The rapture doctrine is clearly a falsehood. There is a wider ranging argument that may be made from the gospel: That there is no need for a subsequent dispensation of grace not already given.

Grace will not fail until those bereft of it are judged on the last day due to their own faults and poorly made choices. Whereas this continuing grace is comfort to the believer, it is a truth that is widely rejected and not even considered by those that are so tied up with "rapture".

The Rapture Vaccine
The rapture doctrine is patently incompatible with the one gospel of Christ. In this page I summarise the content of the book which logically examines the raqpture doctrine for consistency with the gospel, and I liken its effect to a vaccine against "the mark of the beast".

Not The Mark Of The Beast
The rapture doctrine is not "new" but was foreknown of in Pauls day: In "2Thess ch:2" Paul warns the believer against buying that same unsound doctrine - he had taught that the end would not come until false doctrine rapidly encroached upon the church, it is prophesised to cause a vast "falling away" because the restraint on the church's paradigm is also to be loosed, so that they accept such leaven in their fellowships.

Grace To The Very End
I take another look at the scripture that is taken to support the rapture doctrine. Grace will not fail, there is no "popular" mark of the beast as if final damnation before the judgement - and the same may be repented of with learning sound doctrine. There is nothing in the scriptures to state that grace fails beforehand, and mentions of terms also found in the revelation - "clouds" etc, show there were some mysteries transmitted by word of mouth only. (See the previous page and 2Th 2:5 for that!)

No Other Irredeemable Mark
I generalise the proof of Chapter 15 (section 15.8) in the book - perhaps this proof should have been included instead? There is no need or requirement in the law of God for another dispensation beyond that following the cross. Christ's work is complete and finished. There is no "second death" to interrupt grace - not until the judgement is already past. There is great comfort in this, as there is no "great tribulation" with some imaginary "mark", thus all "other gospels" are similarly "lies of Satan".

No Return To the Law
The rapture doctrine claims the grace of God fails in the case of "the mark". Instead of receiving the mark, it is posited that the salvation of failed grace is replaced by salvation under the law of Moses - that the old covenant is reverted to. In fact, this false doctrine becomes enough to damn a soul, rather than keeping believers obedient in suspended grace to return with the millenium. It is yet a rejection of Christ and a falsehood.

Not The Work Of Antichrist
The rapture doctrine is not sustainable, and should not be so whilst the election of grace continues. (The kingdom of God has arrived and will become the only kingdom left standing, it will remain and His works are surely "kept until the end".) If you accept the proof in the book; and consider that proof the work of Antichrist, why then did you not listen to the gospel of Jesus Christ instead? The election of grace continues all the way through to the judgement on the very last day. There is no rapture to evacuate you from the outpouring of wrath you have ignored your entire life! Instead you - given your false doctrine has failed you, should immediately repent of it and seek Jesus Christ instead!

The Irony Gone
The Rapture doctrine is very close to a huge number of people's hearts as one of their most deeply seated beliefs. That stated, it just does not take precedence over the gospel and the cross of Christ. Only with the end of the latter is the former in force and that will only occur after the final judgement from the BEMA seat of Christ Himself. The last day, then, is the only moment the "rapture" could ever occur. (Just as is "found" in scripture.)

Objections To The Proof
There are always objections ot be made to any argument. Here I put to the test one of my axioms, that of "marked" => "faulty&¬saved". I ask, Why does anyone have to be faulty to be marked? That is the first objection. Any others will be added as I find them!

Pleasure In Unrighteousness
So, "unrighteousness" in the sense taken here, is to mean "dialectic" or to be opposed to the didactic paradigm of the octal. I take a look at the "rapture" hypothesis as if it were also an octal, which requires an inversion of the predicates u&v, (r&s)-1 to actually come out as a positive work overall; It is inherently dialectic, and as a doctrine it opposes the gospel rather than complementing it.

Continue To Next Section

Continue To Next Page

Return To Previous Section