IS THE PRETRIBULATION RAPTURE BIBLICAL?
One of the most popular teachings today in Evangelical and Charismatic churches
is the doctrine of the pretribulation rapture. The pretribulation rapture
teaching is that there are two separate comings of Christ. The first coming is
secret and occurs before the future seven year tribulation. At this coming Jesus
comes for the saints (i.e., all genuine believers) both living and dead. These
saints meet the Lord in the air and then are taken to heaven to escape the
horrible judgments that take place during the seven year tribulation. At the end
of the great tribulation Jesus returns to the earth with the saints. This coming
is not secret but is observed by all. At this coming Christ crushes His
opposition, judges mankind and sets up a one thousand year reign of saints upon
the earth (the millennium). Some pretribulation advocates speak of two separate
comings while others prefer to speak of one coming in two separate stages or
phases (phase one is the secret rapture and phase two is the visible coming in
judgment). Hal Lindsey likes to refer to the rapture as “the great snatch.” He
writes: “The word for ‘caught up’ actually means to ‘snatch up,’ and that’s why
I like to call this marvelous coming event ‘The Great Snatch’! It’s usually
referred to as the ‘Rapture,’ from the Latin word
rapere,
which means to ‘take away’ or ‘snatch out.’”1
Although the pretribulation
rapture doctrine is very popular and is even considered so crucial to
Christianity that it is made a test of a person’s orthodoxy in some
denominations, Bible colleges and seminaries, the exegetical and theological
arguments used by its advocates are all classic cases of forcing one’s
theological presuppositions onto particular texts (eisegesis). The purpose of
this brief study is to show that the pretribulation rapture theory is not
plainly taught or directly stated in any place in Scripture, cannot be deduced
from biblical teaching, contradicts the general teaching of the Bible regarding
Christ’s second coming and was never taught in any branch of the church prior to
1830.
The Origin of the
Pretribulation Rapture Teaching
Whenever a Christian encounters a doctrine that has not been taught by anyone in
any branch of Christ’s church for over eighteen centuries, one should be very
suspect of that teaching. This fact in and of itself does not prove that the new
teaching is false. But, it should definitely raise one’s suspicions, for if
something is taught in Scripture, it is not unreasonable to expect at least a
few theologians and exegetes to have discovered it before. The teaching of a
secret pretribulation rapture is a doctrine that never existed before 1830. Did
the pretribulation rapture come into existence by a careful exegesis of
Scripture? No. The first person to teach the doctrine was a young woman named
Margaret Macdonald. Margaret was not a theologian or Bible expositor but was a
prophetess in the Irvingite sect (the
John Nelson Darby
(1800-1882), who was the leader of the Brethren movement and the “father of
modern Dispensationalism,” took Margaret Macdonald’s new teaching on the
rapture, made some changes (she taught a partial rapture of believers while he
taught that all believers would be raptured) and incorporated it into his
Dispensational understanding of Scripture and prophecy. Darby would spend the
rest of his life speaking, writing and traveling, spreading the new rapture
theory.
The Plymouth Brethren
openly admitted and were even proud of the fact that among their teachings were
totally new ones which had never been taught by the church fathers, medieval
scholastics, Protestant Reformers or the many commentators.
The person most responsible
for the rather widespread acceptance of Pretribulationalism and
Dispensationalism among Evangelicals is Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843-1921). C.
I. Scofield published his Scofield Reference Bible in 1909. This Bible, which
espoused the doctrines of Darby in its notes, became very popular in
Fundamentalist circles. In the minds of many a Bible teacher, fundamentalist
pastor and multitudes of professing Christians, Scofield’s notes were
practically equated with the word of God itself. If a person did not adhere to
the Dispensational, Pretribulational scheme he or she would almost automatically
be labeled a modernist.
Today there is a whole
plethora of books advocating the pretribulation rapture theory and the
Dispensational understanding of the end times. Given the fact that among
professing Christians the pre-trib rapture is still wildly popular, a comparison
of this theory with scriptural teaching is warranted. We will see that the
typical arguments offered in favor of this theory are in conflict with the
Bible.
Revelation 3:10
A passage of Scripture that is considered crucial for a defense of the
pretribulation rapture position is Revelation 3:10. “Because you have kept My
command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall
come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earThess.” It is
argued that this passage refers to the great tribulation (“the hour of trial
which shall come upon the whole world”) and that the church is promised a
physical removal from the world for protection. The “from the hour of trial” (ek
tes horas tou peirasmou) is interpreted in a
spatial sense. The preposition
ek, translated from, is
interpreted as a preposition of motion. The saints will be taken out from within
the earth to heaven. Thus, they are kept or preserved from the hour of trial.
The pretribulation interpretation of Revelation 3:10 is totally off the mark for
a number of reasons. First, standard biblical methods of interpretation must be
completely ignored to apply this passage to a future tribulation two thousand
years in the future. The letter is addressed to a specific church (
Second, the time indicators within the passage render impossible the idea that
the promise was not to take place for two thousand years. The passage says that
the hour of trial is about to happen. “I also will keep thee from the hour of
trial that is about to come upon all the world” (Rev. 3:10, Young’s Literal
Translation of the Bible). When the verb
mello
is joined to the present infinitive which is what is found in Revelation 3:10 (tes
mellouses erchesthai), it always expresses
imminence. When Jesus says that the hour of trial is about to come, He means it
will happen soon.4
To place the promise thousands of years away is a denial of the plain meaning of
the Greek language. Chilton writes: “Does it make sense that Christ would
promise the church in
Third, the Pretribulationist’s idea that
ek
(from) in verse 10 is used in a spatial sense and thus refers to the saints
being moved outside of the earth away from tribulation is not supported by the
immediate or broader context of the book of Revelation. This novel
interpretation cannot be found in any theological work or commentary prior to
1830 when the pre-tribulation theory was first espoused by Margaret Macdonald in
western
Further, according to the Dispensational understanding of the great tribulation,
all genuine Christians must be raptured at the beginning of the tribulation
while the Jews must stay on earth and go through the tribulation. The problem
with this view is that it involves both an abandonment of the literal principle
of interpretation and an arbitrary interpretation of the word “from” (ek).
In other words when
ek is used of Christians it
means they will be raptured to safety in heaven, but when it is used of Jews it
means they will remain on earth but receive protection. Oswald T. Allis writes:
“Jeremiah 30:7 declares, ‘but he shall be saved out of it’ (literally, ‘from
it’). Daniel 12:1 says only, ‘thy people shall be delivered.’ In Revelation 3:10
we read, ‘I also will keep thee from (ek)
the hour of trial.’ In chapter 7:14 we are told of those ‘who have come out of (ek)
the great tribulation.’ Matthew 24:22 by speaking of the shortening of the days
of the tribulation clearly implies that the elect will pass through it. John
17:15 illustrates the ambiguity of the preposition ‘from’ (ek
in the same sense of ‘out of,’ ‘away from’) the world, ‘but that thou shouldest
keep them from (ek)
the evil.’ the purpose of the sealing of the servants of God before the pouring
out of the plagues (vii. 3) favors the view that they are to pass unscathed
through them. Why should not the same apply to Rev. iii. 10? It seems rather
inconsistent to insist that ‘from’ in Jeremiah 30:7 must mean that Israel will
pass through the tribulation, but that ‘from’ in Revelation 3:10 must mean that
the church of Philadelphia, and by implication the entire church then on earth,
will not pass through it but be delivered from it by rapture.”7
Dispensationalists, who are
the chief advocates of the pretribulation rapture, claim that they are the
champions of a literal approach to biblical interpretation. They say that a
literal approach to prophecy logically leads to the pretribulation view. Yet
there are a number of important passages such as Revelation 3:10 where
Dispensationalists take a very non-literal approach while their theological
opponents take a very literal approach. It has already been noted how the
literal view of Revelation 3:10 has been totally ignored in order to posit a
tribulation and rapture thousands of years in the future. This contradiction to
the literal method of interpretation is also found in their overall view of the
letters to the seven churches. According to C. I. Scofield and the vast majority
of Dispensational authors, the seven churches of Revelation chapters 2 and 3
represent seven consecutive chronological periods of church history. According
to the general outline of this scheme the church of Philadelphia represents a
period of church revival and great missionary activity (A.D. 1750-1925) while
Laodicea (the seventh century) represents the final period of church history,
which is one of compromise and apostasy. This interpretation raises a number of
questions. 1.) If the seven churches are seven consecutive periods of church
history, why is the rapture passage in the sixth period, the time of revival and
not the seventh and last period, the time of apostasy? If Dispensationalists
were to be consistent they could not claim Revelation 3:10 as a proof text for
the rapture. The Dispensational view of Revelation contains serious internal
contradictions. 2.) There is not one thing within the text or context of this
passage that indicates that the seven letters are somehow prophetic of seven
long periods of church history. Although such an interpretation may be popular,
one is not obligated to hold to a view that has no exegetical basis. 3.) The
interpretation that claims the seven churches are seven long periods of church
history is a very non-literal approach to biblical interpretation.
Dispensational scholars are fond of accusing Amillennial and Postmillennial
expositors of spiritualizing various Scripture passages. Yet the idea that the
seven letters are long periods of church history is itself a blatant example of
spiritualizing Scripture. The Dispensational slogan of “literal whenever
possible” is a claim that obviously is not a reality.
Revelation 4:1
Another proof text for the pretribulation rapture theory is Revelation 4:1,
“After these things I looked, and behold, a door standing open in heaven. And
the first voice which I heard was like a trumpet speaking with me, saying, ‘Come
up here, and I will show you things which must take place after this.’”
Pretribulationists cite this verse and then remark that the church is not
observed on earth again until Revelation 19 when believers return to earth for
the millennial reign of Christ. Pretribulationists reason that since the church
is not mentioned as being on earth during the great tribulation after Revelation
4:1, then John’s removal to heaven must be equated with the rapture. Hal Lindsey
gives us an example of the typical Pretribulationist understanding of this
verse. He writes: “It’s important to note that the Church has been the main
theme of Revelation until Chapter 4. Starting with this chapter, the Church
isn’t seen on earth again until Chapter 19, where we suddenly find it returning
to earth with Christ as He comes to reign as King of kings and Lord of lords....
Although Revelation 4:1 does not specifically refer to Christ’s reappearance at
the Rapture, I believe that the Apostle John’s departure for heaven after the
church era closes in Chapter 3 and before the tribulation chronicle begins in
Chapter 6 strongly suggests a similar catching away for the Church.”8
Does Revelation 4:1 and the
fact that the word church (ekklesia) is not mentioned in chapters 4 through 18
prove or support the pretribulation rapture theory? There are a number of
reasons why this argument in favor of Pretribulationism should be rejected.
First, this argument is an argument from silence in which the idea of the
pretribulation rapture is presupposed and then imposed upon this section of
Scripture. In the immediate context (Revelation 4:2) it says that John the
apostle is transported to the throne room of heaven. Not one word is uttered
that suggests that John represents the church or that the people of God as a
whole are taken to heaven. Also, there is not any mention or any indication
whatsoever of a descent by Christ or a resurrection of the saints. In Revelation
4:1 there is mention of a trumpet but this is not the trumpet blast announcing
the rapture. It is a voice that has a sound of a trumpet just like the voice of
authority that John heard in Revelation 1:10, “I was in the Spirit on the Lord's
Day, and I heard behind me a loud voice, as of a trumpet.” What occurred in
Revelation 4:1 with John was no different than the transportation and throne
room scenes experienced by other prophets (e.g., Ezek. 1:1, 22-28; 8:3-4
[Ezekiel is apparently below the crystal sea looking up to the throne room];
Isa. 6:1 ff.; 2 Cor. 12:1-4).
Second, the argument from silence is arbitrarily applied to Revelation and could
be used to prove many heretical doctrines if applied to other theological
topics. The argument from silence consistently applied would not prove the
rapture of the saints but the annihilation of the saints, for not only is the
word church (ekklesia) not used of the saints on earth in chapters 4 through 18,
it also is never used of the saints in heaven. Does this mean that all the
saints have vacated heaven and moved to Limbo or some other place during these
chapters? No. Of course not! This argument, if consistently applied, leads to an
incredibly absurd conclusion. The word church (ekklesia)
does not even occur in the book of Revelation until Revelation 22:16. Does this
mean the church is not involved in the second coming, the resurrection or white
throne judgment? No. Obviously not! An argument that proves too much is
worthless.
Further, the reasoning that
Pretribulationists use to make Revelation 4:1 a proof text for the rapture could
also be used to prove many dangerous and heretical doctrines. In the book of
Esther the words for God and Jehovah do not occur even once. Does this fact mean
that God does not exist, or that God is a deistic absentee landlord of the
universe? No. It certainly does not. It should be clear to everyone from this
example that arguments from silence are useless.
Third, a careful examination of Revelation 4 through 19 proves conclusively that
the church is on earth during this period. John does not use the word church (ekklesia)
in these chapters but given the nature of apocalyptic literature where allusions
to the Old Testament are constantly used to dramatically portray coming events,
the non-use of the word church in the highly symbolic prophetic section of the
book is not surprising. In chapter 6 after the opening of the fifth seal the
martyred saints ask God to avenge their deaths on the persecutors “who dwell on
the earth” (v. 10). These martyred Christians are told wait “until both the
number of their fellow servants and their brethren, who would be killed as they
were, was completed” (v. 11). The phrase fellow servants and brethren is used in
Revelation to describe Christians in Revelation 6:11, 19:10 and 22:9. Paul uses
the same terminology in Colossians 1:7; 4:7. There is not a shred of evidence to
support the idea that those martyred during the tribulation are a Jewish
remnant. These are Christians of every nation (cf. Rev. 7:9, 14) who die because
the
In Revelation 7 there are the 144,000 saints of God. Dispensationalists argue
that this large group refers to literal
Second, we are specifically told in Revelation itself that the 144,000 are those
redeemed by Jesus Christ from among men. “These are the ones who were not
defiled with women, for they are virgins. These are the ones who follow the Lamb
wherever He goes. These were redeemed from among men, being firstfruits to God
and to the Lamb” (Rev. 14:4). Third, the literal interpretation of Revelation
7:4ff ignores the fact that ten of the twelve tribes had disappeared in
2 Thessalonians 2:6-7
Another argument for the
pretribulation rapture is based on 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7, “And now ye know that
which restraineth, to the end that he may be revealed in his own season. For the
mystery of lawlessness doth already work: only there is one that restraineth
now, until he be taken out of the way” (ASV). The standard Dispensationalist
understanding of this passage is that the restrainer spoken of is the Holy
Spirit. Pretribulationists argue that since the Holy Sprit dwells and works to
restrain evil by means of the church, a removal of the Spirit entails a removal
of the church. Once the church is raptured the Antichrist will be revealed.
Although this passage is a
difficult one that has resulted in many different interpretations, the idea that
this passage teaches the removal of the Holy Spirit is theologically impossible
and totally contradicts the Dispensationalist’s own interpretation of the events
that are supposed to take place during the tribulation. After the rapture a
Jewish remnant of 144,000 is converted to Christ. These Jews will be the
greatest evangelists the world has ever seen, who bring multitudes to Christ
from every nation. What is wrong with this understanding of Scripture? It places
the Dispensationalist in the position of either denying his own interpretation
of 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7 or of denying the biblical teaching regarding the Holy
Spirit’s role in converting sinners. The Bible teaches that no one can be
converted without the regenerating and drawing power of the Holy Spirit (Ezek.
36:25-26; John 1:13; 3:5-8; Acts 5:31; 11:18; 16:13-14; 1 Cor. 2:12-14; 2 Cor.
4:6; Eph. 2:1, 5; Col. 2:11; Titus 3:5). Yet, Pretribulationists teach that the
144,000 Jews are converted after the departure of the Holy Spirit. They also
teach that the preaching of these converted Jews will be a hundred times more
fruitful without the Holy Spirit than the preaching of the church with the Holy
Spirit throughout the so-called church age. Multitudes are said to be converted
to Christ from every nation during the absence of the Holy Spirit in only 1260
days! The truth is that if the Holy Spirit is removed, there would be no
converts during the tribulation—not even one.
Realizing the obviously unbiblical nature of the standard view, many modern
Dispensationalists argue that the Holy Spirit is not taken away, “but ‘taken out
of the way;’ thus the Holy Spirit will continue a divine activity to the
end-time, though not as a restrainer of evil through the church.”10
In other words the Holy Spirit doesn’t go away to heaven, He merely gets out of
the way so that the anti-Christ can have sway over the masses. This
interpretation avoids the absurdity of mass conversions without the Holy Spirit.
However, it also removes 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7 as a proof text for the
pretribulation rapture. If the Holy Spirit doesn’t leave the scene but merely
ceases to restrain the forces of evil as He had before, there is no longer any
reason to suppose that this passage indicates the rapture of the church. The
idea that the Holy Spirit is dependent on the church to restrain evil is not
supported by Scripture. Further, even if the restraining power of the Holy
Spirit came by means of the church, would not the massive revival throughout the
earth caused by the preaching of the converted Jewish remnant also be a
restraining of evil by Christ’s disciples (His church)? Dispensationalists can
not have it both ways. Therefore, this passage has nothing to do with the
rapture.
Another reason that this
passage should not be considered a proof text for the rapture is Paul’s teaching
in the immediate context. The Thessalonians were troubled because of false
teaching regarding the day of Christ. Many within the church believed that the
day of the Lord had already taken place. Paul wants to remove any misconceptions
regarding this coming day by pointing out that certain events must take place
before this coming. Paul says there must first be a falling away or rebellion
and the man of sin must be revealed. Then he gives certain details regarding the
man of sin and when these things will occur. What is particularly interesting
regarding this section of Scripture is that it proves that the Thessalonians who
had previously received instructions by Paul did not know anything about a
pretribulation rapture. If they had been taught such a doctrine then they would
have known that the day of the Lord could not have taken place, for the rapture
had not yet occurred. Furthermore, it proves that Paul did not believe in a
pretribulation rapture (or that he was negligent in his instructions), for Paul
says nothing about a rapture that is to occur seven years before the day of the
Lord. If Paul believed in pretribulation rapture one would expect him to say:
“Don’t be deceived that the day of the Christ has already come, brethren. It can
only come after you have been raptured to heaven. The fact that you are still on
earth is proof positive that it had not yet occurred.” Paul does not tell the
Thessalonian brothers to look for the rapture but to look for an apostasy (or
rebellion) and the man of sin. If the pretribulation rapture theory were true,
why would Paul instruct these Christians to look for events that are supposed to
happen during the tribulation, when the church is not supposed to be around? It
is obvious that Paul presupposes that the church will indeed be present on earth
during the great tribulation.
1 Thessalonians 5:9
One of the most popular
arguments for the pretribulation rapture is based on 1 Thessalonians 5:9, “For
God did not appoint us to wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus
Christ.” It is argued that the great tribulation is an unprecedented time of
God’s wrath falling upon the whole world. Since believers are specifically told
that they are not appointed to wrath, it is only logical to conclude that the
church will be removed from the earth before God’s wrath is poured out. This
removal is the rapture of the saints. This argument for the rapture is
fallacious for a number of reasons. First, it assumes that the wrath spoken of
in verse 9 is the wrath poured out during the tribulation. The context of
chapter 5 however makes it abundantly clear that the wrath spoken of in verse 5
is not the wrath of the tribulation but the wrath that occurs at the second
coming of Christ—the day of the Lord (cf. 1 Thess. 5:1-3).
Second, it assumes that the
only method at God’s disposal for protecting the church from His wrath is a
total removal from the earThess. An examination of the wrath of God in both
testaments reveals that the Pretribulationist assumption is totally unwarranted.
When God poured out His wrath upon Egypt, He spared the people of Israel (cf.
Ex. 8:22-23; 9:4-6, 11, 26; 10:23; 11:7; 12:23; 14:28-29) without first removing
them out of the land. The prophet Isaiah says explicitly that God can judge the
earth without harming His own covenant people who remain on earThess. “Come, my
people, enter your chambers, and shut your doors behind you; hide yourself, as
it were, for a little moment, until the indignation is past. For behold, the
LORD comes out of His place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their
iniquity; the earth will also disclose her blood, and will no more cover her
slain” (Isa. 26:20-21).
The nail in the coffin to
the Pretribulationist use of 1 Thessalonians 5:9 comes from the book of
Revelation which shows that God’s people are protected from His wrath during the
tribulation. In Revelation 6:16 it is the heathen that ask the mountains and
rocks to protect them from the wrath of the lamb. A wrath that falls as a
response to the prayers of persecuted and martyred saints (Rev. 6:9-11). After
the fifth trumpet is sounded, the locusts of destruction are ordered by God only
to harm “those men who do not have the seal of God on their foreheads” (Rev.
9:4). God’s saints are specifically protected from harm. In Revelation 9:20-21
we are told that these plagues were directed to wicked men. Revelation 14:9-10
says that those who are to experience God’s wrath and undiluted indignation are
those who receive the mark of the beast; who worship the beast and his image.
This obviously excluded Christians. Revelation 16:1-2 says that God’s wrath (the
first bowl) is only to be poured out on the worshipers of the beast, who have
his mark. Once again believers are excluded. In 16:9 and 11 those who receive
God’s plagues are identified as blasphemers who refuse to repent. A careful
reading of Revelation demonstrates that although God’s people experience
persecution, death and harm at the hands of wicked men they are carefully and
lovingly excluded from every act of God’s wraThess. God’s wrath only falls upon
those who are the enemies of Christ and His church. The wrath that falls on the
wicked is God’s loving response to the prayers of His saints. Does the church
need to be completely removed from the earth to be spared from God’s wrath, as
Pretribulationists assert? The Scriptures answer that question with an emphatic
“no!”
The “Children in the
Millennium” Argument
One argument that is used
by both pre and mid-tribulationists is based on the necessity of human beings
entering the millennium with natural, non-glorified bodies. Premillennialists
teach that during the millennium people with glorified bodies will dwell side by
side with people who have not yet been glorified. The millennium must begin with
people who are converted after the rapture yet before the second coming so that
procreation can occur during the millennium. Natural bodies and procreation are
necessary because descendants are needed who will rebel against Christ at the
end of His earthly reign. If the rapture and second coming occur at the same
time, then all believers would have glorified bodies and there would be no
natural descendants who could rebel. Christians with glorified bodies cannot
rebel because one aspect of glorification is losing the ability to commit sin.
This argument may have an
effect upon historic Premillennialists who believe in a literal one thousand
year reign of Christ on earth that is to begin immediately after the post
tribulation rapture and second coming occurs. It, however, has no effect upon
those (Amillennial and Postmillennial) believers who reject Premillennialism as
unscriptural.
Because the Bible very
clearly teaches in both the gospels and epistles that the second coming of
Christ, the rapture, the resurrection and judgment of the righteous and the
wicked are to occur on the same day (the day of the Lord) Premillennialism with
its separate resurrections and judgments must be rejected. Note the following
passages.
Matthew 25:31-46—“When the
Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will
sit on the throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered before Him, and
He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the
goats. And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left.
Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My
Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the
world....’ Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you
cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels....’ And
these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal
life.”
Matthew 13:30—“Let both
[the righteous and the wicked] grow together until the harvest, and at the time
of harvest I will say to the reapers, ‘First gather together the tares and bind
them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn’” (cf. Matthew
13:47-50).
John 5:28-29—“Do not marvel
at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His
voice and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and
those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.”
John 6:39-40—“This is the
will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose
nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. And this is the will of Him who
sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting
life; and I will raise him up at the last day” (Cf. John 6:44, 54).
From these passages we
learn that Christ taught a general judgment of all men, not just the wicked.
Jesus plainly taught that there will be a general resurrection in which all men
will be raised on the same day. There is nothing in the New Testament regarding
a partial bodily resurrection which is followed by another bodily resurrection
or 1000 years (or for the Dispensationalist, 1007 years). Further, Jesus taught
that the bodily resurrection of the dead and the day of judgment occur on the
last day. The designation last day means the end of human history. It precludes
another thousand years of non-glorified earthly existence.
The epistles of Peter and
Paul are even more explicit in their rejection of Premillennialism.
2 Thessalonians
1:6-10—“...it is a righteous thing with God to repay with tribulation those who
trouble you, and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus
is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance
on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our
Lord Jesus Christ. These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the
presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, when He comes, in that
Day, to be glorified in His saints and to be admired among all those who
believe, because our testimony among you was believed....”
For the apostle Paul, the punishment of the wicked and the reward of the
righteous are to occur simultaneously, immediately following the second coming
of Christ. There is nothing here teaching separate comings. There is nothing
about a secret rapture. There is no 7 year, 1,000 year or 1,007 year gap between
the glorification of the saints and the destruction of the wicked. According to
Paul they occur the same day (“that Day”), the day Christ returns. Further, note
that Christ comes from heaven to crush His enemies and judge the world. Jesus
does not crush the wicked from His earthly throne in
1 Corinthians 15:23-26, 50-54—“But each one in his own order: Christ the
firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming. Then comes the
end…. The last enemy that will be destroyed is death…. Now this I say, brethren,
that flesh and blood cannot inherit the
According to Paul, the second coming of Christ and the glorification of the
saints will occur immediately prior to the final state. Christ returns, the
saints receive immortal, glorified bodies “then comes the end.” (The adverb
eita,
translated then in “then comes the end” in the New Testament, never refers to a
long period of time. It is the adverb used to denote a short period of time.)
There is no place in Paul’s understanding of the second coming to put a 1,000
year reign. When Christ returns, the kingdom is delivered to the Father.
Furthermore, after Christ’s return, death is completely destroyed and abolished.
How can there be converts in the millennium who live, have children and die, if
death is abolished at the second coming?
1 Thessalonians 5:1-4,
9-10—“But concerning the times and the seasons, brethren, you have no need that
I should write to you. For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the
Lord so comes as a thief in the night. For when they say, ‘Peace and safety!’
then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman.
And they shall not escape. But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this
Day should overtake you as a thief.... For God did not appoint us to wrath, but
to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us, that whether
we wake or sleep, we should live together with Him.”
Once again the apostle Paul
teaches that the day of the Lord is a day of deliverance for the saints but
wrath for the wicked. Paul does not tell believers, to look for a secret rapture
seven years before the second coming. He points them to the second coming itself
when both parties, believers and unbelievers will be dealt wiThess. Believers
are to “watch, and be sober” in preparation for the second coming (1 Thess.
5:6). When Christ returns they will “live together with Him” (1 Thess. 5:10) but
unbelievers will receive God’s wrath—sudden destruction will come upon them (1
Thess. 5:3). If Christians are to be secretly raptured away from the earth seven
years before Christ’s second coming, then why do the Scriptures repeatedly teach
that Christians are to remain on earth until the revelation of Christ? The
resurrection of the righteous and the wicked and the final judgment both occur
on the same day, the day of the Lord (Matthew 13:47-50; 25:31-34, 41; John.
5:28-29; 6:3-40, 44, 54; Rom. 2:5-8, 16; 1 Thess. 5:1-4, 9-10, etc.).
2 Peter 3:4-10—“‘Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell
asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation’.... But
the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved
for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.... But the day
of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass
away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat....” Peter
teaches that the second coming, the day of judgment and the beginning of the
final state occur contemporaneously. Like Paul, Peter says that these events
occur on the “the day of the Lord.” According to Premillennialism Christ does
not come on the day of judgment, because He is already on earth ruling from
The “Translation Versus
Return” Argument
Another pre-tribulationist
argument is based on the difference between the translation of the saints at the
rapture and the return of Christ to earth to establish His millennial kingdom.
It is argued that the rapture of the saints is a catching away up into the air.
However, the return of Christ is a returning to earThess. Therefore, since the
rapture and second coming describe two very different activities (one is a
catching up while the other is a going down) they must be two separate events
separated by time. Pretribulationists also argue that a clear demarcation exists
between the rapture and second coming on the basis that at the rapture no
judgment occurs but at the second coming there is a judgment. Once again this is
supposed to prove that the rapture and second coming are two separate events
that take place at different times (a seven-year difference).
These Pretribulationist
arguments should be rejected for the following reasons. The idea that the
difference between the translation of the saints and the return of Christ proves
the pretribulation rapture theory is an argument begging the question. In other
words it assumes what it sets out to prove. It is true that the rapture and the
return to earth are not exactly the same events. This point, however, tells us
nothing regarding the time sequence of these events. Jesus could meet the saints
in the air as He returns to earThess. There is no scriptural reason to assume a
seven year gap between the rapture and return. Given the passages discussed in
our consideration of Premillennialism, the rapture, second coming, and general
judgment all occur on the same day. The saints meet Christ in the air and return
to earth with Him.
What about the argument
that at the rapture no judgment takes place but at the second coming there is a
judgment? As noted above there is no biblical reason to take events such as the
rapture, second coming and judgment that all are to occur the same day and
insert several years between them. What is particularly devastating to the
Pretribulationist is the fact that when Paul discuss the second coming and gives
us the most explicit passage in the New Testament on the rapture he connects
Christ’s descent with both the rapture and the judgment of the wicked. “But I do
not want you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning those who have fallen asleep,
lest you sorrow as others who have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died
and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus. For
this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain
until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. For
the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an
archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.
Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the
clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the
Lord.... For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as
a thief in the night. For when they say, ‘Peace and safety!’ then sudden
destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they
shall not escape. But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day
should overtake you as a thief” (1 Thess. 4:13-17; 5:2-4). Note that Paul
connects the second coming, the rapture and the destruction of the wicked all
together. He presents them as coterminous and not separated by seven years.
Everything will take place on that “Day” (5:4)—the day of the Lord. Furthermore,
1 Thessalonians 4:16 explicitly teaches that the rapture is a public event, not
secret: “For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the
voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God.”
Oswald T. Allis exposes the fallacious manner in which Pretribulationists make
subtle distinctions in Paul’s terminology which the apostle himself never
intended. He writes: “The question which confronts us is this. If the
distinction between the rapture and the appearing is of as great a moment as
Dispensationalists assert, how are we to explain Paul’s failure to distinguish
clearly between them? And the failure of other writers, Peter, James and John,
to do the same? Paul was a logician. He was able to draw sharp distinctions. If
he had wanted, or regarded it important, to distinguish between these events, he
could have done so very easily. Why did he use language which Dispensationalists
must admit to be confusing? Feinburg [a noted Dispensationalist scholar] made
the following surprising statement regarding the three words we have been
discussing: ‘We conclude, then, that from a study of the Greek words themselves
the distinctions between the coming of the Lord for His saints and with His
saints is not to be gleaned’ (Premillennialism or Amillennialism? p. 207). Such
an admission raises the question whether the distinction itself is valid. If the
distinction is of importance, Paul’s ambiguous language is, we may say it
reverently, inexcusable. If the distinction is negligible, accuracy of statement
would be quite unnecessary. We conclude, therefore, that the language of the New
Testament and especially of Paul not merely fails to prove the distinction
insisted on by Dispensationalists but rather by its very ambiguity indicates
clearly and unmistakably that no such distinction exists.”12
The “No Signs Verses
Many Signs” Argument
A popular Pretribulationist argument is based on the idea that passages which
discuss Christ’s second coming indicate that many signs will proceed the second
coming, while passages that discuss the rapture mention no signs. Feinberg
writes: “In Matthew 24:32-51 our Lord makes it clear that these signs are to
alert the believers that His coming is near: ‘Even so, when you see all these
things, you know that it is near, right at the door’ (Matthew 24:33). On the
other hand, there is no mention of any signs or events that precede the Rapture
of the church in any of the Rapture passages. The point seems to be that the
believer prior to this event is to look, not for some sign, but the Lord from
heaven. If the Rapture was a part of the complex of events that make up the
Second Advent, and not distinct from it, then we would expect that there would
be a mention of signs or events in at least one passage.”13
In other words you can’t have signs and no signs at the same time. Therefore,
the rapture and second coming must occur at different times.
The signs verses no signs argument should be rejected for a number of reasons.
First, the idea that certain signs will precede the second coming of Christ is
based on an incorrect interpretation of Matthew 24. The signs of Matthew 24:6-33
(wars, famines, pestilence, earthquakes, false prophets, etc.) are signs not of
the second coming but of the destruction of
Second, passages which are
used as proof texts for no signs before the rapture are better interpreted as
referring to the second coming itself and not just the rapture. A favorite
passage for Pretribulationists is 1 Thessalonians 5:2 which says, “the day of
the Lord so comes as a thief in the night.” The coming as a thief in the night
is interpreted to mean that the rapture comes secretly. That is, it is a
surprise. There are no signs that precede it. The problem with such a view is:
1.) The phrase “day of the Lord” is consistently used in the New Testament to
refer to the day of judgment which occurs a the second coming; and, 2.) The
context of 1 Thessalonians 5:2 clearly indicates that the day of the Lord is a
day when the enemies of God will be destroyed (cf. 1 Thess. 5:3). Christians are
told to watch and live sober because they know the day of judgment is coming (1
Thess. 5:6ff.). The signs vs. no signs argument simply has no exegetical
support.
Conclusion
Although the pretribulation
rapture theory is very popular today, given arguments that are offered in
support of this doctrine we must declare Pretribulationalism to be contrary to
the clear teachings of Scripture. Simply put, there is not one shred of evidence
that can be found in the Bible to support the pretribulation rapture. The
typical Pretribulational arguments offered reveal a pattern: of imposing one’s
presuppositions onto a text without any exegetical justification whatsoever; of
finding subtle meaning between words and/or phrases that were never intended by
the author; of spiritualizing or ignoring passages that contradict the
Pretribulational paradigm; and, of imposing Pretribulationalism upon passages
that actually teach the unity of the eschatological complex (i.e., the rapture,
second coming, general resurrection, and general judgment all occur on the same
day—the day of the Lord). It is our hope and prayer that professing Christians
would cast off this escapist fantasy and return to the task of personal
sanctification and godly dominion.
FOOTNOTES
1
Hal Lindsey, There’s a New World Coming (
2
Dave MacPherson, The Incredible Cover-Up: The True Story of the Pre-Trib Rapture
(Plainfield, NJ: Logos International, 1975), p. 93. The following scholars are
cited by MacPherson who agree with MacPherson’s contention that
pre-tribulationism is a fairly modern doctrine that originated in or around
1830: Samuel P. Tregelles, Alexander Reese, Floyd E. Hamilton, Oswald T. Allis,
D. H. Kromminga, George E. Ladd and J. Barton Payne. MacPherson also cites
several Dispensational, pre-trib scholars who admit that the pre-trib theory is
in fact a new doctrine: W. E. Blackstone, H. A. Ironside, Charles C. Ryrie,
Gerald B. Stanton and John F. Walvoord.
3
R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of
4
For a scholarly defense of this assertion see Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., Before
Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation (Tyler TX: Institute for Christian
Economics, 1989), pp. 141-142.
5 David Chilton, The Days
of Vengeance: An Exposition of the Book of Revelation (Ft. Worth, TX: Dominion,
1987), p. 129.
6
After spending a number of pages analyzing the pretribulation approach to the
word ek
in Rev. 3:10 Douglas J. Moo writes: “1) The evidence that
ek
can mean ‘outside position’ in a spatial sense is nonexistent in biblical Greek;
2) The combination
tareo or
diatareo ek
denotes protection from, or guarding against a real and threatening danger....
4) The phrases qualifying ‘the hour of trial’ imply nothing at all about the
presence or removal of the church. The lexical and contextual evidence strongly
favors the interpretation according to which Christ in Revelation 3:10 promises
His church protection from the real and present danger of affliction when the
‘hour of trial’ comes. Thus, we reject four different meanings commonly attached
to the phrase
tareo
ek: ‘removal from’
(Pentecost); ‘keeping outside of’ (Townsend, Feinberg); ‘removal from the midst
of’; and ‘Protection issuing in emergence’ (Gundry)” (“Response to the
Pretribulational View” in The Rapture: Pre-, Mid-, or Post-Tribulational [
7
Oswald T. Allis, Prophecy and the Church (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and
Reformed, 1945, 47), pp. 213-214.
8
Hal Lindsey, There’s a New World Coming, pp. 59, 61.
9
William Hendriksen, More Than Conquerors (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1982 [1940]),
p. 111.
10
E. Schuyler English, chairman of the editorial revision committee, The New
Scofield Study Bible (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1967 [1989]), p, 1460,
footnote 1.
11
Premillennialists of course will point to Revelation 20 and
argue that it conclusively proves Premillennialism. To our Premillennial
brothers we ask: “What makes more sense as a method of interpretation? Should we
take one passage in an apocalyptic book that is full of non-literal symbolism,
literally as a chronology of the second coming (and so on), even though this
interpretation contradicts several clear passages in the gospels and epistles?
Or, should we interpret Revelation 20 in light of the clear teaching we find in
the rest of the New Testament?” Obviously we should follow the latter procedure.
Revelation 20 is not a description of a literal thousand year reign of Christ on
earth after the second coming. It rather summarizes the period from Christ’s
first advent to the second advent. Jesus comes to earth and by His death and
resurrection binds Satan so that the gospel can go forth to all nations. Christ
as King of kings and Lord of lords rules at the right hand of God. The saints
participate in this rule. The first resurrection is not a bodily resurrection
but refers to regeneration (cf. John 5:24-25; 3:14; Eph. 2:5-6; Col. 2:13-14).
In Revelation 20 John describes the spiritual reign of the church during the
millennium (the one thousand years represent a very long period of time between
the first and second coming of Christ). The church rules from heaven in the
sense that Christians positionally are in Christ seated on the throne with Him
in heaven (cf. Eph. 2:6; Rev. 3:21). The church receives all its authority from
Christ who rules from heaven, yet Christians must apply His word to every area
of life on earThess. Christians rule with Christ and reign over the world by
preaching the gospel, teaching and discipling the nations. In understanding
Revelation 20 we must let Scripture interpret Scripture. One can only understand
Revelation 20 if he uses the clear historical and didactic portions of Scripture
to understand John’s symbolic language.
12
Oswald T. Allis, Prophecy and the Church (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and
Reformed, 1974), pp. 184-185. “Titus 2:13 is often used to support this view,
but it is not speaking of the two comings of Christ, but of one event, ‘the
blessed hope and glorious appearing our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.’ This
is one event because one article (‘the’) covers the two nouns (‘hope’ and
‘appearing’) joined by ‘and’ (and so it is in the original Greek)” (W. Fred
Rice, “The Not-So-Secret Rapture,” in New Horizons [Willow Grove, PA: The
Committee on Christian Education of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, July
1999], p. 19).
13
Paul D. Feinberg, “The Case For The Pretribulation Rapture Position,” in Ben
Chapman ed., The Rapture: Pre-, Mid-, or Post-Tribulational? (Grand Rapids, MI:
Academic Books, 1984), p. 80.
14
J. Marcellus Kik, An Eschatology of Victory (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and
Reformed, 1971), pp. 60-61.
Copyright © Brian Schwertley,
