 2014110601.htm. "Rana even writes, on page 12, “The goal of chapter three is to demonstrate why radiometric dating is trustworthy [emphasis in the original].” That’s a curious statement if radiometric dating is unquestioned." Mark Armitage, Utterly preserved cells are not remnants--a critique of Dinosaur Blood and the Age of the Earth, Ref-0784, 31(1) 2017, 46-50, p. 46. "there has been an observed solar influence on some nuclear decay rates. If we are just now discovering influences on some decay rates such as these solar ones, who knows what other influences that we now nothing about might also alter these ‘constant’ rates?" Mark Armitage, Utterly preserved cells are not remnants--a critique of Dinosaur Blood and the Age of the Earth, Ref-0784, 31(1) 2017, 46-50, p. 46. "He also ignores the well-documented existence in the literature of strong 14C signals in fossil shells and bones, oils, coals, and diamonds supposedly millions and billions of years old." Mark Armitage, Utterly preserved cells are not remnants--a critique of Dinosaur Blood and the Age of the Earth, Ref-0784, 31(1) 2017, 46-50, p. 47.


radioisotope dating : radioisotope dating - inaccurate
radioisotope dating - inaccurate :

"The following dates (in millions of years) utilize the potassium-argon method. 1. Hualalai, basalt (Hawaii, A.D. 1800-1801) = 1.60 +/- 0.16 and 1.41 +/- 0.08 (2 samples) 2. Mt. Etna, basalt (Sicily, 122 BC) = 0.25 +/- 0.08 3. Mt. Etna, basalt (Sicily, A.D. 1792) = 0.35 +/- 0.08 4. Mt. Lassen, plagioclase (California, A.D. 1915) = 0.11 +/- 0.03 5. Sunset Crater, basalt (Arizona, A.D. 1064-1065) = 0.27 +/- 0.09 and 0.25 +/- 0.15 (two samples) 6. Mt. St. Helens lavadome, whole rock (Washington, A.D. 1980-1986) = 0.35 +/- 0.05 7. Mt. St. Helens lavadome, feldspar (Washington, A.D. 1980-1986) = 0.34 +/- 0.06 8. Mt. St. Helens lavadome, amphibole (Washington, A.D. 1980-1986) = 0.9 +/- 0.2 9. Mt. St. Helens lavadome, pyroxene (Washington, A.D. 1980-1986) = 1.7 +/- 0.3 10. Mt. St. Helens lavadome, pyroxene (Washington, A.D. 1980-1986) = 2.8 +/- 0.6" Ref-0003, 23(3) June-August 2001, pp. 24-25. "In July 1997 a group of seven young-earth scientist joined together to address the problem that such large amounts of nuclear transmutation seemed to pose to defending the Bible’s account of earth history. This group, which became known as the Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth (RATE) team, undertook eight major research projects, the technical details and results of which are presented in the RATE final technical report. Summarized in a few brief words, RATE found multiple lines of objective radioisotope evidence that nuclear transmutation rates had not been constant over time, as widely assumed, but had been dramatically higher during (probably only two) brief episodes in the earth’s past." John Baumgardner, Do radioisotope methods yield trustworthy relative ages for the earth’s rocks?, Ref-0784 26(3) 2012, 68-75, p. 68 "Although there are many naturally occurring radioactive transformations, there are several Parent-Daughter transformations that are commonly used for radiometric dating of rocks. These are listed in Table 1 along with the current half-lives." Jim Mason, Radiometric Dating, Ref-1370, loc. 4818. "While the theory of radiometric dating and the associated calculations are pretty straightforward, they are based on a number of assumptions. These are: 1. The amount of daughter element present in the rock at the time it was formed is zero (but see the section on isochron dating below). 2. The rock has remained as a closed system since the time of its formation, which, in turn, means that: a. no parent element has been deposited in or removed from the rock since its formation, and b. no daughter element has been deposited in or removed from the rock since its formation. 3. The rate of transformation (i.e. the half-life) has remained constant at today’s rate throughout the entire period. These all relate to things that have happened in the past, so there is no way of knowing whether they are true unless there has been a trustworthy eye-witness watching the rock throughout its history." Jim Mason, Radiometric Dating, Ref-1370, loc. 4859. "the findings of scientists working on the RATE project (Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth), sponsored by the Institute for Creation Research, who concluded there was a pulse of accelerated radioactive decay around the time of the Flood. This was strongly indicated by helium diffusion experiments (see discussion later) and supported by other lines of evidence from the analysis of radiohalos and fission tracks. When, how much and by what mechanism this extra decay happened is still a matter of debate." Jim Mason, Radiometric Dating, Ref-1370, loc. 5010. "14C dating cannot determine ages of things that are theoretically older than about 90,000 years." Jim Mason, Radiometric Dating, Ref-1370, loc. 5063. "Whole rock model measurements of the Mt. St. Helen’s lava dome formed in 1984 give an age of 350,000 years, while mineral model ages range from 340,000 years to 2.5 million years, depending on which mineral within the rock is used." Jim Mason, Radiometric Dating, Ref-1370, loc. 5158. "Whole rock ages for lava flows from Mt. Ngaurahoe in NZ formed from 1945 to 1975 range up to 2.5 million years and isochron ages for these same rocks range from 133 million to 3.9 billion years." Jim Mason, Radiometric Dating, Ref-1370, loc. 5160. "Radiocarbon (14C), which should be undetectable after about 90,000 years, is found in abundance in coal allegedly ranging" Jim Mason, Radiometric Dating, Ref-1370, loc. 5163. "in age from 35 million to 315 million years and in diamonds allegedly 1–3 billion years old. Moreover, the amount of radiocarbon in both the coal and the diamonds is approximately the same, indicating that they were all formed at about the same time." Jim Mason, Radiometric Dating, Ref-1370, loc. 5164. "It would also seem reasonable to propose that God created some of all the isotopes of each element at the beginning in the primordial material, including those isotopes that subsequently also formed by radioisotope decay as daughter isotopes from parent isotopes, regardless of when radioisotope decay started. In other words, when God made the primordial material He included in it 206Pb, 207Pb, and 208Pb atoms along with 238U, 235U, and 232Th atoms. It is reasonable to posit that He did, given that when He created the “primordial material” it likely had to have some initial isotopic ratios." -- 20151216213326.pdf, p. 469.


radiometric : age - radiometric age of earth and moon ; radioactive decay - rate
radiometric - age of earth and moon : age - radiometric age of earth and moon
radiometric - dating : radioactive decay - rate
Radmacher, E. D., Allen, R. B., & House, H. W. (1997). The Nelson study Bible : New King James Version. Nashville: T. Nelson Publishers. : Ref-0526
Radmacher, E. D., Allen, R. B., & House, H. W. (1997). The Nelson study Bible : New King James Version. Nashville: T. Nelson Publishers. - Logos-0286 : Ref-0526
Radmacher, Earl D, ed. The Nelson Study Bible : Ref-0107
Radmacher, Earl D, ed. The Nelson Study Bible - Nelson Study Bible, The : Ref-0107
Radmacher, Earl D, ed. The Nelson Study Bible - Nelson Study Bible, The - The Nelson Study Bible : Ref-0107
rags : rags - filthy
rags - filthy : Isa. 64:6
Rahab : Boaz - mother Rahab; Egypt - Rahab; Rahab - faith
Rahab - Egypt : Egypt - Rahab
Rahab - faith : Jos. 2:11
Rahab - mother of Boaz : Boaz - mother Rahab
Rahlfs, Septuaginta : Ref-0227 ; Ref-0809
Rahlfs, Septuaginta - Logos-0530 : Ref-0809
Rahlfs, Septuaginta - Logos-0530 - Septuaginta, Rahlfs : Ref-0809
Rahlfs, Septuaginta - Septuaginta, Rahlfs : Ref-0227 ; Ref-0809
Rahlfs, Septuaginta - Septuaginta, Rahlfs - Septuaginta, Rahlfs : Ref-0227 ; Ref-0809
rain : drought - from God; Elijah - rain stopped; rain - blessing; rain - early and latter; rain - first occurrence ; rain - from prayer; rain - Messiah like; rain - none as judgment; rain - none before flood; rain - righteousness; water - hydrological cycle
rain - blessing : Isa. 30:23
rain - early and latter : Deu. 11:14; Pr. 16:15; Jer. 5:24
rain - first occurrence : Gen. 2:6; Gen. 7:4; Gen. 7:11

✪ See rainbow. "Many older creationist models asserted that there was no rain or rainbow before the Flood . . . Yet this first passage is describing the situation before Man was created; it is silent on whether there was subsequent rain in the 1656 years before the Flood (Genesis 5). And there are plenty of examples in Scripture where God took pre-existing objects or actions and bestowed a new covenantal meaning on them. For example, the bread and wine obviously pre-dated the Lord’s Supper. Furthermore, the Bible gives no indication that the ‘laws of nature’ . . . were any different before the Flood from what they are now. Yet they would have to be if there were no evaporation, precipitation and differential refraction before the Flood." Ref-0784, Jonathan Sarfati, Flood models and biblical realism, 24(3), 46:53, p. 46. (In reality, the question of whether there was some evaporation (and condensation) or whether refraction was possible before the Flood has no bearing on the matter.)


rain - from prayer : 1S. 12:18; 1K. 8:35; 2Chr. 6:26; Jas. 5:17
rain - hydrological cycle : water - hydrological cycle
rain - lack from God : drought - from God
rain - Messiah like : Ps. 72:6
rain - none as judgment : Jer. 3:3
rain - none before flood : Gen. 2:5-6; Gen. 7:11
rain - righteousness : Isa. 45:8
rain - stopped by Elijah : Elijah - rain stopped
rainbow : rainbow - around throne; Gen. 9:13-14; Gen. 9:16; Eze. 1:28; Rev. 4:3; Rev. 10:1
rainbow - around throne : Eze. 1:28; Rev. 4:3
Rainbows From Revelation : Ref-0040
Rainbows From Revelation - Combs, James O. Rainbows From Revelation. Springfield: Tribune Publishers. 1994 : Ref-0040
raised : dead - raised
raised - dead : dead - raised
ram : Persia - represented as ram
ram - Persia represented as : Persia - represented as ram
ram's horn : shofar
RamBam : Maimonides - RamBam
RamBam - Maimonides : Maimonides - RamBam
Rameses : Rameses - Egypt - early
Rameses - Egypt - early : Gen. 47:11; Ex. 1:11; Ex. 12:37; Num. 33:3; Num. 33:5

". . . the name “Rameses” is referred to in a burial painting from the reign of Amenhotep III of the 18th Dynasty. This would precede the reign of Rameses I by at least sixty years. Moreover, the Scriptures refer to Goshen as “the land of Rameses” in the year Jacob joined his son Joseph in Egypt (Gen. 47:11) nearly 400 years before the reign of Rameses I and just over 400 years before the time of Rameses II. Remember, these Roman numeral assignments to the Pharaoh's do not appear in the Egyptian records. They have been so designated by modern scholars, thus there well could have been a famous “Rameses” long before Rameses 1 as Genesis 47:11 strongly asserts. . . . In fact, the Scripture in question (Ex. 1:11) informs us that the City of Rameses (older names = Tanis, Zoan or Avaris) was under construction and completed before the birth of Moses (cp. Ex. 2:2-10); thus it was built long before the rule of Rameses II." Ref-0186, p. 51.


Ramm, Bernard. Protestant Biblical Interpretation : Ref-0015
Ramm, Bernard. Protestant Biblical Interpretation - Protestant Biblical Interpretation : Ref-0015
Ramoth Gilead : Ramoth Gilead - city of refuge
Ramoth Gilead - city of refuge : Jos. 21:38
ransom : ransom - believers by Jesus; ransom - theory of atonement ; ransom - wicked for righteous
ransom - believers by Jesus : Isa. 53:8; Mat. 20:28; Mark 10:45; 2Cor. 5:21; 1Ti. 2:6; Heb. 2:9; 1Pe. 3:18
ransom - theory of atonement :

"Before the eleventh century the dominant teaching on this subject was as old as Origen, who believed that through sin mankind had made itself subject to the devil. The mark of this subjection was death. God in his grace wished to free men, be he was unable to because the devil's claim was just. Consequently, to neutralize Satan's claim, a ransom had to be paid in the form of a valuable person over whom Satan had no right -- a sinless person." Ref-0063, p. 282. "We must steer clear of the unbiblical idea that a ransom must be paid to the devil to secure our release. This mistaken path was taken by some in the early church, and resurfaces on the lips of the evil witch in C. S. Lewis’s The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe [p. 129]." Ref-1291, pp. 143-144.


ransom - wicked for righteous : Isa. 43:3; Pr. 11:8; Pr. 21:18
rape : rape - incident
rape - incident : Gen. 30:21; 2S. 13:14
rapist : rapist - hates victim
rapist - hates victim : 2S. 13:15
rapture : apostasy - departure? ; coming - Jesus comes two times; Elijah - rapture ; imminency - rapture ; rapture - before Antichrist revealed; rapture - church missing in Revelation; rapture - Jesus teaches ; rapture - not in view ; rapture - origin of term ; rapture - partial - advocates ; rapture - partial - AGAINST ; rapture - pilgrim’s progress ; rapture - populating the millennium ; rapture - posttribulational - AGAINST ; rapture - pre-wrath - problems ; rapture - pretribulational ; rapture - pretribulational - Darby vs. MacDonald ; rapture - pretribulational - Ephraem the Syrian A.D. 373) ; rapture - pretribulational - Increase Mather ; rapture - pretribulational - Irenaeus ; rapture - pretribulational - Joseph Mede ; rapture - pretribulational - Peter Jurieu ; rapture - pretribulational - Shepherd of Hermes A.D. 100-120 ; rapture - pretribulational - St. Victorinus ; rapture - pretribulational - views prior to 1800 ; rapture - secret? ; rapture - typological hint?; rapture - vs. second coming - contrast ; rapture - vs. second coming, rapture ; rapture - vs. second coming, second coming
rapture - apostasy : apostasy - departure?
rapture - before Antichrist revealed : 2Th. 2:8
rapture - church missing in Revelation : 2Th. 2:1; Rev. 3:22 (ekklesia, last mention until Rev. 22:16); Rev. 14:14-20; Rev. 22:16 (ekklesia, first mention since Rev. 3:22)
rapture - imminency : imminency - rapture
rapture - Jesus teaches : John 14:1-3; 1Th. 4:13-18

"However, it was the late Mennonite commentator, J. B. Smith, [J. B. Smith, A Revelation of Jesus Christ: A Commentary on the Book of Revelation (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1961), pp. 311-313] who demonstrated just how extensive the relationship of these two passages really are. . . . When it comes to a comparison between John 14:1-3 and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 we see amazing parallels. That John 14:1-3 is a rapture reference is supported by the progression of words and thoughts when compared to Paul’s more extensive rapture passage (1Th. 4:13-18).
trouble (John 14:1) vs. sorrow (1Th. 4:13)
believe (John 14:1) vs. believe (1Th. 4:14)
God, me (John 14:1) vs. Jesus, God (1Th. 4:14)
told you (John 14:2) vs. say to you (1Th. 4:15)
come again (John 14:3) vs. coming of the Lord (1Th. 4:15)
receive you (John 14:3) vs. caught up (1Th. 4:17)
to myself (John 14:3) vs. to meet the Lord (1Th. 4:17)
be where I am (John 14:3) vs. ever be with the Lord (1Th. 4:17) "
Tommy Ice, Ref-0181, Volume VIII Number 83 January 2011, p. 5. In John 13:36, Jesus tells the disciples “you shall follow Me afterward” which seems to differ in emphasis from John 14:3 where Jesus says, “I will come again and receive you to Myself.” The former seems to definitely speak of the disciple’s following Jesus in death. The latter could refer to something different, such as the Rapture.


rapture - not in view : Mat. 24:40; Luke 17:34

"You that have godly husbands, or wives, or brethren, or sisters, with whom you have been wont to dwell under the same roof, and to eat at the same table, consider how it will be with you, when you shall come to part with them;; when they shall be taken and you left (Luke 17:34-36). However you may wail and lament, when you see them parted from you, they being taken and you left . . . that you ascend not with them to meet the Lord in the air, . . ." Ref-1289, p. 261. "This view that Matthew 24:40-41 refers to judgment at the Second Advent rather than the rapture is held by numerous credible Bible interpreters. Walvoord notes: ‘According to Matthew 24:40-41, “Then there will be two men in the field; one will be taken and one will be left. Two women will be grinding at the mill; one will be taken and one will be left.” Because at the rapture, believers will be taken out of the world, some have confused this with the rapture of the church. Here, however, the situation is the reverse. The one who is left, is left to enter the kingdom; the one who is taken, is taken in judgment. This is in keeping with the illustration of the time of Noah when the ones taken away are the unbelievers’ [John F. Walvoord, Matthew: Thy Kingdom Come (Chicago: Moody, 1974), 193]. Feinberg also explains: ‘It will be a taking away judicially and in judgment. The ones left will enjoy the blessings of Christ’s reign on earth, just as Noah and his family were left to continue on earth. This is the opposite of the rapture, where those who are left go into the judgment of the Great Tribulation’ [Charles L. Feinberg, Israel in the Last Days: The Olivet Discourse (Altadena, CA: Emeth, 1953), 27]. Showers echoes: ‘Jesus was not referring to the Rapture of the church in Matthew 24. When that event takes place, all the saved will be removed from the earth to meet Christ in the air, and all the unsaved will be left on the earth. Thus, the rapture will occur in reverse of the order of things in the days of Noah and, therefore, the reverse of the order at Jesus’ coming immediately after the Great Tribulation’ [Showers, Maranatha Our Lord, Come!: A Definitive Study of the Rapture of the Church, 180]. Toussaint similarly notes, ‘Since it is parallel in thought with those who were taken in the judgment of the flood, it is best to refer the verb to those who are taken for judgment preceding the establishment of the kingdom’ [Toussaint, Behold the King: A Study of Matthew, 281]." Andy Woods, Is the Rapture in the Olivet Discourse? Pt. 1, March 31, 2017. [https://www.gracegospelpress.org/is-the-rapture-in-the-olivet-discourse-pt-1/]


rapture - of Elijah : Elijah - rapture
rapture - origin of term :

✪ The word rapture is not found in the Bible. It is based on the Latin verb rapto, which means ‘to seize’ and ‘to carry off,’ taken from the phrase ‘caught up’ in the 1Th. 4:17 of the Latin Vulgate which reads: Deinde nos, qui vivimus, qui relinquimur, simul rapiemur cum illis in nubibus obviam Christo in aera, et sic sempe cum Domino erimus.. ". . .John Darby did not invent the Rapture. Huebner is correct when he explains, ‘The word rapture was in use, to designate the catching up of the saints, long before 1832. For example, Joseph Mede (1586-1638) wrote, Therefore, it is not needful that the resurrection of those which slept in Christ, and the rapture of those which shall be left alive together with them in the air. . ." Heubner, Precious Truths Revived and Defended, p. 95. Cited in Ref-0181, October 2002, p. 3.


rapture - partial - advocates :

✪ See rapture - partial - AGAINST. "Dr. John F. Walvoord, in his book, The Rapture Question, mentions these writers: The modern theory of partial rapture seems to have originated in the writings of Robert Govett who published a book setting forth the theory as early as 1853 (Entrance Into the Kingdom). In this book he expounds his view that participation in the kingdom is conditional and depends upon worthy conduct. The most able exponent of this split rapture teaching in the twentieth century is G.H. Lang (The Revelation of Jesus Christ; Firstborn Sons: Their Rights and Risks). Another was D.M. Panton, editor of The Dawn (London) magazine (pp. 105,106). Many others have succumbed to the partial rapture error, including G.H. Pember, A. Edwin Wilson, J.A. Seiss, Edward Irving, T. Austin-Sparks, and Watchman Nee." Miles Stanford, Critique of “THE REIGN OF THE SERVANT KINGS: A Study on Eternal Security and the Final Significance of Man” by Joseph Dillow. [http://withchrist.org/mjs/reign.htm] accessed 20110115. Also see Tony Garland, Q181: George N. Peters and the Partial Rapture View [http://www.spiritandtruth.org/questions/181.htm] accessed 20121204. "The Scripture pictures the Body of Christ as one unit. And if division is indicated, it is usually between true and professing (false) believers. But partial rapturists further divide the former into worthy and unworthy believers. This splits the body of Christ. The Rapture passages pictures an all-inclusive coverage: 1 Corinthians 14:41, we . . . all; 1 Thessalonians 4:14, if we believe Jesus died and rose again: a cardinal belief; verse 16, dead in Christ; 1 Thessalonians 1:9-10; 2:19; 5:4-11." Paul Lee Tan, Rapture, Partial, Ref-0114, 347-348, p. 348.


rapture - partial - AGAINST : Gen. 19:12-13; Gen. 19:22

✪ See rapture - partial - advocates. "The story of Lot deals a serious blow to the partial rapture position. Recall that partial rapturism contends that only those believers who are earnestly waiting for, seeking, and living for the Lord will be raptured. Those believers in a backslidden state at the time of the rapture will be left behind. According to this view, the purpose of the Tribulation period is to bring the left-behind backslidden believers out of their spiritual slumber and into a sanctified state. As they are each brought out of their carnality, they will be raptured to heaven on an individual basis and at different times as the events of the Tribulation period unfold. However, the notion that carnal believers are left behind at the rapture, violates the paradigm of the Days of Lot. According to this pattern, even a backslidden believer had to be removed before judgment could come." Andy Woods, The Rapture - Part 19, SpiritAndTruth.org. [http://www.spiritandtruth.org/teaching/documents/articles/164/164.htm] accessed 20140123. "And when from v. 51 [1Cor. 15:51] he opens the “mystery” of the living saints changed without death, the modern legend of excluding many real saints, in whom the Holy Spirit dwells (else they are not properly Christian), is itself excluded as an unscriptural invention. For though we shall not all die, “we shall all be changed.” For (v. 52) “the trumpet shall sound: and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we (the then living saints) shall be changed.” Had the νεκροι been anarthrous, it might have left room for exceptions; but the article denotes the whole class, as the “we” does the survivors of God's family without exception, . . ." -- 20160114123340.pdf, p. 8.


rapture - pilgrim’s progress :

"It was also said to the same persons, "Gather my wheat into the garner." [Luke 3:17] And with that I saw many catched up and carried away into the clouds, but I was left behind. [1 Thes. 4:16,17]" Ref-0349, p. 23.


rapture - populating the millennium : Mat. 25:34; Rev. 20:7-9

"Since no wicked nations exist on earth at the beginning of the alleged millennium, having all been sent to eternal punishment; since the righteous cannot fall into sin and cannot bear children; and since the wicked dead have not yet been raised according to the premillennialist, just whom could Satan gather to war against the saints?" Floyd E. Hamilton, "The Basis of Millennial Faith" (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publ. Co., 1942), p. 135 cited in Ref-0207, pp. 339-340.


rapture - posttribulational - AGAINST : Mat. 25:31

". . .if the rapture will take place in connection with the Lord's posttribulational coming, the subsequent separation of the sheep from the goats (see Mat. 25:31ff.) will be redundant. Separation will have taken place in the very act of translation." Mayhue, Richard L., ‘Why a Pretribulational Rapture?,’ Ref-0164, Vol. 13 No. 2, Fall 2002, pp. 244-245. "The implications [of this passage] are clearly in favor of a pretribulational view. If the rapture and translation of the church occur while Christ is coming from heaven to earth in His second coming to set up His kingdom, and the church meets the Lord in the air, it is obvious that this very act would separate all the saved from the unsaved. Under these circumstances, no judgment of the nations would be necessary subsequent to the second coming of Christ, because the sheep and goats would already be separated. The implication of this passage in Matthew is that no rapture of living saints occurs at the time Christ comes to set up His kingdom." Ref-1268, p. 203.


rapture - pre-wrath - problems : 1Th. 5:2; Rev. 6:17

✪ See imminency - rapture. Major problems for the pre-wrath rapture view include: (1) the belief that the Day of the Lord follows upon the Tribulation, yet Scripture indicates that the Day of the Lord comes upon an unsuspecting world experiencing “peace and safety” (1Th. 5:2). Since the pre-wrat position holds that the Day of the Lord follows upon the opening of the seventh seal (Rev. 6:17), how--after the judgments of the first 6 seals--could anyone on earth be experiencing “peace and safety”? (2) The pre-wrath view holds that the Antichrist will be revealed and the Tribulation be complete before the rapture, which denies the many passages which teach that Christ’s coming is imminent.


rapture - pretribulational :

"Since the rapture will take all living believers to heaven, it must occur before any of those who enter the millennium are saved. Yet since believers who survive the Great Tribulation will enter the millennium, the church's rapture must take place before anyone is converted in the Tribulation." Richard Shalom Yates, "The Resurrection of the Tribulation Saints", Ref-0200 Volume 163 Number 652, October-December 2006, 453:466, p. 465.


rapture - pretribulational - Darby vs. MacDonald :

"Margaret MacDonald. . . had her vision in 1830; Darby came to the pre-trib position in 1827. Besides, Margaret's vision had nothing in it about a pre-trib rapture. Anyone who thinks she was his source hasn't read the account of her vision. That is why I reprinted it in the appendix of my book, The Rapture." Ref-0181, October 2002, p. 1. "Some have argued that J. N. Darby got his idea for the pre-trib rapture from either Edward Irving or another Irvingite source. Such a view is not possible since Edward Irving and the Irvingites never held to a pre-trib rapture. The Irvingites did hold to a version of a two-stage second coming where the rapture occurs days before the second coming. The Irvingite view is far different than the pretribulational understanding of Darby and the Brethren." -- Thomas Ice, Did Edward Irving Invent the Pre-Trib Rapture View?, Ref-0164, Volume 27 Number 1, Spring 2016, 57-73, p. 57. See 20160522181858.pdf "John Bray agrees that Macdonald was teaching a single coming, not a two-staged event. “The only thing new in her revelation itself seems to be that of just Spirit-filled Christians being caught up at the second coming of Christ following heavy trials and tribulation by the Antichrist.” In other words, Macdonald seems to have been teaching a post-tribulation and partial rapture. Bray further explains: It seems to me that Margaret MacDonald was saying that Christians WILL face the temptation of the false Christ (antichrist) and be in “an awfully dangerous situation”, and that only the Spirit IN US will enable us to be kept from being deceived; and that as the Spirit works, so will the antichrist; but the pouring out of the Spirit will “fit us to enter into the marriage supper of the Lamb”, and those filled with the Spirit would be taken while the others would be left . . . Margaret MacDonald did teach a partial rapture, of course, but this did not necessarily mean that the teaching included a tribulation period FOLLOWING THAT for the other Christians . . . It would not be right to take for granted that Margaret MacDonald believed in a tribulation period following the appearing of Christ unless she had definitely said so." -- Thomas Ice, Did Edward Irving Invent the Pre-Trib Rapture View?, Ref-0164, Volume 27 Number 1, Spring 2016, 57-73, pp. 62-63. See 20160522181858.pdf "There will be outward trial too, but “tis principally temptation”. It is brought on by the outpouring of the Spirit, and will just in-crease in proportion as the Spirit is poured out. The trial of the Church is from the Antichrist. It is by being filled with the Spirit that we shall be kept." -- Thomas Ice, Did Edward Irving Invent the Pre-Trib Rapture View?, Ref-0164, Volume 27 Number 1, Spring 2016, 57-73, p. 62. See 20160522181858.pdf "Roy Huebner considers MacPherson's charges as “using slander that J. N. Darby took the [truth of the] pretribulation rapture from those very opposing, demon-inspired utterances.” He concludes that MacPherson: . . . did not profit by reading the utterances allegedly by Miss M. M. Instead of apprehending the plain import of her statements, as given by R. Norton, which has some affinity to the post-tribulation scheme and no real resemblance to the pretribulation rapture and dispensational truth, he has read into it what he appears so anxious to find." -- Thomas Ice, Did Edward Irving Invent the Pre-Trib Rapture View?, Ref-0164, Volume 27 Number 1, Spring 2016, 57-73, p. 65. See 20160522181858.pdf "Columba Graham Flegg, an Irvingite scholar who grew up within that church, claims the differences between the two movements are far-reaching: The later Powerscourt Conferences were dominated by the new sect. The Brethren took a futurist view of the Apocalypse, attacking particularly the interpretation of prophetic ‘days' as ‘years', so important for all historicists, including the Catholic Apostolics . . . It was the adoption of this futurist eschatology by a body of Christians which gave it the strength to become a serious rival to the alternative historicist eschatology of the Catholic Apostolics and others. Darby introduced the concept of a secret rapture to take place “at any moment”, a belief which subsequently became one of the chief hallmarks of Brethren eschatology. He also taught that the “true” Church was invisible and spiritual. Both these ideas were in sharp contrast to Catholic Apostolic teaching, and were eventually to lead to schism among the Brethren. There were thus very significant differences between the two eschatologies, and attempts to see any direct influence of one upon the other seem unlikely to succeed—they had a number of common roots, but are much more notable for their points of disagreement. Several writers have attempted to trace Darby's secret rapture theory to a prophetic statement associated with Irving, but their arguments do not stand up to serious criticism." -- Thomas Ice, Did Edward Irving Invent the Pre-Trib Rapture View?, Ref-0164, Volume 27 Number 1, Spring 2016, 57-73, pp. 70-71. See 20160522181858.pdf ". . . the Irvingite rapture is part of the second coming. Thus, their doctrine teaches a brief interval between the rapture and the second advent, not a rapture followed by a multi-year tribulation and then a new event, the second coming." -- Thomas Ice, Did Edward Irving Invent the Pre-Trib Rapture View?, Ref-0164, Volume 27 Number 1, Spring 2016, 57-73, p. 72. See 20160522181858.pdf


rapture - pretribulational - Ephraem the Syrian A.D. 373) :

"For all the saints and Elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins." Ephraem the Syrian, A.D. 373. Ref-0031, p. 108. "An apocalyptic sermon containing two protorapture statements, Pseudo-Ephraem, is known today as Sermon on the End of the World, with extant copies in Syriac, Greek, and Latin. The sermon claims the authorship of the Syrian church father Ephraem of Nisibis (306-373). . . . While there is little support for Ephraem as the author . . . Pseudo-Ephraem was greatly influenced by his writings. The exact date of the original sermon is uncertain and dates range from as early as 373 to as late as 565-627. While a late date (seventh century) seems to have the consensus of support, any reasonable date is acceptable in relation to the history of the Rapture and premillennialism. . . . [The] words All the saints and elect of God are gathered together before the tribulation, which is to dome, and are taken to the Lord, in order that they may not see at any time the confusion which overwhelms the world because of our sins., along with an earlier similar statement, proclaim a divine act of mercy and intervention enacted upon believers prior to a time of great calamity. . . . [He] has Christians being removed from the time of tribulation, even though it is a three and one-half rather than a seven-year Tribulation." Timothy J. Demy, PSEUDO-EPHRAIM, Ref-0216, p. 329.


rapture - pretribulational - Increase Mather :

"Paul Boyer says that Increase Mather proved ‘that the saints would be caught up into the Air beforehand, thereby escaping the final conflagration -- an early formulation of the Rapture doctrine more fully elaborated in the nineteenth century.’" Thomas Ice, The Rapture, John 14, and Myths, Ref-0055, March 2001, 39, quoting Paul Boyer, When Time Shall Be No More: Prophecy Belief in Modern American Culture, 75. "Paul Boyer says that Increase Mather proved “that the saints would ‘be caught up into the Air’ beforehand, thereby escaping the final conflagration--an early formulation of the Rapture doctrine more fully elaborated in the nineteenth century.”" Thomas D. Ice, Rapture, History of the, Ref-0114, 344-347, p. 346.


rapture - pretribulational - Irenaeus :

"Another illustration of pretribulationalism may be found in Irenaeus’ book Against Heresies (Book V, Chapter xix). After describing the sinfulness of the present age, the church father Irenaeus comments: And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this [evil age], it is said, ‘There shall be tribulation such as not been since the beginning; neither shall be.’" Ref-0207, pp. 71-72.


rapture - pretribulational - Joseph Mede :

"It has been claimed that some separated the Rapture from the Second Coming as early as Joseph Mede, who is considered the father of English premillennialism, in his seminal work Clavis Apocalyptica (1627)." Thomas D. Ice, Rapture, History of the, Ref-0114, 344-347, p. 346.


rapture - pretribulational - Peter Jurieu :

"Jurieu was a ‘prominant theologian and apologist in the French Reformed Church. He came to believe that Calvinists would be restored to France, because of his interpretation of the prophecies of the Apocalypse.’ In his work, Approaching Deliverance of the Church (1687), he taught that ‘Christ would come in the air to rapture the saints and return to heaven before the battle of Armageddon. He spoke of a secret rapture prior to His coming in glory and judgment at Armageddon.’" James F. Stitzinger, "The Rapture in Twenty Centuries of Biblical Interpretation," Ref-0164 Vol. 13 No. 2, Fall 2002, p. 162. "Peter Jurieu in his book Approaching Deliverance of the Church (1687) taught that Christ would come in the air to rapture the saints and return to heaven before the battle of Armageddon. He spoke of a secret Rapture prior to His coming in glory and judgment at Armageddon." Thomas D. Ice, Rapture, History of the, Ref-0114, 344-347, p. 346.


rapture - pretribulational - Shepherd of Hermes A.D. 100-120 :

"[T]he author was told in a vision: You have escaped from the great tribulation on account of your faith, and because you did not doubt in the presence of the beast." Ref-0031, p. 230. "You have escaped from great tribulation on account of your faith, and because you did not doubt in the presence of such a beast. Go, therefore, and tell the elect of the Lord His mighty deeds, and say to them that this beast is a type of the great tribulation that is coming. If then ye prepare yourselves, and repent with all your heart, and turn to the Lord, it will be possible for you to escape it, if your heart be pure and spotless, and ye spend the rest of the days of your life in serving the Lord blamelessly." Thomas Ice, The Rapture, John 14, and Myths, Ref-0055, March 2001, 36 quoting The Shepherd of Hermas 1.4.2


rapture - pretribulational - St. Victorinus :

"As early as A.D. 270, St. Victorinus, Bishop of Petau, wrote a commentary on the book of Revelation in which he said, And I saw another great and wonderful sign, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is completed the indignation of God. For the wrath of God always strikes the obstinate people with seven plagues, that is, perfectly, as it is said in Leviticus; and these shall be in the last time, when the church shall have gone out of the midst [emphasis added]" St. Victorinus, Bishop of Petau, "The Writings of Tertullianus," trans. R.E. Wallis, Commentary on the Apocalypse of the Blessed John, vol. III, published by T. Clark, 1870, p. 428, cited by Ref-0181, October 2002, p. 3.


rapture - pretribulational - views prior to 1800 :

"Peter Jurieu in his book Approaching Deliverance of the Church (1687) taught that Christ would come in the air to Rapture the saints and return to heaven before the battle of Armageddon. He spoke of a secret Rapture prior to His coming in glory and judgment at Armageddon. Philip Doddridge's commentary on the New Testament (1738) and John Gill's commentary on the new Testament (1748) both use the term Rapture and speak of it as imminent. It is clear that these men believed that this coming will precede Christ's descent to the earth and the time of judgment. The purpose was to preserve believers from the time of judgment. James Macknight (1763) and Thomas Scott (1792) taught that the righteous will be carried to heaven, where they will be secure until the time of judgment is over." Thomas Ice, The Rapture, John 14, and Myths, Ref-0055, March 2001, 39, quoting Paul N. Benware, Understanding End Times Prophecy: A Comprehensive Approach, pp. 197-198


rapture - secret? : Heb. 9:28

"the common view that the resurrection will be a public affair, to be witnessed by the world, is now discarded as untenable in the light of Christ’s (also pertaining to “the first-fruits”) resurrection, which was strictly private. It is now held, and properly, that the members will be raised like the Head was (for if a public resurrection, humanly speaking, is desirable, then surely it ought to have been that of Christ’s), in order that the preparatory events for the coming judgment of the world may be introduced in such a manner (privately) as to establish “the snare” and “the net” intended for the unbelieving and wicked. Leading prophetical writers justly have no hesitancy in asserting that no mortal eye of unbelief shall behold the resurrection. This at once places the translation of the saints in a new aspect, and indicates, as it accompanies the resurrection, that it also is unseen (like Enoch’s and Elijah’s) by the world." Ref-0141, 2:314-315. "some of the terminology, such as "secret rapture," while widely used in the 19th Century Dispensationalism, is an almost unknown term today." -- Dennis Swanson, Charles H. Spurgeon and Eschatology: Did He Have a Discernible millennial Position?, p. 24. [http://www.spurgeon.org/eschat.php]. See 20161124144019.pdf.


rapture - typological hint? : Sos. 2:10; Sos. 2:13
rapture - vs. coming in judgment : coming - Jesus comes two times
rapture - vs. second coming - contrast : Zec. 14:4; Mal. 4:2; Mat. 24:14; Mat. 24:37-41; Mat. 25:31-34; Luke 21:11; Luke 21:15; John 14:3; Acts 1:11; 1Th. 1:10; 1Th. 3:13; 1Th. 4:13-18; 1Th. 5:1-3; 1Th. 5:9; 2Th. 1:6-9; 2Th. 2:1; 2Th. 2:3-12; Jude 1:14; Rev. 1:7; Rev. 6:12-17; Rev. 19:6-14; Rev. 20:1-7

✪ The following contrasts can be seen between the rapture and the second coming. 1. Christ comes for His own (John 14:3; 1Th. 4:17; 2Th. 2:1) vs. with His own (1Th. 3:13; Jude 1:14; Rev. 19:14). 2. He comes in the air (1Th. 4:17) vs. to the earth (Zec. 14:4; Acts 1:11). 3. He claims His bride (1Th. 4:16-17) vs. He comes with His bride (Rev. 19:6-14). 4. Removal of believers (1Th. 4:17) vs. manifestation of Christ (Mal. 4:2). 5. Only His own see Him (1Th. 4:13-18) vs. Every eye shall see Him (Rev. 1:7). 6. Tribulation begins (2Th. 1:6-9) vs. millennial kingdom begins (Rev. 20:1-7). 7. Saved are delivered from wrath (1Th. 1:10; 5:9) vs. unsaved experience the wrath of God (Rev. 6:12-17). 8. No signs precede rapture (1Th. 5:1-3) vs. signs precede second coming (Luke 21:11,15). 9. Focus is Lord and church (1Th. 4:13-18) vs. focus is Israel and kingdom (Mat. 24:14). 10. World is deceived (2Th. 2:3-12) vs. Satan is bound (Rev. 20:1-2). Ref-0083, pp. 101-102 11. At the rapture, believers depart the earth (1Th. 4:15-17), but at the final event of the second coming, unbelievers are taken away from the earth (Mat. 24:37-41). 12. At the rapture, unbelievers remain on earth, but at the final event of the second coming, believers remain on earth (Mat. 25:34). 13. At the rapture, there is no mention of establishing Christ's Kingdom on earth, but at the final event of the second coming, Christ has come to set up His Kingdom on earth (Mat. 25:31,34). Mayhue, Richard L., ‘Why a Pretribulational Rapture?,’ Ref-0164, Vol. 13 No. 2, Fall 2002, pp. 247. "No one who diligently seeks the answer to this inquiry can fail to be impressed by the fact that at first sight some confusion seems to mark the statements of Scripture with respect to it. Certain passages testify that Christ will return to earth, and stand once more on that same Olivet on which His feet last rested ere He ascended to His Father; and others tell us as plainly that He will come, not to earth, but to the air above us, and call His people up to meet Him and be with Him. These Scriptures again most clearly prove that it is His believing people who shall be “caught up,” leaving the world to run its course to its destined doom; while other Scriptures as unequivocally teach that it is not His people but the wicked who are to be weeded out, leaving the righteous “to shine forth in the kingdom of their Father.” And the confusion apparently increases when we notice that Holy Writ seems sometimes to represent the righteous who are to be thus blessed as Jews, sometimes as Christians of a dispensation in which the Jew is cast off by God. These difficulties admit of only one solution, a solution as satisfactory as it is simple; namely, that what we term the second advent of Christ is not a single event, but includes several distinct manifestations. At the first of these He will call up to Himself the righteous dead, together with His own people then living upon earth. With this event this special “day of grace” will cease, and God will again revert to “the covenants” and “the promises,” and that people to whom the covenants and promises belong will once more become the centre of Divine action toward mankind." Ref-0762, p. 154. "“The sufferings of Christ and the glories which should follow” were foretold in such a way that a superficial reader of the old Scriptures would have failed to discover that there were to be two advents of Messiah. And even the careful student, if unversed in the general scheme of prophecy, might have supposed that the two advents, though morally distinct, should be intimately connected in time. So is it with the future. Some regard the second advent as a single event; by others its true character is recognised, but they fail to mark the interval which must separate its first from its final stage. An intelligent apprehension of the truth respecting it is essential to the right understanding of unfulfilled prophecy." Ref-0762, p. 156.


rapture - vs. second coming, rapture : Luke 24:36; John 14:1-3; Rom. 8:19; 1Cor. 1:7-8; 1Cor. 15:51-53; 1Cor. 16:22; Php. 3:20-21; Col. 3:4; 1Th. 1:10; 1Th. 2:19; 1Th. 4:13-18; 1Th. 5:9; 1Th. 5:23; 2Th. 2:1; 1Ti. 6:14; 2Ti. 4:1; Tit. 2:13; Heb. 9:28; Jas. 5:7-9; 1Pe. 1:7; 1Pe. 1:13; 1Jn. 2:28-29; 1Jn. 2:3; 1Jn. 2:1-2; Jude 1:21; Rev. 2:25; Rev. 3:10

Ref-0031, p. 156.


rapture - vs. second coming, second coming : Dan. 2:44-45; Dan. 7:9-14; Dan. 12:1-3; Zec. 14:1-15; Mat. 13:41; Mat. 24:15-31; Mat. 26:64; Mark 13:14-27; Mark 14:62; Luke 21:25-28; Luke 21:34-35; Acts 1:9-11; Acts 3:19-21; 1Th. 4:13; 2Th. 1:6-10; 2Th. 2:8; 2Pe. 3:1-14; Jude 1:14-15; Rev. 1:7; Rev. 19:11 (- 20:6); Rev. 22:7; Rev. 22:12; Rev. 22:20

Ref-0031, p. 156.


Rapture Question, The, Walvoord : Ref-0190
Rapture Question, The, Walvoord - The Rapture Question, Walvoord, John. : Ref-0190
Rapture Question, The, Walvoord - The Rapture Question, Walvoord, John. - Walvoord, John. The Rapture Question : Ref-0190
Rapture Question, The, Walvoord - Walvoord, John. The Rapture Question : Ref-0190
rapture-itis : rapture-itis - antidote
rapture-itis - antidote : 2Cor. 5:9
raptured : Enoch - raptured
raptured - Enoch : Enoch - raptured
rare : prophecy - rare
rare - prophecy : prophecy - rare
rare - vision : prophecy - rare
Rashi : Rashi - hermenutics ; Rashi - name ; Rashi - occupation
Rashi - hermenutics : Ps. 2:1; Isa. 9:6; Isa. 42:1-9; Zec. 6:12

"Rash lived in an era of religious disputations between Christians and Jews, which included both public debates and written pamphlets designed to convince Jewish people of the messiahship of Jesus based on messianic prophecy. Therefore, Rashi initiated the attempt to rebut Christian interpretation of messianic passages through the use of peshat. Thus, Rashi's commentaries reflect his desire to counter Christianity. Rosenthal sates, "Many a comment on a passage in the Pentateuch, in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel or the Psalms is concluded with the statement that his interpretation is according to the plain sense and serves as 'an answer to the Christians.'" . . . Rashi's use of peshat took on an additional nuance." Ref-1272, p. 116. "In order to refute Christian claims, Rashi made a significant shift in the meaning of peshat: he equated the simple meaning of the text with the historical interpretation. This means that Rashi would often rebut the Christian claim that a given verse was messianic and referred to Jesus by countering that it referred "to a biblical historical person or event." Hence, Rashi no longer understood the peshat as the plain sense of the text but the historical sense. Moreover, Rashi frequently argued for the historical sense of a passage even if this meant that "he had to depart from traditional exposition."" Ref-1272, p. 116. "Those who followed Rashi's view of peshat as referring to the historical sense included his grandson, Samuel ben Meir (also known as Rashbam, 1085-1174), Joseph Bekhor Shor (twelfth century), David Kimchi (also known as Radak, 1160-1235), Abraham Ibn Ezra (1089-1164), and Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1509). Building upon Rashi's work, these scholars also used the historical sense to combat Christological interpretation and even emphasized this approach more than Rashi." Ref-1272, p. 118. ". . . the purpose of medieval Jewish exegesis was polemical. Peshat was used as a tool to advance an antimessianic, historical interpretation of the messianic texts. Thus, the literal sense of the Scriptures became identified with the historical sense. Hence, when the Reformers borrowed literal interpretation from Rashi and other medieval Jewish exegetes, . . ." Ref-1272, pp. 121-122. ". . . Rashi, in rejecting traditional interpretations, was not necessarily, as is sometimes maintained, departing from an allegorical messianic interpretation and instead adopting a literal one. Rather, he was departing from the literary and messianic interpretation to a historical understanding. . . . some of Rashi's interpretations are quite messianic while others are historical. The deciding factor was whether a particular messianic passage could be understood to refer to the first coming of Jesus or to Jesus' deity. If this was an issue, then Rashi would commonly interpret those texts as referring to a historical figure. However, if the passage fit the traditional Jewish conception of the Messiah or referred to what Christians perceived as the Second Coming, Rashi would maintain the messianic interpretation." Ref-1272, p. 117. "Psalm 2 is another example of Rashi's influence on messianic interpretation. . . . Rashi understood the text as having a historical referent, writing, "Our Sages [Ber. 7b] expounded the passage as referring to the King Messiah, but according to its apparent meaning [the peshat], it is proper to interpret it as referring to David himself." Today it is fairly common for evangelical scholarship to see the Psalms as essentially historical and to follow Rashi's view that Psalm 2 addresses David or the Davidic king." Ref-1272, p. 124. "Rashi, in an attempt to avoid the apparent deity of the child [in Isa. 9:6], understands the title as follows: "The Holy One, blessed be He, Who gives wondrous counsel, is a mighty God and an everlasting Father, called Hezekiah's name, 'the prince of peace.'" To accomplish this interpretation, Rashi must take God as the subject of the third person singular verb "he called," although it is more likely that it is an indefinite personal subject ("one calls"). As a result of Rashi's identification of God as the subject of the verb, the divine titles do not describe the Messiah but God Himself, thereby avoiding the Christian idea of a divine Messiah. . . . Rashi breaks with the midrashic idea that the verse speaks of the Messiah and rather identifies the child with Hezekiah." Ref-1272, pp. 124-125. "Isaiah 42:1-9 is yet another example of shifting interpretation because of Rashi's influence. This passage, the first of the famous Servant Songs, was recognized as messianic in the ancient Targum Jonathan, paraphrasing it as "Behold, my servant, the Messiah, whom I bring, my chosen one, in whom one delights." . . . Rashi, however, rejects the messianic interpretation of Isa 42:1 and instead identifies collective Israel as the historical referent." Ref-1272, pp. 125-126. ". . . the Midrash . . . asks [concerning Zec. 6:12], "What is the name of the Messiah?" Then, after giving various names from differing Old Testament texts, it says, "His name is 'Branch' as it is stated, 'Behold, a man whose name is Branch, and who shall branch forth from his place, and build the Temple of the Lord' (Zec. 6:12)." Rashi rejects the messianic interpretation and opts for a historical one, writing concerning the Branch, 'He is Zerubbabel, mentioned above (3:8)' . . . Remarkably, Rashi is arguing that his view reflects the peshat, the simple meaning of the text, although Zerubbabel is nowhere to be found in this text." Ref-1272, p. 127. "The point of this discussion of the importance of Rashi and medieval Jewish interpreters has been to show that their anti-Christian polemic has subtly crept into Christian interpretation of the Old Testament. This is a result of Rashi's shift in the use of peshat from the literal/literary meaning to the historical sense." Ref-1272, p. 128.


Rashi - name :

✪ Rashi lived from 1040-1105, "so known from the initials of his name, Rabbi Solomon [Shlomo] ben Isaac, known as the greatest of Jewish Bible commentators." Ref-0230, p 296.


Rashi - occupation :

"Although serving as a rabbi, teacher and a judge, Rashi earned his living as a vintner." Ref-1272, p. 113.


Rasky, Frank, The Taming of the Canadian West : Ref-1575
Rasky, Frank, The Taming of the Canadian West - The Taming of the Canadian West, Frank Rasky : Ref-1575
rate : radioactive decay - rate
rate - radioactive decay : radioactive decay - rate
rationalism : naturalism - rationalism - Hume ; naturalism - rationalism assumed
rationalism - assumed by naturalism : naturalism - rationalism assumed
rationalism - naturalism - Hume : naturalism - rationalism - Hume
raven : raven - fed by; raven - not meat eater yet; raven - unclean bird
raven - fed by : 1K. 17:4
raven - not meat eater yet : Gen. 8:7
raven - unclean bird : Gen. 8:7; Lev. 11:15; 1K. 17:4

RA