Not the same thing. I pay insurance because I believe the things I'm insured against happen. I believe that people get hit by uninsured drivers, develop cancer, and have their houses burned down. I hope those things won't happen to me and the odds are in my favor, but I believe they happen.
I do not believe that people will be suddenly taken up to heaven, leaving their fur babies behind. Ever. It's not that I believe that I'll be going, or that it's a long way off, I do not believe it will happen.
To me selling pet rapture insurance is like me selling changeling insurance (in case your baby is switched by a fairy queen for her own, and you need to pay for a lot of therapy) or zombie insurance (like life insurance only it pays if they're undead).
If I did believe the rapture was going to happen, I'd be converting pretty darn quick, in which case you couldn't count on me for pet care anyway.
Although there's no doubt that Rapture will happen -- maybe soon, maybe not in our lifetimes -- I agree with your logic:
A person who believes wouldn't sell this type of "insurance" because he's not going to be here to provide the service. He wouldn't want to stick around here to go through the Tribulation.
A person who doesn't believe would sell this type of "insurance" thinking that he's not going to have to provide any service for the money paid.
A person who believes he's going to be Raptured might buy this service thinking that his pets will be left unattended, but he'd do so knowing that he bought it from a person who was essentially laughing at him for buying what he (the provider) sees as a worthless product.
A person who doesn't believe in the Rapture would never buy this product, thinking it's fictional.
I wouldn't pay for this service, as I think my furbabies will either come with me, or my non-believer friends would come take care of them.
From a realistic point of view, if large numbers of people disappear, it would be a very upsetting period of time for people left behind . . . but it won't take long for other people to take over the homes with grass growing high and newspapers piling up. And non-believers aren't mean, bad people -- just not Godly people -- so they wouldn't let animals suffer. Of course, animals in the house would likely to days without care, while dogs living outside would be noticed more readily.
I am a pre-trib believer, mainly because the bible says that God will show himself in such a way that noone will be able to deny he exists BEFORE the tribulation. Since we are expected to believe by faith, I don't believe He would then take people who believe because they see Him, if that makes sense. I think the church will be raptured before the tribulation.
That does make sense, and I think I'm right in saying that MOST Protestant churches are pre-Trib believers. In the end, though, it'd be nice to know the absolute answer, but it wouldn't change the way we'd live: Either we live for Christ, or we do not. Knowing God's "exit strategy" for that seven-year time period would satisfy our curiosity, but it wouldn't change the grand scheme of things.
Actually, it looks like someone on another thread put 2 and 2 together. The day of the rapture is the same day of the "Take Your Kids To The Park and Leave Them There". I mean, it can't be coincidence, you know?
Don't worry about it. Anytime someone predicts that ___ is the end of the world, you can be sure that date is NOT going to be the end of the world. The book of Matthew says that NO ONE knows the hour and the date, not even the angels or Jesus -- only God knows the date he's chosen. So anyone who's done fancy calculations with Biblical dates is bound to be wrong. Furthermore, the book of Thessalonians says that the Lord will return like a thief in the night, meaning that it will come when we do not expect it.
Regardless, what would we all do if we knew the date? Nothing. We'd all live our lives as we believe to be appropriate -- some following God's word, some thinking it's all just imaginary. And, in reality, although we don't like to think about it, we all know that our own personal date could arrive at any time, so the "end of the world" date could be irrelevant to us.
I think different churches believe different things. I've heard of some that the age of 18 is accountable, and like you mention, 12-15. But surely babies and fetuses would not be held accountable. So babysitting teenagers might not be a bad idea. Actually, as the parent of 2 teenagers, I take that back.
I personally think that everyone doesn't reach the age of accountability at the same time. A child who's been raised in a Christian home will have greater access to information from a younger age and will likely be accountable from a younger age, while others who are never introduced to the Gospels wouldn't have an opportunity until an older age. And some who lack mental capacity to EVER make a decision would never be held accountable. However, God knows what we cannot know -- he knows what's in each person's heart -- so He can judge, whereas we cannot. I do trust that He'd judge a young person who'd not yet had time to reach a fully-developed faith differently than he'd judge a person who'd passed up years of opportunities.
