No explanation of origins succeeds at explaining how everything got here, including how people got here, except for the biblical one. And the biblical one makes sense, because it fits everything that we see. Evidence also confirms the Bible.
An explosion turning into terrific, complicated design, either physical or biological, just can’t be true. We have no basis for believing that, and people really don’t. They opt for the explanation, but not because it is true. It is convenient for personal autonomy. It’s a method for blocking God out of the psyche.
Naturalistic End Time Belief
On the other end, people invent an ending too. It says, everything will burn out and turn into free floating space junk. The universe will go silent. Despite Star Trek, Star Wars, and any other fictional alien story, no life will exist.
How it ends is some kind of global warming, global freezing, collision of an asteroid, called an “impact event,” a world wide nuclear holocaust, or the spread of a incurable deadly disease that kills everyone (pandemic). The latter probably doesn’t work, because it probably just kills people. Animals of many different varieties survive, running around and doing what animals would do without people here. Perhaps they wait for the inevitable evolution into something closer to people.
The avoidance of end time catastrophe in this naturalistic sense means people doing a better job of not destroying the planet. They do that apparently by adapting. This means the soon end of carbon emissions.
Apocalypse
People call the planet ending catastrophe, “apocalypse.” Those who know the Bible might find this ironic, because that’s the Greek word for the Book of Revelation. Revelation doesn’t provide such an ending as what men call an apocalypse. People don’t even know what the apocalypse of Revelation is.
Apocalypse is Jesus coming back to earth with unveiled glory. He came the first time as Savior and He appears the second time as Judge. People are basically correct in that apocalypse is end time destruction, but it is an angry God judging the world because of sin.
The world’s population doesn’t promote talk about sin. People don’t want to hear about sin. They hate that. People want to hear good news, but not what the Bible says is “good news,” the gospel. Good news to the people of the world would be living however they want without destruction. They despise any warning of destruction that comes because of sin. People revel in the idea that destruction might come because of carbon emissions. No problem there.
Preachers and theologians cooperate with the naturalistic end time viewpoint, the cataclysmic ending of the planet, by confusing and contorting what the Bible says about the end. Their views show very little urgency. The true view of the end is urgent. Many Bible preachers today mock any kind of urgency as kooky, elevating instead their spiritualized, allegorical, and subjective positions. Why not opt for a naturalistic view, if the people who are supposed to know the Bible aren’t themselves clear about how everything ends?
Eschatological Boldness
Christians today are very often afraid to make a statement about naturalistic end time views. They are so unsure about how the world will end that they most often stop telling the world what the Bible says. Professing believers are not really that offended about the naturalistic explanations like climate change. They don’t think Christians should speak in dogmatic fashion about what the Bible says.
Even professing Christians consider biblical end time teaching to be questionable. They diminish it to something on the level of art on the other side of the campus from the engineering department. It can’t be viewed like science. Someone cannot trust the Bible that much, especially for prophecy. As a result, Christians themselves and then especially the world is not prepared for how the world will really end.
The shame felt over eschatological beliefs debilitates Christians. They won’t talk about those beliefs in public. Instead, they leave conversations about the end for very private enclaves of the few like minded. This is not the will of God. God expects boldness on talk of the future. The Bible portrays a clear picture of what to expect for the future.
Christians should unequivocally reject the naturalistic end times explanations. They are repugnant and an offense to God. Naturalistic eschatology capitulates to the world system. What the Bible says about the end is not a mere theological position. It is the truth. Everyone around needs to hear what will really occur in the future. They need a thorough debunking of the modern false views of how the world will end.
Scriptural Authority
People want to live like they want. A major contributing factor eliminates future judgment of God. Satan and his minions attack the teaching of the second coming of Jesus Christ.
Confusion over the second coming, when Jesus comes and judges the world, takes away a major motivation for salvation and personal purity. If people don’t think Jesus is coming, they can or might live however they want. They don’t consider the consequences of their sin.
Christians with boldness must stand on the teaching of creation and of the end of the earth. They must embrace what scripture teaches. Satan told Eve in the Garden of Eden, “Thou shalt not surely die.” The capitulation to the world on the end times offers a similar lie to the people of the world. They miss the blessing (Revelation 1:3) of an important warning of their dire future without Jesus Christ.
I understand the context you’re dealing in. People who allegorize prophecy damage faith in the Bible.
I read something from Thomas Ross, which agrees with David Cloud as well as Ryrie, Pentecost, Chafer and other dispensationalists that I believe creates confusion for true Bible students.
Thomas distinguished between “the day of the Lord” and “the great and terrible day of the Lord.” He said the former includes the time of tribulation while the latter is the second coming of Christ. I have collated every mention of the day of the Lord (OT and NT) and I cannot see one passage that includes the time of tribulation. Zechariah 14 teaches that the day of the Lord comes after the armies are gathered against Jerusalem. Joel teaches that the day of the Lord is preceded by the sun, moon, and stars falling from the skies, which Christ said would also precede His second coming in Matt 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21.
Do you believe that the day of the Lord includes the tribulation? If so, could you provide an exegetical reason for that belief? I do believe this goes along with clarity and believing what the Bible teaches about prophecy.
Hello David,
Allegorization is part of it, but it’s not the main part. The ones who allegorize are also those who don’t want eschatology to be essential, a kind of deal breaker. I’ve noticed many unsaved people allegorize, so it seems to be the favorite of unsaved people.
I’m saying that there is a weakness about end times, period. People are ashamed about talking about it. Much of that relates to naturalism, a man-centered explanation for everything.
I understand a minimal connection to “what-view-of-the-timing-of-the-rapture” someone takes. I don’t think the differences on the timing of the rapture relate to this apathy and shame professing Christians feel over end time teaching. I also get that you want to talk about it, and no one here has been writing on this subject that is very close to the surface for you, and I understand that, because it is pretribulational rapture is still the go-to position of IFB, unaffiliated Baptists, fundamentalists, etc. Ever since Marvin Rosenthal wrote his book, The Pre-Wrath Rapture, that position has been in the discussion. I’ve heard it among a small minority of independent Baptists. A short time later, however, the late fundamental Baptist pastor, Roland Rasmussen, wrote a book teaching a Post-Trib or Pre-Wrath position. People in his orbit took that position and I ran into them in various situations.
I can see how that you would think that people just take pre-trib based on tradition. It’s the tradition or the heritage of independent Baptists, who are dispensationalists. However, I taught or preached through every word of the Bible and in certain cases, preached a few times through certain books. Exposing all of scripture over 33 years, I would have changed, but I saw pretrib as cohesive with all the Bible.
Since you mentioned Thomas Ross, I would like him to answer your comment on that point that you mention about him in the comment. Maybe I’ll come back and answer it. Yours is a very narrow point about the use and meaning of “Day of the Lord.” There are a lot of arguments either way.
You’re partially correct. I have brought this up twice now or maybe this is the third time. I don’t mean to hijack your website for it. It means something to me now because I just told my church I don’t believe the Bible teaches the pre-trib rapture (a conclusion I came to after I became the pastor). Obviously in an IFB church that didn’t go over well and the first proposition I made was that the day of the Lord does not include the tribulation, which is why I posed it to you. You said my point is very narrow (assuming yours would be broader). But my point is not based on speculation but clear exegetical logic on the issue.
I know people come here with their soapboxes all the time, I’ve read their comments on various subjects. I’ll try not to do that, but I do think mine is a fair question from and honest motivation with at least a point worth considering.
Also, I’ve never read anything by Rosenthal or Rasmussen. I’m not after the Anderson order. I first heard the post-trib position from two different unaffiliated landmark Baptists, Jason Cooley and Sam Adams. I don’t agree with everything they say. I set out to prove them wrong on this only to find that the pre-trib arguments I had heard and made fell short of proving it.
Ok, I’m off the soap box. I’ll wait until you write something about the pre-trib to bring it up again.
Thanks again for all you do in writing. It’s been a real encouragement to me. I’d still like to speak with you about prayer sometime if you ever have a free 30 minutes or so. 520-330-8839.
Hi David,
When I said narrow point, you didn’t argue about the position as a whole, but on the narrower point of the Day of the Lord. That’s all I meant by that.
I’ve never heard of those two men you mentioned, but I read Rosenthal’s book with great interest, and I then read Rasmussen’s book. I’m in part telling you that, because I’ve read two books on the subject and with great interest. I grew up with a man as a close friend as a jr/sr higher, whose brother now is maybe one of the most prominent supporters of Pre-Wrath, and operates the Pre-Wrath Rapture website, Dr. Alan Kurschner. Alan and I went to the same high school and essentially he grew up in a town in which I lived for 12-13 years, between 12 and 25 years of age. He started the PreWrath website, but also eschatos, which is focused on this one doctrine.
Hello David! I can’t get into an extensive discussion right now, but I believe the “great and terrible day of the LORD” is the second half of the Tribulation, not the specific event of the second coming of Christ. The “day of the LORD” is used in a broader way for all kinds of judgments from God, including, but not limited to, the entire seven-year Tribulation, the specific day Christ returns to earth, judgments on the city of Babylon that happened many years ago, etc. I am writing this comment simply to clarify what my position on it is. Thank you.
Please don’t take this personally, but I am glad that your disavowal of the Biblical pre-Trib Rapture did not go over well, as it was the repudiation of a Scriptural position.
In terms of Joel, when we recently had that book preached through verse-by-verse by our assistant pastor, he explained that the “day of the LORD” passes from the historical judgement of a serious locust plague to future tribulation judgments. It would seem really hard to not have the demon-locust creatures in the book of Revelation not be part of the Day of the LORD in Revelation, alluding to the book of Joel.
The outline of the book of Revelation clearly supports a pre-Trib Rapture, taking place at the same time as the “come up hither” that divides the “things which are” from the “things which shall be hereafter” in the outline of Revelation.
I am not going to be the one to go through all those texts with you, but I would strongly urge you to reconsider and return to the Biblical pre-Trib Rapture position.
Thank you for reading the blog and for your comments.
Thank you for the clarification. Forgive me for misstating your position. As I said, if someone here opens it for discussion I will be back for discussion on it. Sorry again for changing the topic.
Hi Bro. David,
Concerning the timing of the Rapture, I do not know the specific variation of Post-Tribulationism that you are leaning towards, but out of the many strong biblical arguments for a Pre-Tribulation Rapture is the following:
The citizenry of the Millenial kingdom.
It is quite obvious from many Old Testament prophecies, that in the Millenial Kingdom there will exist a citizenry of humans who are not in glorified bodies yet. They will still marry, bear children, work the land (needing food), and die. Passages such as Isaiah 65:20-25 is one example.
This poses a problem for Post-Tribulation. If the Rapture coincides with the Return of Christ to Earth, and is basically one event, then:
1. All the believers at the end of the Tribulation will be caught up into heaven and changed into glorified bodies.
2. There will be no saved/believers entering the Millenium in their natural bodies.
3. This will contradict the many passages about believers in their natural bodies in the Millenium.
In Christ,
TG
I’m very fine with you two discussing this in the comment section as long as everyone keeps it civil, which I would assume.
Hello Tenrin,
I can’t speak for everyone who believes or argues for post-trib, nor do I want to because there are some crazies out there. My reason for being post-trib is simple. Jesus said He is coming back after the tribulation. Paul said the day of Christ will not come except there come a falling away first and the man of sin is revealed. Not one passage can be exegetically proven to show that Christ comes before the tribulation so I believe Jesus and Paul’s words.
Now, to your point.
Old Testament prophets, specifically Zechariah 14 and Isaiah 59:20, make two things clear that answer both the problem you posed and also the argument by many who are pre-trib that if the rapture is post-trib there will be no one at all left to populate the earth.
To your question. The Jews will be saved when they see Christ coming with His army of saints. This will, of course, leave saved people in their natural bodies and also will give back to the Jews the land they had been promised in the covenant.
To the second accusation that the post-trib leaves no one to populate the earth, which is a commonly held and espoused pre-trib view. Zechariah 14:16 says “every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem.” This parallels with Rev. 19:14-15 which states that Christ will smite “the nations” and he shall rule them [the nations] with a rod of iron. In Revelation “the nations” are distinct from the saints as well as Zechariah 14 the saints are distinguished from “the nations which came up.” In fact, Zechariah 14 says “all the saints” come with Christ. Which would of necessity include those saints alive during the tribulation.
It would appear from prophetic writing that those nations will have the chance to follow and obey Christ, but ultimately most of them will follow Satan when he is released at the end of the millennium.
Hello Brother David,
As for Christ saying that He will come back after the Tribulation, I believe that also. As you should well know, Pre-Trib position holds that Christ will come back to Earth after the Tribulation, together with the previously raptured people. Verses that show Christ will come after the Tribulation do not settle the issue at all.
Therefore, the question should be: are there verses about Church Age believers being taken out of the Tribulation period? And to that question, the answer is clearly yes.
One example:
Revelations 3:10 “Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.”
The Lord Jesus promised to keep (tereo) thee (the Philadelphian church, and by extension all bible believing churches) from (ek, meaning out of, not through), the hour (hora) of temptation (peirasmos) which shall come upon all the world.
Careful exegesis reveals that the very words that the Holy Spirit used exclude a Post-Trib understanding that God will protect believers going through the Tribulation.
1. The temptation mentioned is not the daily temptations that believers face, but a global temptation, corresponding to the Tribulation period.
2. God will keep believers “out of” (preposition ek), not “through” (preposition “dia” would be used if this were the Spirit’s intention)
3. God will keep believers “out of” not only the temptation itself, but out of “the hour” (the time) of the temptation. Which means that believers will not even be in that time. Which strongly teaches that they will be taken out of that time, through Rapture.
This of course agrees with the whole exegesis of the book of Revelation, which is the most extensive book in the Bible about the Tribulation period. It is very revealing to see that the word “ekklesia” occurs 19 times from chapter 1-3 (church age), and none at all from chapter 4-19 (tribulation), and one more time in the epilogue (22:16).
To that we can add 1 Thessalonians 4-5, but since you asked for one passage, I will proffer Revelations 3:10 for the moment being.
About the natural bodies in the Millenium issue. Am I correct in surmising that you believe thus:
1. All the believers at the end of the Tribulation will be raptured, changed into resurrection bodies.
2. Leaving only unbelievers on the Earth with their natural bodies when Christ touch down on mount Olives.
3. Therefore at the start of the Millenium, only unbelievers will enter the Kingdom with their natural bodies.
This is the consequence of Post-Trib, but I just want to make sure we are on the same page before analyzing it with Scripture.
In Christ,
TG
Hello Tenrin,
I want to be clear that I was not accusing you of not believing that Christ would come after the tribulation as He obviously stated.
Revelation 3:10 does not exegetically show that Christ will come back before the tribulation of those days. I assume you believe that Bible interpretation uses what is clear to interpret what is unclear. It is not at all clear to me that the “hour of temptation” is the tribulation period. Nor is it clear to me that “keep thee from” requires the removal. I assume that the Israelites were “kept from” the final judgments that were poured upon the Egyptians without being removed from the earth. In fact, the Bible plainly specifies that the vials of wrath are only poured out on unbelievers. So even if the hour of temptation is Daniel’s seventieth week (which I don’t believe it is), this verse does not require by any means a pre-trib coming of Christ to rapture the saints.
Of course the word church is found 19 times because the first three chapters are letters to the churches. God says the whole book of Revelation is the angel sent by Jesus to testify to the churches. I wonder why Revelation was written to the churches if they will be gone. Of course, that doesn’t prove post-trib, but I think it is a valid question.
As I stated in the previous post. All living saints will be changed and gathered to Christ at the last trump, the trump of God, the great sound of a trumpet (mixing 1 Cor 15, 1 Thess 4, and Matt 24 just for your reading pleasure). Then, according to Zechariah 14, the unbelieving Jews will look upon Christ, repent, and be saved. This would leave SAVED BELIEVERS in their non-glorified bodies to populate the millennial kingdom, all Jews. Also, the Bible seems to plainly state that there will be some left of the nations who Christ (and the saints) will rule with the rod of iron. So I do not believe that there will be only unbelievers entering the millennium.
I have a list of every reference to the coming of Christ. Not one of those exegetically shows Christ coming before the tribulation. In fact, 2 Thessalonians 2 says “I beseech you by the COMING of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering (rapture) together unto him.” Then in verse 8 it says that Christ destroys the antichrist “with the brightness of His COMING.” Can you show exegetically that those are two different comings?
Also, Mark 13:26 says “Then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with power and great glory.” While Titus 2:13 (a famous pre-trib verse aka “Don’t mess with my blessed hope”) says “Looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of our Great God and Savior Jesus Christ.” Another question I have is what exegetical reason does the pre-trib have to say that the “Glorious Appearing” of Titus is not Christ’s coming “in power and great glory.” I don’t say this with animosity, but the typical answer I hear is “Well, because we know there is a pre-trib rapture and we’re looking for Christ not the antichrist so they have to be different.” So I’d appreciate an exegetical argument on both of those questions if you would be willing to take the time.
Finally, I have read 1 Thess. 4-5 many times and I see no exegetical argument that proves Christ comes back before the tribulation there, but I’d be willing to hear your exegesis on that as well.
Thanks
Hi David,
I did not think that you were accusing me of such, I was merely pointing out that the coming of Jesus after the Tribulation is a part of Pre-Trib theology also. So, no offense taken.
I do want to point to something that many post-trib advocates miss or downplay (not necessarily you), and that is the Bible can talk about the coming of Christ and refers to two different times altogether. This is evident if we look at the Old Testament, where the Messiah was prophesied to come in humbleness and suffering as a servant to die, and also prophesied to come as a king in judgment and conquering and building a kingdom.
In hindsight, of course we know today that the two very different aspects of the prophecies about the Messiah would not be fulfilled in one go, or one coming to be precise. He came once to die, and He will come once more to reign.
In the same vein, when the New Testament prophesies about the return of Christ, there are details that do not match up. Pre-Tribulationists fear that the Post-tribulationists are making the same mistake that some Jews made about the OT prophecies. They expected one coming of the Messiah, so they disregard some contradictory details (the suffering part mostly), and therefore fail to see that if all the details were given full value, two comings of the Messiah should be expected. Yes, it is often hard to differentiate the first coming from the second coming of the Messiah, because they occur in one passage. For instance: Isaiah 9:6-7. The Child born is obviously in His first coming. And the kingdom and throne of David in verse 7 is in His second coming. One passage, talking about the same person, the Messiah, but actually describing two separate advents.
The same is true about the Rapture and the Return to Earth of our Lord Jesus Christ. The Rapture is said to be a mystery, i.e. “secret” (1 Cor. 15:51), whereas the Second coming to Earth is a well know prophecy in the OT (for instance Zec. 14). The Rapture is said to happen in the twinkling of an eye, and a catching up to heaven (1 Th. 4; 1 Cor. 15), but see what Mark 13:26-27 says: “And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.” Mark 13 describes a gathering of the elect through the agency of angels, not an instantaneous. The details are very different from 1 Thes. 4 and 1 Cor. 15.
Jude 1:14-15 talks about the coming of Jesus with His saints, whereas 1 Th. 4:13-17 and John 14:1-4 talks about the coming of Jesus to receive His saints unto Himself.
Clearly the details drive us to conclude to two different occasions here.
About Revelations 3:10, notice:
1. The hour of temptation is the Tribulation, because it “shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.” This is not talking about our daily tribulations, as those are not global. The Tribulation is global. Also, our daily tribulations are already here. First century churches already face persecutions, martyrdoms, confiscations, etc. But this time of global temptation is still future. It “shall come” which points to something special, a prophesied specific time, i.e., the Tribulation. I hope this makes the matter from unclear to clear for you.
2. Also, Church Age believers will be kept “out of” this time of global temptation. Again, the Greek word used is very clear, the preposition “ek” (out of) not “dia” (through). There is no corresponding promise to the Israelites in the plaques of Egypt. And as Israel is distinct from the Lord’s churches, typologically speaking Israel being in Egypt while the plagues were unfolding correponds to Israel in the Tribulation period, not the Lord’s churches. It is true that God no where promises to keep Israel “ek” (out of) the Tribulation, but God does promise his churches to keep them “ek” (out of) it.
That’s all I have time for today. I hope to continue some other thoughts in the coming days.
Tenrin,
I have heard the argument that the Bible “can” speak of Christ’s coming while speaking of two different events as was done in the OT. I don’t downplay that the Bible did that, because it did do that. However, it is clear in hindsight that the Bible gave clear distinguishing differences that would differentiate that (i.e. “Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself”). However, we must agree that because God did that before is not proof that the second coming of Christ will be the same. So, if the supposed “distinctions” between the Rapture (which takes place at THE coming of the Lord) and the Second Coming (also called THE coming of the Lord) are shown to be manmade inventions rather than Biblical distinctions, we should not teach what the Bible does not say.
I understand that you are afraid that I am missing the distinctions. I fear that you have “Let a man deceive you” that “the day of Christ” will come BEFORE the falling away and revelation of the antichrist is revealed. Paul made it very clear that we were to “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;” It seems obvious to me that this is exactly what has happened those who believe in the pre-trib “day of Christ.”
I have seen the list put out by Chafer and Walvoord about the differences of the Rapture and Second Coming. I believe they fail to pass the test to exegetically prove a difference between the comings. I will address the aspects you have distinguished one point at a time.
1. “The Rapture is said to be a mystery, i.e. “secret” (1 Cor. 15:51), whereas the Second coming to Earth is a well know prophecy in the OT (for instance Zec. 14).”
Answer: First, I always find it interesting that pre-trib so wants to use the word “secret” for the coming of Christ. I personally don’t see how a “glorious appearing” is secret, nor how “The Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God” is considered “secret.” (I know that most pre-trib writers say that the shout, voice, and trump of God are only heard by the saints, but that is not exegesis, nor is it logical, nor is it Biblical Compare Rev. 1:7). Second, contextually, it is not the Rapture itself that is a mystery, PLEASE DON’T IGNORE THIS. 1 Cor 15:51 clearly says, “Behold, I shew you a mystery; (SO WHAT IS THE MYSTERY?) We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,” The mystery is CLEARLY that some would be changed without dying, not the event itself. So, the argument that the rapture itself being a mystery proves that it cannot be the revelation of Christ falls short. Also, to say that it being a mystery proves that it is “secret” cannot be defended from 1 Cor. 15:51.
2. “The Rapture is said to happen in the twinkling of an eye, and a catching up to heaven (1 Th. 4; 1 Cor. 15), but see what Mark 13:26-27 says: “And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.” Mark 13 describes a gathering of the elect through the agency of angels, not an instantaneous. The details are very different from 1 Thes. 4 and 1 Cor. 15.”
Answer: The Rapture is not, in fact, said to happen “in the twinkling of an eye.” What 1 Corinthians 15:51-52 says is that the we shall be CHANGED “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye,” Also, 1 Thessalonians 4 does not say that the Rapture is a “catching up to heaven.” Let’s examine the text. 1Th 4:17 (KJV) “Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” If I were preaching this text, which words exegetically say that we are caught up to heaven? As I read it, it says we are caught up “to meet the Lord in the air:” That’s it. It never, one time, says we go to heaven. It says “We shall ever be with the Lord.” So wherever the Lord goes is where we go. Again, this doesn’t prove that the Rapture is different than the second coming.
3. “Mark 13 describes a gathering of the elect through the agency of angels, not an instantaneous.”
Answer: This is not exegesis. The text of Mark 13 gives no indication of the time it takes for the angels to gather the elect. And again, you are operating on the false assumption that the Rapture itself takes place in the “twinkling of an eye” when in fact it is the changing of those who “are alive and remain” that happens “in the twinkling of an eye.” In fact, 2 Thessalonians 2 says “I beseech you by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto Him…” Is that gathering instantaneous or not? How do you know, or not?
4. “Jude 1:14-15 talks about the coming of Jesus with His saints, whereas 1 Th. 4:13-17 and John 14:1-4 talks about the coming of Jesus to receive His saints unto Himself.”
Answer: The way I commonly see this in the lists is “At the Rapture Christ comes FOR the saints and at the second coming He comes WITH the saints.” So, if I could show a passage where Christ comes both FOR and WITH His saints then this point would be shown to be false as well. I think we would both agree that 1 Thessalonians is written to a New Testament church. In 1 Thessalonians 3:13 Paul says, “The the end he may stablish your hearts (New Testament saints in the “age of grace”) unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ WITH ALL HIS SAINTS.” Why would Paul be talking to these New Testament saints about the coming of Christ WITH all His saints? They would’ve been raptured seven years before, right? NOW PLEASE DON’T MISS THIS POINT. In 1 Thessalonians 4:14 Paul says, “For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God BRING WITH HIM.” We all know that the next verses speak of Christ’s coming to Rapture the saints. So there are two verses, spoken to New Testament saints, that show Christ coming BOTH WITH and FOR the saints. So, the passages that speak of Christ coming “with” the saints cannot be proven to be different than Christ’s coming “for” the saints, since the Bible shows Him doing both at the same time.
Tenrin, based on the answers I gave, which provide clear Scripture. Will you admit that your supposed “differences” are not in fact taught by the passages you cited? It is rather frustrating when discussing this that those who make such assertions will not admit that their assertions are not in fact the clear, exegetical teaching of the Bible, but the repeating of oft-cited arguments that came from Dallas Theological Seminary.
As for Revelation 3:10. I do not believe that it is talking about “daily trials.” I do believe it is a future, worldwide event. I do believe that it is a prophesied, specific time. I believe, based upon my understanding of prophecy, that it refers to the “day of the Lord.” Christ said in Matt. 24:50, “The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of, and shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” I believe this is the “hour of temptation” of which no man knoweth, but the Father, from which we who believe and overcome will be delivered from. However, as I previously stated, Revelation 3:10 provides no exegetical evidence of Christ coming back before the tribulation.
Just so anyone reading this is aware, I’m not using caps to YELL. It’s just that I’ve discussed this so many times that I know people will miss things if you don’t point it out to them. I’m trying to just make the main point clear.
To anyone who cares to consider the case I’m making, I would like to also provide a list of the similarities between the supposed “two comings.” I would like to thank pastor Brandenburg for allowing me the opportunity to present the doctrine of the post-trib rapture. I hope that everyone can see that I do not hold the post-trib to be some evil, Bible-denying, return-of-Christ-hating heretic. I actually believe that the pre-trib position is wrong and indefensible based on the clear teaching of the Bible. So, in this post I will compare Matthew 24 (clearly the “second coming” after the tribulation), with the clear Rapture passages to show that there is great harmony between the two comings. In fact, the distinctions can be summed up as simply insignificant details (i.e. “The voice of the archangel” vs. “he shall send his angels” vs. “revealed from heaven with his mighty angels” OR “the great sound of a trumpet” vs. “the trump of God” vs. “the last trump”)
Christ comes with a trumpet sound (Matt. 24:31; 1 Cor 15:52; 1 Thess. 4:16), with angelic beings (Matt. 24:31; 1 Thess. 4:16; 2 Thess. 1:7), in the clouds (Matt. 24:30; 1 Thess. 4:17, Rev. 1:7), the elect are gathered to Him (Matt. 24:31; 1 Thess. 4:16-17; 2 Thess. 2:1), believers are comforted (Luke 21:28 [“your redemption draweth nigh” is pretty comforting, but you can exclude this from the list if you’d like to since it is interpretation not exegesis]; 1 Thess. 4:18), Christ comes in power and great glory (Matt. 24:30; 1 Thess. 4:16 [You can exclude this as well, but I’d say “The Lord Himself shall descend from heaven with a shout” is power and great glory]; Titus 2:13; 2 Thess. 2:10), The wicked mourn and are judged (Matt. 24:30; 1 Thess. 5:3; 2 Thess. 1:8-10), it comes “as a thief in the night” (Matt. 24:43; 1 Thess. 5:2; 2 Pet. 3:10; Rev. 16:15), the saints are to be watching (Matt. 24:42 [POST-TRIB]; 1 Thess. 5:6), while the world is drunk and claiming “Peace and safety” (Matt. 24:37-39 [POST-TRIB]; 1 Thess. 5:7; Rev. 18 [Many who are pre-trib say “No way people are saying ‘Peace and safety’ at the end of the tribulation,” but Matthew 24 and Revelation 18 say otherwise]), after the antichrist has been revealed (Matt. 24:15, 29-31; 2 Thess. 2:3), after the falling away (Matt. 24:11-12; 2 Thess. 2:3, 9-12), after the saints are afflicted by the nations for their testimony of Christ (Matt. 24:9-10; 2 Thess. 1:4-10; Rev. 6:9-11; Rev. 12:11, 17), believers are warned not to be deceived that Christ has come (Matt. 24:4-5, 24; 2 Thess. 2:3).
As I read Matthew 24 (supposedly to the Jews even though it was Christ speaking to 4 members of His church who would lay the foundation of the church) and compare it with 1 Thess. 4-5 and 2 Thess. 1-2 it almost seems like Paul thought Matt. 24 was actually for New Testament saints and churches. I don’t see two different comings that are clearly distinct from one another. I’m told that the Bible clearly teaches a pre-trib coming of Christ, but I do not, in the Bible, see evidence for such a coming.
I would also like to point out that many who hold the pre-trib want to turn Matt. 24:36-51 into the pre-trib Rapture. This is exegetically unsound. He says in verse 36 “Of THAT day.” Which day? The day in which the Son of man comes in power and great glory. For instance, to prove “imminence,” many pre-trib authors say that the Rapture happens on a day when no man knows, as a thief in the night. However, that refers clearly to Christ’s post-trib coming. Which is actually echoed in Revelation 16:15 in which Christ says, “Behold, I come as a thief, blessed is he that watcheth.” Both the “thief in the night” and “watching for Christ” are “imminence” arguments, but both apply to the post-trib coming of Christ based on Matt. 24 and Rev 16.
Anyway, thanks again for putting up with my rambling. I hope that someone will be willing to consider this Biblical argument. I also hope that I will not be labeled as a heretic for holding to the post-trib rapture, since I think it is the Biblical position to hold. Also to pastor Brandenburg, I have “scratched the itch” to get this out there and I thank you for allowing it. I do wonder what you think of the arguments I have put forth in response to the pre-trib, but I know you are busy and do not expect a response on this.
Hello David,
Well, so many threads and subpoints are presented here. I am sorry if I cannot invest the time needed to reply to all these in a timely manner. In fact even right now I am having a hard time to decide which “point’ I want to address first.
Let me start with looking at the main passages about the Rapture. I cannot afford to be as thorough as possible, but I’ll try to make relevant comments.
1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:10.
4:13. But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
Paul already taught the doctrine of Rapture to the saints in this church. But this epistle addressed the question of what about deceased believers. Paul maintains that deceased believers will not miss out on the Rapture. This makes most sense for Pre-Trib Rapture. If the Rapture coincides with the Return to Earth, there should be no question in their minds that deceased saints will partake in the Resurrection at that time. The Thessalonians should have known that deceased believers will be resurrected, that is one of the essentials of faith. What they were not sure of is whether the deceased believer will take part in the Rapture. This supports a Rapture that is distinct from the Resurrection promised int he Old Testament (which is after the Rapture, see Daniel 12:1-3).
14:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
The Bible tells us that God will bring the deceased believers with him. This bringing will be from the grave (see John 5:28-29) to meet him in the air and then away to be with him. (See 2 Tim. 3:6 for how the KJV translates the Greek word “ago” as “led away”). So this is not Jesus bringing the saints from heaven to earth, which is what happens in Revelations 19:14 and Jude 1:14. In the Second Coming, the saints are already in heaven, and came down with Jesus. In the Rapture, Jesus came to bring (or take or to catch up) the saints to be with him. As an aside, that the saints are already in heaven in the Second Coming is clear from several things, for instance:
1. The identity of the 24 elders in Rev. 4 and 5, see Rev. 5:9-10, especially clear in the KJV, which the new versions perverts.
2. In Revelations 19, the wife of the Lamb “hath made herself ready” and given the bridal clothes of “fine linen, clean, and white” which is “the righteousness of the saints.” So, the bridegroom and the bride appears together here at the “marriage supper.” She has been judged and rewarded and appears in splendor.
4:15-17 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
This portion describes the event of the Rapture. The Lord shall descend. No mention of the host of heavens (contrast with Revelations 19), although announced by the trump of God and the voice of the archangel. The dead rise first (the burning question of the Thessalonians) followed by those alive at the time. The criteria of participating in the Rapture being “in Christ.” What happens afterward? The raptured saints will be ever with the Lord Jesus. And where will that be immediately after? Is it back to earth to deal with the Antichrist? That seems to be the Post-Trib position, but makes one wonder what is the need for the catching up then? If Jesus will immediately return to earth after the rapture, what is the need? Believers can be changed into incorruptible right where they stand. Of course God can do as He wishes, no one denies that, but it is a valid question for God is not capricious. Also John 14:1-3 supports the Pre-Trib position: Jesus talks about preparing a place in heaven, and then after preparing said place, to come again to “receive you unto myself.” Contextually, this means to go be with Jesus in the place that He had prepared, which is heaven.
4:18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.
They should not fear for their deceased loved ones, for they will not miss the Rapture. Again, this makes the most sense with Pre-Trib theology.
If Post-Trib is correct, the living ones needs to worry more about themselves than the dead. In so many parts of the NT, the churches look forward to the coming of Christ. Including Titus 2:13 (mentioned already), “looking for that blessed hope.” If Post-Trib is correct, I would rather be part of the dead that will be raised at the end, than to go through the Tribulation. A believer would not wish for the Tribulation in his lifetime, (so bad, that Jesus said it’s the greatest since the beginning of the world to the end, and should it not be shortened no flesh would survive, Mat. 24:21-22) so by extension they wouldn’t wish for the Rapture in their lifetime. This is in contrast to the NT churches which looks forward with joy to the Rapture. This makes good sense with the Pre-Trib Rapture, and almost no sense with the Post-Trib Rapture. In fact, Amos 5:18 says: “Woe unto you that desire the day of the LORD! to what end is it for you? the day of the LORD is darkness, and not light.” Now if Post-Trib is correct, as you argue that the day of the Lord coincides with the Rapture, then the Bible pronounce woe to those who desire the Rapture. This is very contradictory.
5:1-3 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. 2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. 3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.
Ok, so when will the Rapture happen? Paul says that there is no need to write about this, because they already perfectly know. Apparently Paul has taught them before. What is this that they know? They know that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. Which means it is unpredictable for church age believers.
But why the sudden mention of the Day of the Lord? There must be a connection between the Rapture and this day of the Lord. I believe you are arguing for a very narrow definition of the day of the Lord, which is the day of the Return to Earth, which to you coincides with the Rapture. However, at least the following points demonstrate that “the day of the Lord” is not only the day of the Return to Earth:
a. 2 Peter 3:10. “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.” The day of the Lord includes the time of the destruction of Earth and the very elements itself. Which according to Revelations 20:11 will occur after the Millenium.
b. Revelation 6:17, in the midst of the Tribulation, people acknowledge that the “great day of his wrath” is come. The day of the Lord in the OT is connected to God’s wrath, and this passage tells us that the Tribulation period is part of that day of the Lord.
c. The use of the birth pang analogy, or as in 1 Th. 5:2 “as travail upon a woman with child.” Childbirth takes time, and the travails of it increases in intensity and frequency, just like in the Tribulation period as described in Revelations.
d. “peace and safety” before the day of the Lord. There is no peace and safety before the Return of Christ to Earth. This is not just a subjective thing, this is written in the Bible. The second seal brings much warfare. The sixth vial prepares for Armageddon, the greatest conflict in history. The various plagues from God of course denies safety from the people of earth, and they know it (Rev. 6:17).
So, why did Paul mention the timing of the day of the Lord in a passage about the Rapture? Because the Rapture will usher in the day of the Lord, the Tribulation period. And therefore, it will come unpredictably as to the time thereof, as a thief in the night.
5:4-8 But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. 5 Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. 6 Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober. 7 For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night. 8 But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation.
The character of the day of the Lord, which is darkness, wrath, is not applicable to NT believers. Therefore they shall not partake in it. That day shall not “overtake” them (katalambano, that is to reach or to attain to them). This makes great sense when we understand the day of the Lord as an extended time. But makes little sense if the day of the Lord is only the Return to Earth. The Return to Earth only takes one literal day, even less, it takes maybe only hours (or minutes??). What is the point to saying, as in Revelation 3:10, (you said that it is talking about the trouble in the Return to Earth) of God promising to keep the NT saints out of this time of temptation, if post-Trib is right and actually the saints will start that day firmly on the earth and experiencing it as it unfolds, to be caught up, and then immediately return again.
5:9-10. For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, 10 Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.
Revelation 6:17 says that the Tribulation period is the day of the wrath of God and of the Lamb. But we are not appointed to wrath. Therefore we will not be in the Tribulation, instead we look forward to salvation. In what form is this salvation: that we will “live together with him” which parallels 4:17 “so shall we ever be with the Lord.” Which in light of John 14:1-3 and how Jesus prepared a place in heaven to receive us unto himself, would mean in heaven. And in Revelations 4-5, we do see the NT saints represented in the 24 elders, bought and paid for by Jesus, after called to “come up hither” by the Lord Jesus, in heaven.
I am sure you want me to deal with some other points you brought up, but just writing this already took longer than I anticipated. I don’t feel like I have to have the last word. I am just sharing my conviction from Bible study about the truth of the Rapture, and since you asked for an exegesis of 1 Th. 4-5, I tried to supply one here, albeit in limited fashion.
Time permitting, I might make more comments on some of the other points brought up.
May the Lord lead us ever to His truth,
In Christ,
TG
Hello Tenrin,
I appreciate your gracious response. I hope you will not hold it against me that I am not convinced by your arguments.
I think that we come at this issue from two very different perspectives. In your response, I see a heavy commitment to the idea that you believe there must be a pre-trib rapture. This clearly affects your thinking when it comes to Bible passages. I understand that this is possible for all of us in many different areas. I have studied the pre-trib position in great depth and could probably argue pre-trib better than most pre-tribbers themselves. You have not presented anything “new” to me that would sway my belief in the post-trib rapture. In essence, we are each trying to convince one another that we know the truth, which can make for a pretty “stalemate” discussion, but I will at least go through the points you’ve made to give a post-trib response and show that 1. You have misinterpreted the position that I hold, and 2. The pre-trib position lacks a Biblical basis and must use flimsy argumentation.
“What they were not sure of is whether the deceased believer will take part in the Rapture.”
Response: I don’t know if this is what they were not sure of, as the Bible does not say. It seems that some of them were sorrowing as others, which have no hope, and Paul was telling them that Christ would bring the dead with Him when He came, so don’t sorrow as those which have no hope.
“This supports a Rapture that is distinct from the Resurrection promised in the Old Testament.”
Response: Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t. Maybe Paul isn’t making that distinction at all, and since the Bible doesn’t say, we’d best not say it either.
“The Bible tells us that God will bring the deceased believers with him. This bringing will be from the grave to meet him in the air and then away to be with Him.”
Response: I don’t see this at all. “With” means with. When Jesus comes from heaven, he will bring the dead in Christ WITH Him. I’ve never heard that explanation before in my life.
“As an aside, that the saints are already in heaven in the Second Coming is clear from several things, for instance:
1. The identity of the 24 elders in Rev. 4 and 5, see Rev. 5:9-10, especially clear in the KJV, which the new versions perverts.”
Response: You say the identity of the elders proves that the saints are in heaven. I believe that the saints are in heaven in the book of Revelation. How does saints being in heaven prove a pre-trib Rapture. Aren’t there saints in heaven now? What about all the saints on the earth in the book of Revelation?
“2. In Revelations 19, the wife of the Lamb “hath made herself ready” and given the bridal clothes of “fine linen, clean, and white” which is “the righteousness of the saints.” So, the bridegroom and the bride appears together here at the “marriage supper.” She has been judged and rewarded and appears in splendor.”
Response: When does Revelation 19 happen? Before or after the tribulation? Before or after the second coming of Christ? In Revelation 11:18 the four and twenty elders say “That thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great…” So, according to the Bible, Jesus comes to reward the saints AFTER, not BEFORE the tribulation. Also, you assume that the wife “making herself ready” shows that the saints (N.T. church or all God’s people?) were raptured seven years prior, but there is nothing in the text that says anything about that. Again, Revelation 11 says Christ judges and rewards, but NOT BEFORE the tribulation. Can you show one place in the Bible which teaches that Christ comes with His rewards before the tribulation?
“That seems to be the Post-Trib position, but makes one wonder what is the need for the catching up then? If Jesus will immediately return to earth after the rapture, what is the need? Believers can be changed into incorruptible right where they stand. Of course God can do as He wishes, no one denies that, but it is a valid question for God is not capricious.”
Response: This is an argument commonly made by the pre-trib position. However, the Bible is clear in Matthew 24 that the elect will be gathered “from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.” Why would Christ have the angels gather everyone to Him before He comes? I mean, they could all walk, or find a plane ticket. You see how this line of questioning just isn’t right. God says the saints are gathered “at His coming.” I could guess that the reason is that Christ wants His saints with Him as He gloriously establishes His kingdom. At the end of the day, I don’t know why God did that, but just because you don’t understand doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
“Also John 14:1-3 supports the Pre-Trib position: Jesus talks about preparing a place in heaven, and then after preparing said place, to come again to “receive you unto myself.” Contextually, this means to go be with Jesus in the place that He had prepared, which is heaven.”
Response: Contextually, Jesus had just told the disciples that He would not be coming until after the antichrist and the tribulation. It seems to me that if He were speaking of a different coming here He would have given some indication that was the case. Do you have textual evidence that this coming is not the same as Matthew 24? On a side note, if this is speaking of the Rapture, wouldn’t that mean that your “1 Corinthians 15 teaches that the Rapture was a mystery” argument isn’t true?
“If Post-Trib is correct, the living ones needs to worry more about themselves than the dead.”
Response: Well, I believe post-trib is correct, and I’m not more worried about myself than the dead, because the Bible says, “God hath not given us the spirit of fear.” If you believe the Bible, don’t worry about the Tribulation. God’s in control.
“In so many parts of the NT, the churches look forward to the coming of Christ. Including Titus 2:13 (mentioned already), “looking for that blessed hope.” If Post-Trib is correct, I would rather be part of the dead that will be raised at the end, than to go through the Tribulation.
Response: This is an oft-repeated sentiment by those who hold the pre-trib, like David Cloud and the men of Dallas Theological Seminary and many others.. I believe that it may be inadvertent, yet it shows a shocking distrust in the goodness of God toward His people. You said, “If post-trib is correct, I would rather be part of the dead that will be raised at the end, than to go through the Tribulation.” So are you saying that if God so called you to face those days, He would be wrong and could not be trusted to take care of you? Have you considered that there are “multitudes” of saints in the tribulation? Do you think they would rather be dead? Is it trusting the Lord to rather be dead than live in the times in which He has placed us? Please understand that this line of reasoning displeases our Lord. God is good, no matter what He allows us to go through.
“A believer would not wish for the Tribulation in his lifetime, (so bad, that Jesus said it’s the greatest since the beginning of the world to the end, and should it not be shortened no flesh would survive, Mat. 24:21-22) so by extension they wouldn’t wish for the Rapture in their lifetime. This is in contrast to the NT churches which looks forward with joy to the Rapture.”
Response: I wish for the Tribulation in my lifetime, because I know it means the soon return of Christ. In fact, Jesus and Paul said that without it, the day of Christ cannot come. I actually do look forward, with joy, to the Rapture. I hope that I am alive and that I live through the Tribulation (I don’t have a death wish) to be on earth when He comes. Apparently it is your own fear that causes your dread to not wish for the Rapture if it meant having to go through the Tribulation. By the way, millions of Christians have faced the exact same types of trials as the saints in the tribulation will face, of course, not to the same degree, yet they faithfully and steadfastly trusted in their Lord through them all. Christ literally told His disciples that they would be turned on by their family and killed for His name’s sake. Should they have, as you, wished for an early death before those days came?
In fact, Amos 5:18 says: “Woe unto you that desire the day of the LORD! to what end is it for you? the day of the LORD is darkness, and not light.” Now if Post-Trib is correct, as you argue that the day of the Lord coincides with the Rapture, then the Bible pronounce woe to those who desire the Rapture. This is very contradictory.
Response: The day of the Lord is not the Rapture. There is no contradiction. The day of the Lord, as Amos mentions, comes upon the wicked and destroys them. The day of Christ, which coincidentally Paul says “SHALL NOT COME, except there come a falling away first and the man of sin be revealed,” is the day for which believers are looking. Since the day of the Lord and the Rapture are not the same, there is no contradiction here.
“They know that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. Which means it is unpredictable for church age believers.”
Response: I wonder if you read my previous post. Zecharaiah 14:7; Matthew 24:36, 43; 2 Peter 3:10; Revelation 16:15. Each of these speaks of the day when Christ comes “as a thief.” Each of them is clearly post-trib (Zech 14 is after the armies are gathered against Jerusalem, Matt 24 Christ says “After the tribulation, 2 Pet. 3:10 says heavens shall pass away as in Isa. 34:4, Rev 16:5 is immediately before the seventh vial). So, the day of the Lord that comes “as a thief” is clearly referring to the post-trib coming of Christ to destroy the wicked, not the Rapture. The day of the Lord does not pertain to the children of light, but is our motivation to keep watching and serving.
“The day of the Lord includes the time of the destruction of Earth and the very elements itself. Which according to Revelations 20:11 will occur after the Millenium.”
Response: According to Isaiah 34:4-5 and Isaiah 13:13, the dissolving of the heavens takes place when the Lord comes to destroy the nations, not after the millennium. Romans 8:18-23 teaches that the “creature” travaileth in pain…waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.” I believe this teaches that at the Rapture (the redemption of our body) the creature will be freed from its corruption. I do not believe this takes place at the end, but at the beginning of Christ’s millennial reign. I don’t believe Jesus is going to rule on this earth while it is sin cursed.
“b. Revelation 6:17, in the midst of the Tribulation, people acknowledge that the “great day of his wrath” is come. The day of the Lord in the OT is connected to God’s wrath, and this passage tells us that the Tribulation period is part of that day of the Lord.”
Response: I believe that the sixth seal, seventh trumpet, seventh thunder (Rev 10), and seventh vial all refer to the coming of Christ. This is not just a “It must be so because I’m post-trib,” but comes from careful exegesis. This also disproves those who are Mid-trib because they don’t understand the book of Revelation. The sixth seal contains many happenings which the OT relates to the “day of the Lord.” For instance, the sun being darkened and moon turned to blood and stars falling from heaven is found in Joel. The heavens being rolled as a scroll is found in Isaiah 34. Men in great fear is a common description of the “day of the Lord.” Also, in the book of Revelation, the sixth seal is too climactic to precede the first six trumpets (which include ⅓ of sun, moon and stars being made dark). Compare “ever mountain and island were moved out of their places” with Rev. 16:20 “And every island fled away, and the mountains were not found.” Also, the fact that the OT says the day of the Lord is the day that the Lord comes back; therefore, “The great day of His wrath is come” makes it apparent that the sixth seal is the coming of our Lord at the end of the tribulation.
“c. The use of the birth pang analogy, or as in 1 Th. 5:2 “as travail upon a woman with child.” Childbirth takes time, and the travails of it increases in intensity and frequency, just like in the Tribulation period as described in Revelations.”
Response: It actually says immediately preceding that “Sudden destruction” but you say, “It takes time.” Who is right, you or the Bible? As I mentioned, men travailing is commonly spoken of as the effects of “the day of the Lord” which cannot come until the sun and moon are darkened, Elijah has come, and the armies are gathered against Jerusalem. Is that before or after the tribulation has started?
“d. “peace and safety” before the day of the Lord. There is no peace and safety before the Return of Christ to Earth. This is not just a subjective thing, this is written in the Bible. The second seal brings much warfare. The sixth vial prepares for Armageddon, the greatest conflict in history. The various plagues from God of course denies safety from the people of earth, and they know it (Rev. 6:17).”
Response: No post-tribber argues that there is peace and safety before the day of the Lord, and that is not what Paul said. He said, “FOR WHEN THEY SHALL SAY, peace and safety.” What is not subjective is that the Bible clearly says that before Christ comes at the end of the tribulation, the world will be as it was in the days of Noah. Consider Matthew 24, in which Christ says this: “But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.” This is NOT pre-trib, as many like to teach (including David Cloud and the Dallas Theological Seminary men). Christ has not changed from the context of His post-trib coming when He says this. You may ask, “Well, how will they be doing that during the tribulation?” I don’t know, but the Bible says it will be so. Read Revelation 18 and see what it says about those in Babylon DURING the tribulation. It says they “lived deliciously (Rev 18:7)” Revelation 18:22-23 says that AFTER her destruction (Which shall come in ONE HOUR, not seven years), there will no more be musicians, pipers, trumpeters…the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride…” So, the Bible is clear that the world will be saying “Peace and safety” DURING the tribulation before that day comes upon them AS A THIEF.
“So, why did Paul mention the timing of the day of the Lord in a passage about the Rapture? Because the Rapture will usher in the day of the Lord, the Tribulation period. And therefore, it will come unpredictably as to the time thereof, as a thief in the night.”
Response: Once again, you say that it will come “unpredictably,” but the Bible gives plenty of things for the children of light that predict the coming of the day of the Lord. You’ll notice in 1 Thess. 5:4-5 that we are NOT overtaken by that day “as a thief.” The pre-trib position holds that the Rapture DOES overtake us as a thief, when the Bible says only those who are not watching are overtaken by that day as a thief. Do you believe that you will be overtaken by the Rapture “as a thief in the night”?
“The character of the day of the Lord, which is darkness, wrath, is not applicable to NT believers. Therefore they shall not partake in it. That day shall not “overtake” them (katalambano, that is to reach or to attain to them). This makes great sense when we understand the day of the Lord as an extended time. But makes little sense if the day of the Lord is only the Return to Earth. The Return to Earth only takes one literal day, even less, it takes maybe only hours (or minutes??). What is the point to saying, as in Revelation 3:10, (you said that it is talking about the trouble in the Return to Earth) of God promising to keep the NT saints out of this time of temptation, if post-Trib is right and actually the saints will start that day firmly on the earth and experiencing it as it unfolds, to be caught up, and then immediately return again.”
Response: First, as I’ve stated, I agree that the “day of the Lord” will not be something in which believers partake. As the Bible clearly states, the signs in the sky PRECEDE the day of the Lord (Joel 2:31 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, BEFORE the great and the terrible day of the LORD come). And Christ, speaking of that day, said this. Luke 21:25-28 “And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 26 Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. 27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.” Clearly, the signs in the skies are not “the day of the Lord,” but come before. That day is the day in which God has promised to destroy the wicked from the earth. We who are watching will be caught up to meet Christ, our redemption, before that day commences. Also, you make a big deal about “then return again.” YES! We get to come back with Christ when He pours out His wrath on those who have persecuted us and then rule and reign with Him.
“Revelation 6:17 says that the Tribulation period is the day of the wrath of God and of the Lamb. But we are not appointed to wrath. Therefore we will not be in the Tribulation, instead we look forward to salvation. In what form is this salvation: that we will “live together with him” which parallels 4:17 “so shall we ever be with the Lord.”
Response: Revelation 6:17 does not say “that the Tribulation period is the day of the wrath of God.” You say that. Many others say that. But not Revelation 6:17. As I said before, there is great exegetical evidence to believe that Revelation 6:17 is actually speaking of the second coming of Christ. You say my definition of “the day of the Lord” is narrow. I would say your definition of “wrath” is very narrow. The wrath from which we are delivered is the wrath of God upon sinners for their sins. I believe Romans 5:9 and 1 Thessalonians 5:9 apply just as much to the saints alive during the seventieth week of Daniel as they do to us today. I don’t believe that the saints in the tribulation face God’s wrath, and I believe that all who believe on Jesus Christ will be delivered from the wrath that all who do not believe will face in that day. I just think you are wrong to say the wrath is the tribulation period. By the way, I recognize that the seven vials are the “seven vials of the wrath of God;” however, it is clear from Revelation 16 that those vials do not affect the saints on earth; therefore, it cannot be said that the saints “face God’s wrath” when the vials are poured out.
I do not need to have the last word either. I think I have shown that the post-trib position is consistent with the teaching of the New Testament and Old Testament. I recognize you are sharing “your conviction from Bible study about the truth of the Rapture.” I would ask if you aren’t just offering the arguments of men like Scofield, Chafer, and Pentecost. They all said the same things that you are saying. You are making the same arguments I made before I actually looked at the issue with a truly open mind to know the truth, even if that meant no pre-trib rapture. Nothing you can say will make 2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 go away. Nothing can change that Christ told His disciples that He was coming “after the tribulation of those days.” I used to wish those passages weren’t in the Bible, but they always were.
You don’t have to deal with my points. I know I have written almost a book by this point, which would be difficult to respond to. I wish you would see that the Bible doesn’t teach a pre-trib rapture, but if not, at least don’t say things like “I’d rather be dead than go through the Tribulation,” as that doesn’t show faith in God if He were to allow such a thing. Who knows, maybe they’ll start lopping off heads in America soon for following Christ and you may experience something terribly difficult for which you will need to trust the Lord, even in the face of something your flesh deems as terrifying.
May God give you grace and peace by our Lord Jesus,
David Thompson
Hello David,
Apologies that my time constraints will not allow me to carry a brisk conversation. How I wish this is a face to face conversation, as there are just so many things to say, and writing is definitely more time consuming.
I do believe in Pre-Trib, but this is also not my first brush with Post-Trib. I have written a book on Eschatology in my native language. I have just found the Pre-Trib arguments stronger and more biblical. Of course I am not the first to come up with Pre-Tribulation, but neither did you come up with Post-Trib yourself. You seem to suggest that I am just echoing Dallas men, which I think is unfair. In my research for my Eschatology book, I have read from many sources. In fact, I’ve only read very little of Scofield or Chafer. I have Chafer’s Systematics somewhere in my inherited library, but have barely read it. Pentecost I have read, at least his Things to Come. There are many Dallas positions I do not take, but I evaluate every issue separately and where they are biblical I say amen.
As I am writing this in the middle of the night, and don’t have much time, let me just be quick about a few points.
1. That Jesus will bring the dead WITH Him, that is from the grave, is clear from the immediate context: “the dead in Christ shall rise first.” Rise means from the grave, to be WITH the Christ in the air. And Christ will bring them from the grave to be with Him, which in John 14 is to His prepared house in heaven.
2. Identity of the 24 elders. You said: “I believe that the saints are in heaven in the book of Revelation. How does saints being in heaven prove a pre-trib Rapture. Aren’t there saints in heaven now? What about all the saints on the earth in the book of Revelation?”
It proves the Pre-Trib rapture because the elders are resurrected saints. They have been resurrected and they have been judged and rewarded. Which means the Rapture already occurred. Yes there are saints in heaven now, but not yet resurrected.
How do we know the 24 elders are resurrected and rewarded?
a. Their description. Positioned around the throne, with white raiment and crowns of gold.
b. The contrast between then and the unresurrected martyred Tribulation saints, described in Rev. 6:9. Their position is under the altar, they are described as souls only.
3. The bride in Rev. 19. Rev. 19 describes the moment of the Return to Earth at the end of the Tribulation. Rev. 11:18 talks about rewarding the OT and Tribulation saints. Predictably, the Post-Trib position blurs the distinction between Israel saints, church age saints, Tribulation saints, etc.
As for NT saints rewarded before the Return to Earth, see above with the 24 elders already having crowns of gold on their heads.
4. You said: “However, the Bible is clear in Matthew 24 that the elect will be gathered “from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.” Why would Christ have the angels gather everyone to Him before He comes? I mean, they could all walk, or find a plane ticket.”
Because you are committed to Post-Trib, you see this gathering of the elect as the same thing as the Rapture. This is very unconvincing to me. It does not match the description of the Rapture in 1 Th. 4 and 1 Cor. 15. Again the details are different.
“They could all walk or find a plane ticket….”
Here at first I find a perplexing statement, but the I realize that you have missed the details of the Rapture, even as you believe it is described in Matt. 24.
In the Rapture, the dead in Christ shall rise first, “then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds.” No instrumentality of angels at all. 1 Corinthians said: “In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall all be changed.”
The Bible affirms that at the sound of the trump:
a. the Lord shall descend
b. The dead shall rise
c. Those alive shall be changed, in the twinkling of an eye, and caught up to meet Jesus in the air.
No angels needed to transport, but a catching up of the dead and alive. Changed in the twinkling of an eye, and then caught up.
With glorified resurrected bodies, there is no need for angels to gather us.
Mat. 24 talks about the gathering of the elect still in their natural bodies at the end of the Tribulation. That’s why they need angels to gather them, so that they can be quickly transported to the place of Christ’s choosing. And that’s why you mentioned walking or taking a plane, because you envision them in natural bodies.
And this brings me back to an unresolved point in a previous thread about the existence of saved believers in natural bodies in the millenium. If post-Trib is correct, then there should be no believers in natural bodies in the Millenium, because they should have all been changed into incorruptible.
You answered:
a. Jews will believe Jesus at His coming. But then the Jews that believe should be raptured and changed into incorruptible. Or do you mean that they only believe after the Rapture? What would be the text justification that Jews will only believe after the Rapture? Malachi 4:5-6 teaches that the repentance of Israel will be before moment of the Return to Earth.
b. That nations will be in their natural bodies in the Millenium. Of course I believe this too, but the point is that Post-Trib makes it so that all the nations will be composed of unbelievers (because believers will already be changed). So, in Post-Trib, Christ will rule over a completely unbelieving world of nations. That’s a very strange position, and one that the OT prophecies do not bear out.
In Pre-Trib position, the Millenium starts out with all believers, and then as those believers bear children, then there will be a mix of believers and unbelievers.
5. You miss my point about the context of John 14, by pivoting to Matthew 24. In the context of John 14, Jesus talks about returning to the Father, preparing a place in heaven (called my Father’s house) for believers, and then promising to come again, and receive you unto myself. So in this context, at the coming of Jesus (Rapture), believers will be brought to be with Jesus in heaven.
6. You misunderstand “mystery,” which as Ephesians chapter 3, is defined by Paul as something not revealed in past ages (such as the OT), but now revealed by revelation in the NT. So, yes, the Rapture was not revealed in the OT, but revealed in the NT. By contrast the Return to Earth was already revealed in the OT. The conclusion being, that the Rapture and the Return to Earth is separate, as one is a mystery and the other not.
7. You said: “If you believe the Bible, don’t worry about the Tribulation. God’s in control.”
Again:
“So are you saying that if God so called you to face those days, He would be wrong and could not be trusted to take care of you? Have you considered that there are “multitudes” of saints in the tribulation? Do you think they would rather be dead? Is it trusting the Lord to rather be dead than live in the times in which He has placed us? Please understand that this line of reasoning displeases our Lord. God is good, no matter what He allows us to go through.”
“Apparently it is your own fear that causes your dread to not wish for the Rapture if it meant having to go through the Tribulation. By the way, millions of Christians have faced the exact same types of trials as the saints in the tribulation will face, of course, not to the same degree, yet they faithfully and steadfastly trusted in their Lord through them all. Christ literally told His disciples that they would be turned on by their family and killed for His name’s sake. Should they have, as you, wished for an early death before those days came?”
Later: “Who knows, maybe they’ll start lopping off heads in America soon for following Christ and you may experience something terribly difficult for which you will need to trust the Lord, even in the face of something your flesh deems as terrifying.”
First, I am not in America, and in my neck of the wood, persecution is a given, it’s just a matter of degree. I was not born in the US, but did spend some years of study in the US. After which, I went to minister overseas in a Muslim majority area. While I do not wish to presume or be haughty, should my blood be required, I rest on the fact that His grace will carry me through and I hope to stand boldly for Him.
You miss the argument completely if you think this is about whether one is ready to face persecution or not. Of course God is in control. Of course obedient Christians will surrender to God’s will. That’s not the argument. The argument is that Christians are looking for the coming of Christ, not for the Tribulation. That’s why it’s a blessed hope. But Post-Trib inadvertently makes Christians look for the Tribulation before looking for the Rapture.
While one is ready to face persecution and surrender to God’s will, it is not shameful to say that we do not wish for persecution, and do not see it as desirable. It’s a blessing not to see a prophesied evil come to fruition in our life time. For instance, to the godly king Josiah, God said “Because thine heart was tender, and thou didst humble thyself before God … Behold, I will gather thee to thy fathers, and thou shalt be gathered to thy grave in peace, neither shall thine eyes see all the evil that I will bring upon this place, and upon the inhabitants of the same” (2 Chr. 24:27-28). Jesus himself taught us to pray: “and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.”
Are we wiser than Jesus to want the Tribulation to come upon us? This is separate from whether we surrender to God’s will if He does allow sufferings on us.
I’m out of time, and I have not even finished replying to your points in one thread, not to mentions some other threads. But I have read them. I appreciate that you believe you have the biblical position and think you are trying to convince me of some truth. I may or may not have more opportunities to give more replies, but I assure you that my Pre-Trib position is thought through. I can confidently say that Jesus can come today, as I wait for the Son from heaven.
Hello Tenrin,
Please forgive my sarcasm in the statement about “why wouldn’t they walk or get a plane ticket.” Also, I am thankful to hear of your service for the Lord. I currently live in southwestern Michigan and pastor Bible Baptist Church in New Buffalo, Michigan. If you’re ever near the area and would care to do so, I’d be more than happy to treat you to a meal and even give you a place to stay. My personal information is on our church website.
I’ll give my last word on the matter how I started. Jesus said He was coming back after the tribulation of those days. Paul said “Let no man deceive you by any means, for that day shall not come except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed.” I’ve yet to hear any Biblical reason that I should say Jesus will come back before the tribulation and that the day of Christ will come before the falling away and revelation of the antichrist. I just can’t ignore the plain teaching of the Bible. I don’t want to deceive men to believe what Paul said not to deceive them into believing, as that would be disobeying God’s Word.
I will read your future responses, but I think I am finished dialoging in this format. If you’d like to discuss it privately, my email is davidthompson2415@gmail.com and my phone number is 520-330-8839.
Hello David,
Somewhere in all this “exegesis”, do you make a distinction between “the church, the body of Christ” (Ephesians 1:22-23) and “the church in the wilderness” (Acts 7:38)?
In the book of Revelation, is God dealing with the body of Christ (the church) and Israel (the church in the wilderness”) simultaneously? Are their distinctions and differences between unfinished promises to Israel (Romans 11) and the body of Christ?
Are the two witnesses in Revelation 11 and the 144,000 (Revelation 7, 14) who are from the 12 tribes “preaching” at the same time as those who preach “the gospel of the grace of God”? Are they preaching the same things as “the church” or something similar but distinct?
Also, look carefully at Revelation 14:6-7
And I saw another ANGEL fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, SAYING with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.
(Rev 14:6-7)
This mimics the preaching of Jonah, rather than “the gospel”. Therefore, how can an angel be “saying” what the scriptures clearly state when Paul clearly wrote:
But though we, or an ANGEL from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
(Gal 1:8)
The angel of Revelation 14 is preaching an “accursed” gospel IF the church is not raptured before that time.
This to me is a very clear indication, as with the two witnesses and the 144,000 (Jewish) that at this time the church must be gone (raptured).
From these biblical observations, I can clearly argue a 3.5 year or 7 year “pre-tribulation”, but not a post-tribulation.
Tom
Hello Tom,
I don’t know why you put “exegesis” in parenthesis. I have given each and every text for which I have made my case. If you had read my previous posts, you would see that I said that the physical descendants of Abraham will be saved at the end of Daniel’s seventieth week, thereby making a distinction between the church and Israel, as is obvious in Romans 9-11.
Tom, God can and has dealt with the church and Israel simultaneously. He did so when he regathered Israel, fulfilling the “dry bones” prophecy. He did so when he allowed the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. He clearly does so in the book of Revelation when He cares for and protects a remnant of Israel while the antichrist turns to go after “those that keep the testimony of the Lord.” So two things can be true at the same time and the difference between Israel and the church does not necessitate the rapture taking place first.
The Bible never says that the 144,000 preach anything. If I’m understanding your comment correctly, you are talking about hyper dispensationalism which advocates for multiple gospels, as C.I. Scofield did in his study Bible. I think most here would disagree with that conclusion.
I believe that the everlasting gospel is the gospel of Jesus Christ and I believe it is heresy to say otherwise. I don’t believe, like David Cloud, that the “gospel of the kingdom” is different than Paul’s gospel. Paul clearly preached the same message as John the Baptist, “Repent and believe on the Christ.”
As far as Galatians 1 not applying during the tribulation, I also believe that is heresy. God never insinuates that during the time of tribulation New Testament truths will no longer apply. Again, I assume that most on this blog agree with me, or at least I hope they do.
I don’t plan on spending any more time trying to refute hyper dispensationalism because I believe it is a fringe position that is very wrong.
I do agree that “THAT DAY” is speaking of the rapture, and I wish others would be willing to see that truth.
You wrote:
“I believe that the everlasting gospel is the gospel of Jesus Christ and I believe it is heresy to say otherwise. I don’t believe, like David Cloud, that the “gospel of the kingdom” is different than Paul’s gospel. Paul clearly preached the same message as John the Baptist, “Repent and believe on the Christ.”
You certainly go out of the way to be very particular of every word (A good thing!), but when I did just that with Revelation 14:6, you run to call it heresy??
You then say that John the Baptist preached the same gospel as Paul?? He did not, for that gospel that puts you into the body of Christ by the baptism of the Holy Ghost (Romans 6:1-4), by believing in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) was never revealed to John the Baptist!
You get “saved” throughout the bible by “grace through faith” by believing what God said during the different dispensations, for no one throughout time, until his resurrection even knew anything about the body of Christ until it was revealed by revelation to Paul (Galatians 2:2, Ephesians 1-3, Colossians 2).
These are my last points. You get to your wrong conclusions of post millennialism because of not rightly dividing the words of truth by assuming (1) wrongly concerning Ezekiel 38, (2) that the gospel preached in Revelation 14 is the same as the church, the body of Christ, preaches today, (3) not understanding the different promises God made “who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets” (Hebrews 1:1), and (4) that John the Baptist preached the gospel as we know it today. All you have to do is read Acts 19:1-6 to clear that up.
You need to think about these things instead of making false accusations.
Tom
Hello David,
” Paul says “SHALL NOT COME, except there come a falling away first and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition…” (2 Thessalonians 2:2)
It says “THAT DAY shall not come”. What day is that? The clear context is based on “the rapture” in v1 and the explanation that Paul already told them about in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18. That is one of the verses that the 7 year tribulation (Revelation 4) has trouble with since the son of perdition is not revealed until Revelation 13.
As you wrote, that could be used for a post-tribulation, but as my previous post mentioned, you will have to give clear scriptural rebuttals to those “dispensational” truths.
Hello David,
I will take your points and respond. Please stop with this insinuation of a saved born again Christian who believes the gospel of the grace of God by calling what he teaches “heresy”. That is uncalled for when one thinks he can refute another brothers argument with evil surmissings.
You wrote:
“He did so when he regathered Israel, fulfilling the “dry bones” prophecy. He did so when he allowed the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.”
He fulfilled the prophecy of Israel coming back to life in 70 AD? How was Israel regathered in 70 AD? Israel and the temple were destroyed at that time, completely setting aside Israel as he did when they went into captivity. They been amoung Gentile nations for 2,000 years and only recently these “Gentile nations” and not God gave Zionists some of their land back during the 1914 Belfour declaration. Your statement above is believed by no one who actually reads Ezekiel 38 and can see that this is a prophecy that did not come to pass, even under Ezra and Nehemiah.
You wrote:
“So two things can be true at the same time and the difference between Israel and the church does not necessitate the rapture taking place first.”
That has never been true throughout the scriptures. To deny “rightly dividing the word of truth” by understanding the dispensations of God “according to the dispensation of God which is given to me” by which Paul was given revelation by God concerning the church, the body of Christ, as Noah was given revelation to build a boat, Abraham given revelation about a land that he was going to inherit and Moses given the dispensation of the law.
By telling you those things, does not make me a hyper-dispensationalists, for I do not deny OT teachings or the teaching of non-Pauline books to the church. They are very much necessary in the Christians life.
You wrote:
“The Bible never says that the 144,000 preach anything.”
They were sealed as servants of God. If you believe they were like the typical saved person that never opens his mouth because he is ashamed of Jesus Christ, please tell me what these eunuchs did on earth as servants? Be ye followers of me, who are to follow the Lord, would definitely include what Steven and all the apostles did, “GO ye…”.
Continued…
Tom