The Rapture ‘Caught Away’ doctrine has existed way before 1740 and I’m sure many 5 Dovers know that. Using that girl as an example to discount the doctrine is not being intellectually honest or show a lack of researching the issue that even someone from a cursory stand point can see there is a pro and con to this issue.

I think we will be rapture despite the harping nowadays that I want to escape the tribulation, who wouldn’t, but I’m not dogmatic about it, and I’m certainly not closed to the idea that we may go through it or some of it or part of it.  I do find it disconcerting those that keep this up with the dogmatic; there will be no rapture, that is deception in the church.  I haven’t been convinced it is.

For one, in the 21^st century, Jack Van Impe, discusses this argument every now and then, from what I recall, he said the original Greek/Hebrew lexicon God uses specific verbs for the same word, that if switched have a different meaning.  If God wanted to tell us in the original text that we are going through The Tribulation or parts of it, He is God and knows what verb to use for the meaning He intended. I often wonder why the discussion does revolve around this?  According to Jack, he used the verb that means we will not go through the tribulation. 

In closing, so someone has to be right here and someone has to be wrong, both of these views can’t be right.  Where and what is the actual deception?