A surface reading of the New Testament, particularly some of Paul's letters (First Corinthians, Thessalonians) gives the reader an idea that that writer expected the "end of the world" and the ushering of the "new order" at any time. To him it was imminent.
To people in every Century, it was imminent.
Whenever wars, earthquakes, disease plagues, comets appeared and ravaged the populace, the "End of the World" was a hot topic.
The "world" never "ended".
Particularly throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, this "end of the world" increased in imminence and concern among certain religious persons. It was from one of those in the early 19th Century that the "Rapture" arose, where "two would be in the field and one would be taken and one would remain" was perceived as the rapturing of the righteous up to Heaven at the first phase of the second appearing of Christ, where Christ comes no farther than the clouds to enact this glorious occasion.
The rapture has been debated among religious leaders from that time to this. The majority of religious leaders appear not to accept the rapture as doctrine.
Of course, this gets us into the topic of heaven and hell and all places in between, which really is the subject for another sermonisitic train of thought. Traditionally (but not overwhelmingly) it's thought that we are born, live, and die; then the afterlife is a reward or punishment for what we did in this life. A multitude of perceptions are extant about this.
Of course, in this heaven/hell scenario, the Rapture seems glaringly out of place.
In the Twentieth Century, religious philosophies have arisen that challenge the traditional heaven/hell scenario, among them, the "Rapture" scenario, which has caught hold among several denominations. We had Baptist neighbors who believed in the Rapture.
But more glaringly, the "End of the World" has increasingly become a believable scenario, with the Book of Revelation in its many interpretations coming more to the fore with the increase of the destructive capabilities of weapons of destruction -- and when nuclear weapons finally literally exploded on the world stage, the end of the world was more believable than ever.
The basic discussion, though, is in exactly how the "end of the world" will come about. Is it like the "Omen" movies, with a certain "antichrist" figure leading the world to the brink of destruction? Could it be a nuclear exchange between two nuclear powers that devastates the world? Who -- what -- are the seven churches of Revelation? Who is the Beast? What is the "Mark of the Beast? Mid-century predictions played out various scenarios: the Soviets and the U.S. -- The Syrians and their allies and Israel -- A powerful European Union and the U.S. -- all culminating in Armageddon and the Second Coming to bring and end to the evil of the World.
In 1950, any date between 1975 and 2000 was the distant future, and the world would "come to an end" at any time. It didn't. It hasn't.
Will it?
Will there be any saved from the devastation scenario? That's where the Rapture comes in.
The Old Testament prophets, particularly the Book of Daniel, relate an end time in some people's eyes. Matthew 24, First Corinthians 15, the entire book of Revelation -- speak to a resurrection and people (God's People) being taken up "in the clouds" -- a "remnant" of one hundred and forty four thousand from Israel and an innumerable multitude from the whole world that will be rescued from the Great Tribulation that will engulf the rest of the world.
The place these favored are taken to varies -- the city of Petra (First Century C.E. Nabataean Capital) in Jordan is a favorite of some (has been at least since 1950).
Millions of people have been disappointed before.
If it doesn't happen in our lifetime, then what?
Lots of people look to a brighter future to block out an unwanted present.
But we still live in the present.
Whether this "Rapture" is real or not, whether it happens in our lifetime or after we're dead (millions of people have expected it to happen in their lifetimes -- and have died without it happening), we still have the present to deal with. The present imposes itself on us no matter what, no matter what the future may hold.
We still live in the present.
Whether we believe in Jesus or Moses or Mohammed, we still must deal with the present and those people with whom we interact in the present. The future has never saved anyone from having to deal with the present.
So that's where we must start -- with this present moment. Jesus (I prefer the Jewish name, Joshua) said that we shouldn't be worried about the future -- that we have more than enough to do to deal with present situations. 99% of the New Testament is a "Here and Now" type of document, admonishing us in day to day, moment to moment, dealings with those around us.
The future will take care of itself. It's our job to take care
of the present.