Chapter Nine - Views of the Millennium and Rapture

The doctrines of Millennium and Rapture of Saints are important to the study of Eschatology. Since there are too many different views of these important doctrines, the readers may feel difficult to comprehend these doctrines. This chapter is designed to help the readers to understand the rationale of all the major views. This chapter is divided into two major divisions, they are:

1. views of the millennium; and

2. views of the rapture.

1. VIEWS OF THE MILLENNIUM

Sincere believers disagree about what the one thousand years of Revelation 20 is, and one's view of the Millennium tends to govern his view on most other details of eschatology. There are three major views:

1. amillennial;

2. postmillennial; and

3. premillennial.

There are hermeneutical reasons for these and other assumptions that enter into why one takes the position he does. It is the purpose of this section to examine these factors in order to give you a better basis for deciding which view you will take or perhaps a better reason for taking the view to which you already hold.

1.1 Definition of Terms

Before proceeding to deal with specific aspects of the last-day events, there is benefit in defining some basic terms:

1. The rapture / translation of the church is the catching away of the church from earth to heaven.

2. The judgment seat of Christ is the place where Christ judges Christians, immediately after their rapture, on the basis of their conduct as Christians, resulting in a receiving of rewards by some and a sense of loss for others.

3. The marriage supper of the Lamb is a term used in Revelation 19:7-10 to refer to the specific occasion, occurring sometime between the rapture and the revelation of Christ, when the church is eternally united to Christ as His bride.

4. The great tribulation is a period of seven years, beginning shortly after the rapture, when judgment is meted out upon the world at large for its sinfulness of past ages. At this time the restored nation of Israel is tried by the fire of suffering to bring the Jews to a receptive attitude toward Christ as their Messiah-Deliverer. Because the last half of this period is more severe in the degree of suffering experienced, the term is often used in reference only to the last three-and-a-half years of the total seven while the first half of this period is known as the beginning of the sorrow.

5. The revelation of Christ is a term commonly used to designate the return of Christ to the earth at the conclusion of the great tribulation, when He comes with the saints of the church, raptured seven years before, to bring deliverance for Israel which is being oppressed by the Antichrist.

6. The battle of Armageddon, a name taken from Revelation 16:16, designates the battle in Israel which brings the great tribulation to a climax, as the Antichrist triumphs over the Jews to seize Israel's homeland for himself. Part of the struggle, probably its beginning, takes place at the historic battle scene of Megiddo, well north of Jerusalem, but descriptive passages show it will end at Jerusalem.

7. The judgment of Gentiles is an occasion of judgment, immediately following the time of Christ's deliverance of Israel from the Antichrist, when a determination is made regarding which Gentiles will be permitted to enter the millennial period. The criterion for judgment will be personal righteousness as believers in Christ, evidenced by the attitude of each shown during the great tribulation toward Christ's "brethren," the Jews.

8. The millennium is a period of one thousand years, beginning soon after the judgment of Gentiles, when Christ rules in perfect righteousness and continual peace over the state of Israel, in particular, and over all the world, in general, with resurrected saints, now glorified, acting as assistants in this rule. The term millennium is from the Latin mille, a thousand, and annus, a year, means a thousand years. It is not found in Scripture, but the term "a thousand years" occurs 6 times in Revelation 20:2-7. The Greek term chiliasm frequently occurs in theological literature and denotes the doctrine that Christ will come and set up an earthly kingdom for a thousand years. The fact of such a kingdom is firmly established in the teaching of the Old Testament, but the book of Revelation gives its duration.

9. The great white throne judgment follows the millennium and is the occasion when the unsaved of all ages will receive their sentence of eternal punishment in hell for their sin.

10. The premillennial view of last things holds to the existence of a literal, earthly millennium, as just defined, and believes that the rapture of the church precedes it.

11. The postmillennial view holds to the existence of a literal millennium, resulting from the spread of the Gospel and the Salvation of a vast number of people, with Christ returning to the earth at its conclusion.

12. The amillennial view, denying the existence of a literal millennium, sees the millennial promises as being fulfilled in a spiritual kingdom; some adherents hold that this kingdom is Christ's rule over His church here on earth and others that it is God's rule over the saints in heaven.

13. The pretribulational view holds that the rapture of the church will be not only premillennial but pretribulational; that is, it will occur before the beginning of the great tribulation, meaning that the church will not experience this severe period of suffering.

14. The posttribulational view agrees with the pretribulational view that the rapture will be premillennial, but holds that it will occur after the great tribulation, meaning that the church will be on earth during this seven-year period.

15. The midtribulational view also agrees that the rapture will be premillennial but disagrees in holding that it will occur at the midpoint of the great tribulation, meaning that the church will not experience the last half of this period when suffering will be the most severe.

16. The pre-wrath view of the rapture departs from the customary two-fold division of the seventieth week of Daniel 9:27 and suggests that a threefold division (i.e. "beginning of birth pangs," "great tribulation," "day of the Lord") is more valid. The rapture will occur before the "day of the Lord" (Revelation 6:12-17). In this way, believers escape the "wrath" of God as promised in 1 Thessalonians 5.

1.2 A Brief History of Principal Views

(References: George N.H. Peters, The Theocratic Kingdom, 3 Vols, Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1952, pp. 494-505; Leon J. Wood, The Bible and Future Events, Chapter 2, Academie Books, Zondervan Corporation, 1973 Edition, pp. 35-38.)

Various viewpoints regarding last-day events have been held through the centuries of church history. There is value in noting the principal ones. The evidence for a given view is not made stronger because it was held earlier than another, or by more people; but confidence may be gained by the adherent of a view if he knows that other Bible students, through significant periods of history, have held it.

1.2.1 The first two centuries of church history

There is general agreement among scholars that the view of the early church was premillennial. That is, Christians held that Christ would rule over a literal, earthly kingdom for one thousant years, assisted by raptured saints. No church fathers of the first two centuries are known to have disagreed with this view. The following may be listed as those who favored it:

From the first century:

1. Aristio;

2. John the Presbyter;

3. Clement of Rome;

4. Barnabus;

5. Hermas;

6. Ignatius;

7. Polycarp; and

8. Papias.

From the second century:

1. Pothinus;

2. Justin Martyr;

3. Melito;

4. Hegisippus;

5. Tatian;

6. Irenaeus;

7. Tertullian; and

8. Hippolytus.

Papias (AD 80-163), wrote that "there will be a millennium after the resurrection from the dead, when the personal reign of Christ will be established on this earth" (Papias, Fragment VI). Papias was in a position to know early church thinking, for Irenaeus says of him that he was one of John's hearers and was intimate with Polycarp. He not only stated his own view clearly but added that his view was held also by the following apostles:

1. Andrew;

2. Peter;

3. Philip;

4. Thomas;

5. James;

6. John; and

7. Matthew.

It may be concluded that, in the early church, a common view was that Christ's apostles were themselves premillennial.

Barnabas, writing about AD 100, likened world history to the six creative days and the day of rest. After the six days, which he interpreted to be six thousand years, Christ would come again and "destroy the time of wicked man, and judge the ungodly, and change the sun, and the moon, and the stars, then shall He truly rest on the seventh day" (Barnabas, The Epistle of Barnabas, Chapter XV). Barnabas continued by saying that the eighth day is the beginning of another world. The apostle Peter admonishes believers not to forget that "one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day" (2 Peter 3:8; read also Psalm 90:4).

Justin Martyr (AD 110-165), of the second century, wrote, "I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured that there will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged" (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter LXXX). He not only set forth his own premillennial position but added that this was the view of all Christians who were orthodox.

Tertullian (AD 150-225), declared, "We do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem" (Tertullian, Against Marcion, Book III, Chapter XXV). Further on he writes that after the thousand years are over "there will ensue the destruction of the world and the conflagration of all things at the judgment.

The eminent historian, Philip Schaff, observes, "The most striking point in the eschatology of the ante-Nicene age is the prominent chiliasm, or millenarianism ... It was indeed not the doctrine of the church embodied in any creed or form of devotion, but a widely current opinion of distinguished teachers" (Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, II, p. 614).

1.2.2 The third century

In the third century the premillennial view continued to be held by many. Peters lists the following among those who did:

1. Cyprian;

2. Commodian;

3. Nepos;

4. Coracion;

5. Victorinus;

6. Methodius; and

7. Lactantius.

At the same time, this century witnessed the rise of opposition to the view. Leaders in this were:

1. Gaius;

2. Clement of Alexandria;

3. Origen; and

4. Dionysius.

This opposition grew out of a new approach in hermeneutics. The allegorical method of interpreting Scripture was made to replace the former literal method; and, since the premillennial position found its basis in literal principles, it soon came into disfavor. In all fairness, it should be added that no true adherent of present-day amillennialism (which also rejects the literal interpretation of millennial passages) accepts the allegorical method then set forth.

1.2.3 The fourth century

It is generally agreed that the fourth century saw the decline of premillennial thinking. Few voices were now being raised in its favour. Instead, theologians came to interpret millennial concepts as symbolic of church-related truths. The beginnings of amillennial thinking can be discerned in this. The following factors may be contributed to this change of view:

1. Several erroneous doctrines arose, such as Gnosticism, Asceticism, and Docetism, which could not be reconciled with the idea of a future earthly kingdom.

2. Judaism, having begun already in the early church, now gained strength, which resulted in greater enmity between Jewish and Gentile Christians. This, in turn, tended toward a denial of the millennium since the millennium had a distinctly Jewish character.

3. Emperor Constantine made Christianity the official religion of Rome, which resulted in a loss of expectancy among Christians for the return of Christ since the church was no longer being persecuted. The church saw a new day of peace dawning. Many Christians believed that this temporal supremacy of Christianity was the actual fulfillment of the millennial promises, an opinion voiced officially by Rome itself.

4. There was a change in biblical interpretation, from the literal hermeneutic to the allegorical method. The predictions of the millennial kingdom were spiritualized.

5. Many began to interpret the binding of Satan and the resurrection and reign of saints (Revelation 20:1-4) as the personal victory of believers over Satan. In that sense, believers are, in this present life, reigning with Christ.

1.2.4 The rise of amillennialism

Though the earliest beginnings of amillennial thinking can be traced back to the third century, Augustine (AD 354-430) is properly credited as the first to systematize this non-literal view of the millennium. He was a highly capable theologian, and his thinking came to carry great weight in all doctrinal discussion of the Roman Church after his day. He set forth his view particularly in his well-known volume, The City of God, in which he advocated that the visible church was the kingdom of God on earth. He believed that the millennium should be interpreted spiritually as fulfilled in the church. He believed that the binding of Satan occurred during Christ's earthly ministry, that the first resurrection should be identified with the new birth of the believer, and that the millennium, therefore, must coincide with the present church age.

According to the Scriptures, this view is obviously wrong due to the fact that the binding of Satan was not occurred during Christ's earthly ministry. The temptation of Jesus Christ by Satan as recorded in the Gospels showed that Satan was free to carry out his sinful works (Matthew 4:1-11; Mark 1:12-13; Luke 4:1-13).

With the Roman Church accepting this viewpoint, it became the dominant position for centuries, though certain groups, outside the mother church and considered heretical at the time, did continue to hold to premillennial tenets. Among these were the Waldeness, the Paulicians, and the Albigense (see Charles Ryrie, The Basis of the Premillennial Faith, pp. 27-28).

1.2.5 The rise of postmillennialism

The eschatological doctrines were neglected during the Dark Ages, but with the Reformation there was renewed interest. The Reformers, by and large, taught that the church was in some sense the predicted kingdom, but they did revive the doctrine of the Lord's return and the resurrection.

The leaders of the Reformation continued in amillennial thinking, though it should be recognized that they gave little of their attention to last-day matters. Their man concern was rightly with the area of Salvation, where they had their main differences with the Roman Church. A matter of note is that they called for a return to the literal method of interpretation, and this, quite apart from their intention, really laid the foundation for a return to premillennialism. It was not premillennialism that first brought a change in eschatological thinking, however, but a new view which came to be called postmillennialism.

Daniel Whitby, (1638-1726), a liberal Unitarian, is generally considered the originator of the viewpoint. Some of his basic ideas, however, had been presented as early as the twelfth century by Joachim of Floris (see H. Kromminga, The Millennium in the Church, p. 20). Whitby saw a wonderful age for the church in the future, climaxed by a man-made millennium. Other liberals followed him, attracted by the suitability of the view to the evident progress of man in society, science and technology. Conservative Bible students were attracted also, for the view returned to the idea of an earthly kingdom, which was felt to be more in keeping with numerous Scripture passages. As a result, both a literal and a conservative type of post-millennialism came into being; the former seeing man making his own millennium by natural progress, and the latter viewing the millennium as the result of an increasing number of people being saved through faith in Christ.

Postmillennialism became widely accepted among leading theologians. It was dealt a severe blow, however, by the two World Wars of this century, which showed that man was not making the progress that had been envisioned.

1.2.6 Revival of premillennialism (The seventeenth to twentieth centuries)

By the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, along with the rise of postmillennialism came a less noticed return to premillennialism, following the early days of the Reformation. This resulted, as already noted, from the return to literal principles of interpretation. The movement was slow in developing at first, but it gradually gained impetus as men of recognized stature were persuaded in favor of it. Among these were the following:

1. Bengel;

2. Steir;

3. Alford;

4. Lange;

5. Meyer;

6. Ellicott;

7. Fausset;

8. Bonar;

9. Trench;

10. Ryle;

11. Tregelles;

12. Godet;

13. Lightfoot;

14. Watts;

15. Wesley;

16. Darby;

17. Newell;

18. Pentecost;

19. Thiessen;

20. Walvoord;

21. Ryrie; and

22. Baker.

Due to the leadership and influence of such men, the last century has seen the view come to the fore. It may be added that amillennialism has experienced a strong revival also, with the diminishing influence of postmillennialism. At the present time the two leading positions are:

1. premillennialism; and

2. amillennialism.

1.3 The Major Views of the Millennium

1.3.1 Postmillennialism

The term postmillennial has reference to the time Christ returns to earth ("post," or after the "one thousand years"). Those who hold this view believe in an actual earthly kingdom sometime in the future. However, they believe that the number of years, one thousand, is not to be interpreted literally, but as a long period of time, perhaps longer than a literal one thousand years.

The distinctive feature of the postmillennial view is that the church itself, through world evangelism, will bring about a "millennium" of righteousness as the world is converted to Christ. Along with this is further optimism about the general course of history as Christian principles have an increasing impact on society. Things have their ups and downs, but the world is getting better, they feel. This concept best suited the optimistic times during which it flourished, the latter part of the 19th century. It dominated early liberalism, but a small minority of evangelicals hold it today. Its major decline occurred following World War I, but recently it is being revived by a group of evangelicals who call themselves "reconstructionists" or "theonomists" and who advocate the reinstatement of Mosaic Law in government through political, social and evangelistic involvement of believers in the power of the Holy Spirit.

1.3.2 Amillennialism

The term amillennialism means "no millennium," but this is misleading. What is actually taught by those who adhere to the amillennial view is that there will be no earthly millennium. Figurative interpretation of eschatology prevails in this school of thought, so that the one thousand years of Revelation 20 is interpreted figuratively as an indefinite period of time during which a spiritual millennium takes place between the first and second coming of Christ.

Like postmillennialists, amillennialists believe in the return of Christ to earth following this millennium. But they differ in that they believe this millennium is spiritual in nature and is taking place now. They do not believe that history is going to get ultimately better or that evangelism will ever be totally successful.

1.3.3 Premillennialism

The term premillennial pertains to the belief that Christ will return before the one thousand years of Revelation 20, as implied in Revelation 19 (if it is to be interpreted as chronologically preceding Chapter 20).

Distinctive to the premillennial view is the belief in a literal one thousand-year reign of Christ on earth. There are two schools of thought within premillennialism:

1. historic premillennialism; and

2. dispensational premillennialism.

Dispensational premillennialism tends to interpret eschatological passages in the Bible more literally, and thus believes that Old Testament promises to Israel will be literally fulfilled to the nation of Israel.

The historic school, so called because the early church fathers did not talk much about Israel's future role, applies most of the Old Testament promises to the church in a figurative way similarly to the amillennialists.

Finally, premillennialism views history as generally declining toward a culmination in the Great Tribulation.

1.4 The Major Assumptions Behind Each Millennial View

We will focus on the following major assumptions behind the two predominant views (i.e. amillennialism and premillennialism):

1. pertaining to Israel; and

2. pertaining to Hermeneutics.

What information I give about amillennialism generally applies to postmillennialism, anyway.

1.4.1 Assumptions pertaining to Israel

The Old Testament contains numerous promises to the nation of Israel, starting with the Abrahamic covenant (Genesis 17:1-8; 22:16-18) all the way to the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:1-40. Since they have never been fulfilled, what is to be our point of view regarding these promises of restoration and kingdom?

1.4.1.1 The amillennial view

The amillennialist believes that promises concerning Israel's possession of the land of Canaan and her kingdom were fulfilled when Israel conquered Canaan in the days of Joshua (see Joshua 21:43-45) and became a great nation under Solomon, and / or that because of Israel's wholesale rejection of Jesus the Messiah these promises were revoked and applied in a figurative way to a more obedient New Testament people known as the "church."

The issue turns on the interpretation of the following New Testament texts, which might be understood to mean that Israel as a nation has been rejected by God, and only Jews who become Christians can inherit the ancient promises:

1. Matthew 3:2. Jesus and John the Baptist preached that the kingdom of heaven was "near." Since no earthly kingdom was established at that time nor shortly after, none, therefore, is to be expected except a spiritual kingdom, the church.

2. Matthew 21:43. The kingdom of God will be taken away from you [Jews], and be given to a nation [the church] producing the fruit of it. The "kingdom" here is interpreted as the earthly kingdom, and thus we should not look for such a kingdom but should expect that it will be spiritually realized in the church.

3. John 18:36. Jesus affirms, "My kingdom is not of this world." This is interpreted to mean that only a spiritual kingdom should be expected.

4. 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16. The wrath of God is upon the Jews "to the utmost," implying a rejection of national Israel.

Amillennialists insist that such texts as these should alert us to the fact that a fundamental change in God's plans for Israel had been made. Their persistent disobedience led to the dissolving of hopes for an earthly, worldwide kingdom, and to a fulfillment of the ancient promises of the kingdom spiritually in the church.

1.4.1.2 The premillennial view

The premillennialist believes that the passages cited above can be explained differently:

1. Although Joshua 21:43-45 says that Israel possessed all that God had given, it evidently pertains to that which Israel actually possessed, not all she potentially could have had (see Judges 1:27-36; Joshua 13:1). The failure of Israel to realize the promised kingdom is a temporary situation to be remedied by a conversion of Israel at the second advent (Romans 11:26) and ultimate restoration to their heritage.

2. The announcement by Jesus that His kingdom was "near" means: (1) the earthly kingdom was actually being offered but was rejected and postponed until the second advent; or (2) only a spiritual kingdom was offered by Christ, who intended that the earthly kingdom be establised at His second coming. This latter view is my preference.

3. To say that Jesus' kingdom is "not of this world" means not of this world system, the meaning of kosmos or "world."

4. The wrath of 1 Thessalonians 2:14 is toward that generation, not necessarily all generations.

Beyond these verses, premillennialists find several unconditioned promises of Israel's ultimate restoration:

1. Deuteronomy 30:1-10. Even if Israel is scatered "to the ends of the earth" (her present condition), God will gather them again when they "return to the Lord," which Romans 11:26 predicts will indeed occur.

2. Jeremiah 31:27-37. Only if the "fixed order" of the universe can be destroyed, will God cause Israel to cease being a "nation before Me" or cast her off for all they have done. This seems to require national restoration, not merely preservation of the Jews as a race, in light of the Old Testament meaning of "nation before Me."

3. Romans 11:25-27. The present condition of Israel is due to a "hardening in part" until the "fulness [full number] of the Gentiles has come in," a possible reference to world evangeliztion. When the Deliverer (Christ) comes "out of Zion," He will "remove ungodliness" and "all Israel will be saved." The previous analogy of the olive tree refers to Israel's reinstatement to covenant blessings, which for them would involve national restoration.

Premillennialists believe that the Old Testament promises to Israel are still valid and certain to be fulfilled at the second coming of Christ, a conviction based largely on the Old Testament. Since God's promises cannot be annulled (Galatians 3:15-16), no further expansion was needed upon the Old Testament by New Testament writers. Jesus did not deny a restoration to Israel in Acts 1:6-7. He merely told the disciples it was not their concern.

1.4.2 Assumptions pertaining to hermeneutics

Amillennialists reach their conclusions because they have followed a non-literal interpretation of all eschatology. Conversely, premillennialists apply a more literal method of interpretation, especially to Revelation 20, and thus reach the conclusions they do.

1.4.2.1 The amillennial view

Amillennialists believe in a non-literal interpretation of eschatology, especially Revelation, for at least two reasons:

1. eschatology is a literary style that demands it (called "apocalyptic"), and

2. the rejection of Israel requires a non-literal fulfillment of the promises of God to the church, because of the church is a "spiritual," not an earthly, kingdom.

First, the ammillennialist believes he can produce examples of a non-literal interpretation of Old Testament eschatological passages. He points to Hebrews 8 where a covenant originally made with Israel is applied to the church. He also points to Acts 2 where Peter applies a prophecy from Joel to a New Testament event (Pentecost), which would be a "non-literal" fulfillment of the original prophecy. If these examples and others are interpreted in a non-literal way, does this not imply that all prophecy should thus be interpreted?

Amillennialists justify the non-literal application to the church of Old Testament promises to Israel partly because they regard the church as the "new Israel." They interpret Galatians 6:16, "Israel of God" and James 1:1, "twelve tribes," as pertaining to the church. The church is simply the continuation of Old Testament Israel as God's chosen people.

1.4.2.2 The premillennial view

The premillennialist, especially the dispensational variety, believes that except for certain genuinely non-literal "apocalytic" books like Daniel and Revelation, most Old Testament eschatological passages should be taken in a normal, literal fashion. They believe this is consistent with a rule of hermeneutics which affirms that you interpret something literally unless it makes no sense otherwise (a rule with which amillennialists agree, except with eschatology).

Although many premillennialists see a spiritual application to the church of promises originally made to Israel (like Hebrews 8 - the new covenant), they qualify the application by noting that it is done by New Testament writers only in reference to the spiritual aspects of a prophecy (like forgiveness of sin and inner transformation), not promises that pertain to earthly, temporal matters. These latter features will be literally fulfilled to the earthly nation of Israel.

Finally, premillennialists note that all Old Testament prophecies that have already been fulfilled, like the prophecies concerning Christ's birth, life, death, and resurrection, were fulfilled literally. Why should we not expect the same kind of literal fulfillment for prophecies that have not yet been realized?

1.4.3 Conclusion

If Old Testament prophecies can stand on their own literally, except for those which are of an apocalyptic style, there appears to be a future for Israel. If the millennium of Revelation 20 is a literal period of time on earth, then the Old Testament kingdom promises fit logically into that period. The New Testament does not clearly contradict this; in fact, the passages amillennialists cite can be interpreted in other ways without any strain upon them. I conclude that the premillennial scheme of eschatology is the most viable.

2. VIEWS OF THE RAPTURE

The Scriptures predict a period of tribulation which would come between the present age and the age to come. This period of will end with the second coming of Christ to the earth. But will it begin with His coming into the air and the rapture of the saved, or will it begin before He comes, and will the church pass through the tribulation?

Some say that the church will pass through the tribulation and that the catching up of the redeemed will be immediately followed by their return with Christ. Other say that the church will pass through the first half of the period and that the rapture will take place in the middle of it. The partial-rapturists teach that the unspiritual part of the church will pass through the tribulation, but the mature and Spirit-filled will be caught up before tribulation. And some say that Jesus will come for the church before tribulation. In summary, there are five major views of the rapture:

1. partial rapturism;

2. posttribulational;

3. midtribulational;

4. pre-wrath; and

5. pretribulational.

It is the purpose of this section to examine the underlying reasons and assumptions of each view in order to give you a better basis for deciding which view you will take. Let us consider briefly some early Christian teaching and then examine the teaching of Scripture.

2.1 Early Christian Teaching

As noted earlier, the early church expected the premillennial coming of Christ. Was its teaching also pretribulational? In the testimony of the early church fathers, there is almost complete silence on the subject of the tribulation. They often speak of going through tribulations, but very seldom of a future period known as the great tribulation. This is probably because during the first centuries of the church, the church was passing through many persecutions and it did not concern itself with the future tribulation period.

2.1.1 Writings from the early church fathers support pretribulational rapture

However, there are two intimations of a belief in the pretribulational return of Christ:

1. Hermas' writings; and

2. Irenaeus' writings.

2.1.1.1 Hermas' writings

Hermas writes that he passed by a wild beast on the way, and that thereafter a maiden met him and saluted him, saying, "Hail, O Man!" He returned her salutation, and said, "Lady, hail!" Then she asked him, "Has nothing crossed your path?" To this, Hermas replied, "I was met by a beast of such a size that it could destroy peoples, but through the power of the Lord and His great mercy I escaped from it." Then the maiden said, "Well did you escape from it, because that you can be saved by no other than His great and glorious name ... You have escaped from great tribulation on account of your faith, and because you did not doubt in the presence of such a beast. Go, therefore, and tell the elect of the Lord His mighty deeds, and say to them this beast is a type of the great tribulation that is coming. If then ye prepare yourselves, and repent with all your heart, and turn to the Lord, it will be possible for you to escape it, if your heart be free and spotless, and ye spend the rest of your days in serving the Lord blamelessly" (Hermas, Shepherd of Hermas, Book I, Vision IV, Chapter ii). This seems to show that there was teaching that the church would escape the future great tribulation period.

2.1.1.2 Irenaeus' writings

Irenaeus also seems to hold that the church will be caught up during the tribulation, for he says:

"And therefore, when in the end the church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, "There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be. For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome, they are crowned with incorruption" (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book V, Chapter xxix).

2.1.2 Early church fathers believe in the imminence of the Lord Jesus Christ's return

It is clear that the early church fathers regarded the Lord Jesus Christ's coming as imminent. The Lord Jesus had taught the church to expect His return at any moment, and the church looked for Him to come in their day and taught His personal return as being imminent. The early church lived in the constant expectation of their Lord, and hence was not concerned with the possibility of a tribulation period in the future (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, I, 11). This may be the reason for the silence concerning the tribulation in the fathers.

The doctrine of imminency is taught in Scripture in such passages as John 14:2-3; 1 Corinthians 1:7; Philippians 3:20-21; 1 Thessalonians 1:9-10; 4:16-17; 5:5-9; Titus 2:13; James 5:8-9; Revelation 3:10; 22:17-22. The doctrine of imminence forbids the participation of the church in any part of the tribulation period.

2.1.3 The teaching of future tribulation period was ignored during the Middle Ages

Further, it is not strange that the leaders in the Middle Ages are silent concerning the pretribulational rapture. With the rise of Constantine and the state church, the church turned to an allegorizing of the Scriptures concerning the Lord's return. And with the denial of a literal millennium, the tribulation was allegorized or ignored. The Reformers returned to the doctrine of the second coming, but their emphasis was on the doctrine of Salvation rather than the development of the details of eschatology.

2.1.4 Revival of pretribulational rapture (The seventeenth to twentieth centuries)

In 1830, a new school arose within the fold of premillennialism, pretribulational rapture was developed as an important doctrine in eschatology. Nowadays, most of the reputable Bible scholars hold the pretribulational rapture view, they are:

1. John Nelson Darby;

2. C.I. Scofield;

3. William R. Newell;

4. J. Dwight Pentecost;

5. John F. Walvoord;

6. Henry C. Thiessen;

7. Charles C. Ryrie;

8. Robert L. Thomas;

9. Leon J. Wood;

10. R.E. Harlow;

11. John Phillips;

12. William MacDonald;

13. Henry M. Morris; and

14. William H. Baker.

2.2 The Major Views of the Rapture

2.2.1 Partial Rapturism

According to the partial rapturism view, not all believers will be taken at the translation of the church, but rather only those who are "watching" and "waiting" for that event, who have reached some degree of spiritual attainment that makes them worthy to be included.

2.2.1.1 Reasons for holding this view

The partial rapturist believe that a clear inference from Luke 21:36 is that those Christians who do not "watch" will not "escape all these things that shall come to pass," and will not be accounted worthy "to stand before the Son of Man." They gather from such passages as:

1. Matthew 24:41-42;

2. 1 Corinthians 15:23;

3. 2 Timothy 4:8;

4. 1 Thessalonians 1:10;

that those only will be taken who "wait," "look for," and "have loved His appearing" (Thomas Waugh, When Jesus Comes, p. 108).

2.2.1.2 Comments

The partial rapturists have made the following mistakes:

1. It is based on a misunderstanding of the value of the death of Christ (i.e. doctrines of propitiation, reconciliation and redemption) as it frees the sinner from condemnation and renders him acceptable to God. The believer is justified, made acceptable to God, placed in Christ positionally, to be received by God as though he were the Son Himself. The individual who has this perfect standing of Christ can never be less than completely acceptable to God. The partial rapturist, who insists that only those who are "waiting" and "watching" will be translated, minimizes the perfect standing of the child of God in Christ and presents him before the Father in his own experimental righteousness.

2. They must deny the New Testament teaching on the unity of the body of Christ. According to 1 Corinthians 12:12-13, all believers are united to the body of which Christ is the Head (Ephesians 5:30). If the rapture includes only a portion of those redeemed, then the body, of which Christ is the Head, will be a dismembered and disfigured body when it is taken to Him.

3. They must deny the completeness of the resurrection of the believers at the translation. Since not all the living saints could be raptured, logically, not all the dead in Christ could be resurrected, inasmuch as many of them died in spiritual immaturity. But since Paul teaches that "we shall all be changed" (1 Corinthians 15:51-52; 1 Thessalonians 4:14), it is impossible to admit a partial resurrection.

4. They confuse the Scriptural teaching on rewards. The rewards are given by God as the recompense for faithful service (Revelation 2:10; James 1:12; 1 Thessalonians 2:19; Philippians 4:1; 1 Corinthians 9:25; 1 Peter 5:4; 2 Timothy 4:8). Nowhere in its teaching about rewards is the rapture included as the reward for watching.

5. They confuse the distinction between law and grace. If this view is correct, the believer's position before God, eternally, would depend on his works, for what he did and what attitudes he developed would then be the basis of his acceptance.

6. They must place a portion of the believing church in the tribulation period. This is impossible. One of the purposes of the tribulation period is to judge the unbelievers. The church needs not such a purging judgment unless the death of Christ be ineffective.

7. They must deny the distinction between Israel and the church. There are certain passages which the partial rapturist uses to support his position. They use Scriptures that are applicable to God's problem for Israel and applies them to the church.

8. Luke 21:36. The primary reference of this passage is to the nation Israel, who is already in the tribulation period, and therefore this is not applicable to the church. The things to be escaped are the judgments associated with "that day" (v. 34), that is, the Day of the Lord. Watchfulness is enjoined upon the church (1 Thessalonians 5:6; Titus 2:13) apart from being found worthy to participate in the translation.

9. Matthew 24:41-42. This passage is in that discourse in which the Lord Jesus outlines His program for Israel, who is already in the tribulation period. The one taken is taken to judgment and the one left is left for the millennial blessing. Such is not the prospect for the church.

10. 1 Corinthians 15:23. This is made by the partial rapturist to teach a division in the ranks of the believer in the resurrection of the church. However, Paul is not giving instruction on the order of the resurrection for the church, but rather the divisions within the whole resurrection program, which will include not only church saints, but also Old Testaments and tribulation saints as well.

11. 2 Timothy 4:8. This is used by the partial rapturist to show that the rapture must be a partial one. However, the subject of translation is not in view in this passage, but rather the question of reward. The second advent was intended by God to be a purifying hope (1 John 3:3). Because of such purifying a new life is produced because of the expectancy of the Lord's return. Therefore those that truly "love His appearing" will experience a new kind of life which will bring a reward.

12. 1 Thessalonians 1:10. This is used by the partial rapturist to teach that the church that was unprepared for the rapture will meet the Lord in the clouds on His way to the earth at the second advent. Such a view coincides with the interpretation of the posttribulationist and will be shown to be contrary to the teaching of Scripture in the next section.

2.2.1.3 Conclusion

An examination of the Scriptures used by the partial rapturists to support their position shows that their interpretation is not consistent with true exegesis. From these considerations then, I conclude that the partial rapture position is untenable.

2.2.2 Posttribulational rapture

According to the posttribulational view, the church will pass through the whole tribulation period and only then be raptured, just before the millennium when Christ returns.

2.2.2.1 Reasons for holding this view

There are several major arguments on which the posttribulationist rests his case:

1. The historical argument. His position is that pretribulationism is a new doctrine, arising in the last hundred years, and therefore to be rejected because it is not apostolic.

2. The promise of tribulation given to the church. Passages such as Matthew 24:9-11; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 23:27-31, which are addressed to Israel and promise them tribulation, are used to prove that the church will go through the tribulation period. In the light of such specific promises it is impossible to say that the church will be raptured prior to the tribulation period. Their argument is substantiated by citing the persecutions recorded in the New Testament into which the church came (John 16:33; Acts 8:1-3; 11:19; 14:22; Romans 12:12) as being a partial fulfillment of those warnings.

3. The argument from resurrection. Perhaps the strongest evidence for this view is the fact that the resurrection passages in the Bible make no reference to an earlier, separate resurrection for the church, but place the resurrection of all believers at a point prior to the millennium (see 1 Corinthians 15:23-24; Revelation 20:1-4). Upon examining passages that speak of the first resurrection, they find that this first resurrection is associated with the coming of the Lord (Isaiah 26:19), the conversion of Israel (Romans 11:15), the inauguration of the kingdom (Luke 14:14-15; Revelation 20:4-6), the giving of rewards (Revelation 11:15-18), the Great Tribulation coming before it (Daniel 12:1-3).

2.2.2.2 Comments

The posttribulationists have made the following mistakes:

1. They must be based on a denial of dispensationalism and all dispensational distinctions. It is only thus that they can place the church in that period which is particularly called "the time of Jacob's trouble" (Jeremiah 30:7).

2. They must deny the Scriptural teaching concerning the nature and purpose of the tribulation period which is to pour out judgment on sin instead of believers.

3. They must deny all the distinctions observed from the Scriptures between the rapture and the second advent, making them one and the same event.

4. They must deny the doctrine of imminence, which says that the Lord Jesus Christ may come at any time, and substitute the teaching that a multitude of signs must be fulfilled before the Lord can possibly come.

5. They must deny any future fulfillment to the prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27, claiming for it an historical fulfillment.

6. They must apply major passages of Scripture that outline God's program for Israel (Matthew 13, 24-25; Revelation 4-19) to the church in order to support his views. Therefore, they must also deny the distinctions between Israel and the church.

7. In response to the historical argument, we reply that the failure to discern the teaching of the Scripture does not nullify that teaching. It should be observed that each era of church history has been occupied with a particular doctrinal controversy, which has become the object of discussion, revision, and formulation, until there was general acceptation of what Scripture taught. It was not until the last century that the field of eschatology became a matter to which the mind of the church was turned. The whole concept of the progress of dogma would be our strongest argument against the posttribulation rapturist who argues that the doctrine must be rejected because it was not clearly taught in the early church. In addition, the early church lived in the light of the belief in the imminent return of Christ. Pretribulationism is the only position consistent with this doctrine of imminence.

8. In response to the promise of tribulation given to the church, we reply that the Scripture abounds in promises that Israel will be brought into a time of purging to prepare them as a nation for the millennium to follow the advent of Messiah. However, since Israel is to be distinguished from the church in the economy of God, those Scriptures (Matthew 24:9-11; Mark 13:9-13; Luke 23:27-31) which promise tribulation to Israel cannot be made to teach that the church is to experience the tribulation period. Further, the term "tribulation" is used in several different ways in Scripture. It may be used in a non-technical, non-eschatological sense in reference to any time of suffering or testing into which one goes. When the word "tribulation" is used in reference to the church, as in John 16:33; Acts 8:1-3; 11:19; 14:22; Romans 12:12, it is used in a non-technical, non-eschatological sense, in which the church is promised an age-long opposition from the god of this age, but it is not teaching that the church will be brought into the tribulation period. Otherwise one would have to teach that the tribulation has already existed for over nineteen hundred years.

9. In response to the argument from resurrection, we would explain that this is due to the fact that the rapture of the church is a "mystery" doctrine (1 Corinthians 15:52) previously unrevealed and given mainly to the apostle Paul, and thus it is not clarified in the resurrection passages. Further, if one separates the resurrection of the church from the resurrection of Israel, there is no strength left in the posttribulationist's argument. We believe that the Old Testament saints are raised after the end of the tribulation period.

2.2.2.3 Conclusion

From the above considerations of the arguments presented by the posttribulation rapturist it can be seen that his arguments are invalid. I conclude that the posttribulational rapture position is untenable.

2.2.3 Midtribulational rapture

The midtribulational view is actually a variation of the pretribulational view. The midtribulationist simply considers the period from which the church is exempt from tribulation to be the three-and-one-half-year part of the tribulation that closes the tribulation period (Revelation 11:2) instead of the full seven years. The only difference in the view, other than this, is that the rapture is not imminent. The beginning of the seven-year period will be marked by a "covenant" or treaty by the Antichrist with Israel (Daniel 9:27).

2.2.3.1 Reasons for holding this view

There are several major arguments on which the midtribulationist rests his case:

1. The denial of the imminent return of Christ. This position rests on the argument that the announcements of events such as the destruction of Jerusalem, the death of Peter, the imprisonment of Paul, and the announced program for the age as set forth in Matthew 28:19-20, together with the outlined course of the age with its development of apostasy, all make an imminent return impossible; therefore the Lord Jesus could not come until these events had taken place.

2. The promise of tribulation given to the church. If the church was promised tribulation, then we can expect to experience the first half of the tribulation period (John 16:33; Acts 8:1-3; 11:19; 14:22; Romans 12:12).

3. The identity of the last trump. They argue that the seventh trumpet of Revelation 11:15 and the last trump of 1 Corinthians 15:52 and 1 Thessalonians 4:16 are identical. In addition, Jesus pictures the tribulation as follows by "a great sound of the trumpet" (Matthew 24:29-31).

4. Revelation 7:14 seems to give the strongest evidence in this view. In the parenthesis between the sixth and seventh seal, where the scope of the whole vision is given, those saved in that time are said to have come out of "great tribulation." This seems to indicate that the time covered by the seals is considered a part of the tribulation period.

2.2.3.2 Comments

The midtribulationists have made the following mistakes:

1. They must deny the dispensational interpretation of the Scriptures.

2. They must deny the distinctions between Israel and the church. This is observed in that this position places the church in the first half of the last seven years of the period determined upon Daniel's people and city.

3. This position must rest on a view of the tribulation that divides the period into two separate and unrelated halves, so that the church can go through the first half, even though it has no part in the last half.

4. In response to the denial of the imminent return of Christ, we reply that such argument fails to see that the very men who received such announcements themselves believed that what would be the natural course of history could be interrupted by the translation of the believers out of the sphere in which history unfolds and held to the imminent return. The exhortation to watchfulness addressed to the church became the hope of the early church and that they lived in the light of the expectation of the imminent return of Christ. Further, the doctrine of imminency is clearly taught in the Scriptures cannot be denied.

5. In response to the promise of tribulation given to the church, since this question has been dealt with previously reference need only be made to the fact that tribulation may be used in either a technical sense, referring to the seven years of Daniel's prophecy, or in a non-technical sense, referring to any time of trial or distress. The tribulation promised to the church is of this non-technical kind.

6. In response to the identity of the last trump, we reply that inasmuch as the program for the church differs from that for Israel, each may be terminated by the blowing of a trumpet, without making the two last trumpets identical and synchronous as to time. We have numerous reasons to believe that the seventh trumpet of Revelation 11:15 is not identical to the last trump of 1 Corinthians 15:52 and 1 Thessalonians 4:16. (1) The trumpet of 1 Corinthians 15:52 sounds before the wrath of God descends, while the chronology of Revelation indicates that the trumpet in Revelation 11:15 sounds at the end of the time of wrath, just prior to the second advent. (2) The trumpet for the church is singular. No trumpets have preceded it so that it cannot be said to be the last of a series. The trumpet that closes the tribulation period is clearly the last of a series of seven. (3) In 1 Thessalonians 4, the voice associated with the sounding of the trumpet summons the dead and the living and consequently is heard before the resurrection. In the Revelation, while a resurrection is mentioned (11:12), the trumpet does not sound until after the resurrection, showing us that two different events must be in view. (4) The trumpet in 1 Thessalonians issues in blessing, in life, in glory, while the trumpet in Revelation issues in judgment upon the enemies of God. (5) In Matthew 24:31, Jesus teaches that the Israel will be regathered by the sounding of a trumpet after the second advent, therefore it is clear that the trumpet is purely related to Israel instead of the church.

7. In response to the parenthesis between the sixth and seventh seal (Revelation 7:14), we reply that the Scriptures clearly indicate that a great multitude of both Jews and Gentiles will trust in the Lord Jesus after the church is caught up to glory. Though all genuine Christians living on earth will be raptured to the Heaven when Christ comes for His church, immediately a testimony will be raised up to the name of Christ through new converts among Jews and Gentiles. There are many in the world who either have never heard the gospel or have not fully understand it. There is no reason to think that these cannot be saved, if still alive after the rapture. By reading the Bible and related books regarding the Bible Prophecy, many Jews and Gentiles, for instances, will turn to the Lord Jesus Christ in repentance and faith. This will also include some previous professing Christians who will repent and have faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. They will then go throughout the world (Matthew 24:14), preaching the gospel of the Kingdom resulting in many Jews and Gentiles will be converted. Though these are never described by the term "church," they are constantly called "saints" in the book of Revelation. In this connection, those saved in that time are said to have come out of "great tribulation."

2.2.3.3 Conclusion

Examination of the midtribulation rapture position has shown us that the essential arguments of the view will not stand the examination of true interpretation of Scripture and must be rejected as false.

2.2.4 Pre-wrath Rapture

The pre-wrath view of the rapture departs from the customary two-fold division of the seventieth week of Daniel 9:27 and suggests that a threefold division is more valid. They would be:

1. the first division, the "beginning of birth pangs" (Matthew 24:4-8) or first seal (Revelation 6:1-2) which cover the first half of the seventieth week;
   
   

2. the second division, the "great tribulation" (Matthew 24:21) or second to fifth seals (Revelation 6:3-11) which will begin in the middle of the seventieth week and end sometime between the middle and end. The sixth seal warns believers about the coming of the "Day of the Lord" (Revelation 6:12-17), and at this point the rapture will occur; and
   
   

3. the third division, will consist of the "Day of the Lord" which begins with the breaking of the seventh seal (Revelation 8:1) and continues until the end of the seventieth week.

2.2.4.1 Reasons for holding this view

In this way, believers escape the "wrath" of God as promised in 1 Thessalonians 5, and the problems of a division between the rapture and second coming of Christ are avoided.

2.2.4.2 Comments

The major weakness of this view is that  there is lack of Biblical evidence to support the threefold division of the seventieth week of Daniel 9:27. The other weaknesses of this view is similar to the midtribulational rapture view.

2.2.4.3 Conclusion

This view is obviously wrong.

2.2.5 Pretribulational Rapture

According to the pretribulationists, a removal and resurrection of believers takes place prior to the seven-year tribulation period. This is an event which they believe is imminent or could possibly occur at any moment.

2.2.5.1 Reasons for holding this view

It is worthwhile to examine the reasons for holding this view:

Reason 1: The literal method of interpretation

The doctrine of the pre-millennial return of Christ to institute a literal kingdom is the outcome of the literal method interpretation of the Old Testament of promises and prophecies. The post-tribulationist must either interpret the book of Revelation historically, which is basically a spiritualizing method which spiritualize away the literalness of the events in an attempt to harmonize these events with other Scriptures such the Old Testament prophecies regarding the future Millennial reign of the Messiah.

Reason 2: The nature of the seventieth week

There are a number of words used in both the Old and New Testaments to describe the seventieth week period, which give us the essential nature of this period:

1. wrath (Revelation 6:16-17; 11:18; 14:19; 15:1, 7; 16:1, 19; 1 Thessalonians 1:9-10; 5:9; Zephaniah 1:15, 18);

2. punishment (Isaiah 24:20-21);

3. hour of trouble (Jeremiah 30:7);

4. destruction (Joel 1:15); and

5. darkness (Joel 2:2; Zephaniah 1:14-18; Amos 5:18).

Let us understand the nature of the Tribulation is divine wrath. We know that our Lord Jesus Christ bore for us the wrath of God, therefore we who are in Him shall not come into judgment. "For God appointed us not unto wrath, but unto the obtaining of salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Thessalonians 5:9-10).

Reason 3: The scope of the seventieth week

This period relates to the unbelieving Gentile nations and particularly to Israel. Jeremiah 30:7 calls this period "the time of Jacob's trouble." God says to Daniel "seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city" (Daniel 9:24). This whole period has special reference to Daniel's people, Israel, and Daniel's holy city, Jerusalem. Inasmuch as many passages in the New Testament such as Ephesians 3:1-6; Colossians 1:25-27 make it clear that the church is a mystery and its nature as a body composed of Jew and Gentile alike was unrevealed in the Old Testament. Since the church did not have its existence until after the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (Acts 2), the church could not have been in the first sixty-nine weeks of Daniel's prophecy. Since it had no part in the first sixty-nine weeks, which are related only to Israel, it can have no part in the seventieth week, which is again related to God's program for Israel after the mystery program for the church has been concluded.

Reason 4: The purpose of the seventieth week

There are two major purposes to be accomplished in the seventieth week. The first purpose is stated in Revelation 3:10, "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." First of all we see that this period has in view "them that dwell on the earth" and not the church. The true church does not need to be tested to see if her faith is genuine. The second major purpose of the seventieth week is in relation to Israel. The God will send Elijah the prophet before the coming of the day of the Lord in order to prepare a remnant in Israel for the advent of the Lord (Malachi 4:5-6). It is evident that no such ministry is needed by the church since she by nature is without spot, but is holy and without blemish (Ephesians 5:25-27).

Reason 5: The unity of the seventieth week

The entire seventieth week is in view when it is described and predicted in Bible prophecy. It becomes impossible to adopt the position that the church although exempt from a portion of the seventieth week, may be in the first half of it, for the nature of the entire seventieth week is the same throughout.

Reason 6: The nature of the church

It should be observed that the professing church is composed of those who make a profession of faith in Christ. To some this profession is based on reality and to some on no reality at all. This latter group will go into the tribulation period, for Revelation 2:22 indicates clearly that the unsaved professing church will experience this visitation of wrath. Only the true church will be raptured.

Membership in the group called national Israel is based on a physical birth, and all in this group who are not saved and removed by rapture and who are alive at the time of the rapture will, with the professing church, be subjected to the wrath of the tribulation.

There is a distinction between the true church and true or spiritual Israel. Prior to Pentecost there were saved individuals, but there was no church, and they were a part of spiritual Israel, not the church. After the day of Pentecost and until the rapture we find the church which is Christ's body, but no spiritual Israel because all faithful men will become a church member. After the rapture we find no church, but a true or spiritual Israel again. These distinctions must be kept clearly in mind as they would help us to understand the nature of the true church.

Since the church is the object of Christ's love (Ephesians 5:25) and has been perfected and delivered from all judgment (Romans 8:1; John 5:24; 1 John 4:17), if she is subjected to wrath and judgment again the promises of God would be of none effect and the death of Christ would be ineffectual.

Again, all who are in the seventieth week are brought into subjection to the powers of the Beasts and Satan (Revelation 13:7). If the church were in this period she would be subjected to Satan, and Christ would Himself, because of His union with the church, would be likewise subjected to Satan's authority. Such a thing is impossible.

Reason 7: The concept of the church as a mystery

The fact that God was going to form Jews and Gentiles alike into one body was never revealed in the Old Testament and forms the mystery of which Paul speaks in Ephesians 3:1-7; Romans 16:25-27; Colossians 1:26-29. This whole mystery program was not revealed until after the rejection of Christ by Israel. It was after the rejection of Matthew 12:23-24 that the Lord first makes a prophecy of the coming church in Matthew 16:18. It is after the rejection of the Cross that the church had its inception in Acts 2. It was after the final rejection by Israel that God called out Paul to be the Apostle of the Gentiles through whom this mystery of the nature of the church is revealed. The church is manifestly an interruption of God's program for Israel, which was not brought into being until Israel's rejection of the offer of the Kingdom. This mystery program must itself be brought to a conclusion before God can resume His dealing with the nation Israel. This concept of the church makes a pre-tribulation rapture a necessity.

Reason 8: The distinctions between Israel and the church

Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology, IV, pp. 47-53, has set forth twenty-four contrasts between Israel and the church which show us conclusively that these two groups cannot be united into one, but that they must be distinguised as two separate entities with whom God is dealing in a special program. I add four more contrasts between Israel and the church, therefore there are twenty-eight contrasts now. More information and also the relevant Bible references can be found in the book written by Dr. C.I. Scofield, Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth.

These twenty-eight contrasts are listed in below table:

These clear contrasts, make it impossible to identify the two in one program, which it necessary to do if the church goes through the seventieth week.

Reason 9: The doctrine of imminence

Many signs were given to the nation Israel, which would precede the second advent, so that the nation might be living in expectancy when the time of His coming should draw nigh. To the church no such signs were ever given. The church was told to live in the light of the imminent coming of the Lord to translate them in His presence (John 14:2-3; Acts 1:11; 1 Corinthians 15:51-52; Philippians 3:20; Colossians 3:4; 1 Thessalonians 1:10; 1 Timothy 6:14; 1 Peter 3:3-4). All believers to be watching for the Lord Himself, not for signs that would precede His coming. The fact that no signs are given to the church, but she, rather, is commanded to watch for Christ, precludes her participation in the seventieth week.

Reason 10: The work of the restrainer (i.e. Holy Spirit) in 2 Thessalonians 2

As long as the Holy Spirit is resident within the church (i.e. all believers), which is His temple, this restraining work will continue and the man of sin cannot be revealed. It is only when the church, the temple, is removed that this restraining ministry ceases and lawlessness can produce the lawless one. This ministry of the Holy Spirit must cease before the lawless one can be revealed, requires the pre-tribulation rapture of the church, for Daniel 9:27 reveals that that lawless one will be manifested at the beginning of the week.

It should be noted that the Holy Spirit does not cease His ministries with the removal of the church, nor does He cease to be omnipresent, with her removal, but the restraining ministry does cease.

Reason 11: The necessity of an interval

Passages such as 2 Corinthians 5:9; 1 Corinthians 3:11-16; Revelation 4:4; 19:8, 14 show that the church has been examined as to her stewardship and has received her reward at the time of the second advent of Christ. It is impossible to conceive of this event as taking place without the expiration of some period of time. The church is to be presented as a gift from the Father to the Son (Ephesians 5:25-27; Jude 24). In Revelation 19:7-9 it is revealed that the consummation of the union between Christ and the church precedes the second advent. In many passages, such as Matthew 25:1-13; 22:1-14; and Luke 12:35-41, the King is seen in the role of Bridegroom at His coming, indicating that the marriage has taken place. This event requires the expiration of a period of time and makes the view that the rapture and revelation are simultaneous events impossible. In this connection, an interval between the rapture and the revelation is required.

Reason 12: Distinction between the rapture and the second advent

There are a number of contrasts (note: 17 contrasts here) to be drawn between the rapture and the second advent which will show that they are not viewed as synonymous in Scripture. Diligent students should find out all the relevant Bible references for these contrasts and e-mail a copy to me for correction. These contrasts are listed in below table:

Reason 13: The twenty-four elders

In Revelation 4:4 John is given a vision of twenty-four elders who are seated on thrones, clothed in white raiment, crowned with golden crowns, and in heaven in the presence of God. The twenty-four elders could not be angelic beings, for angels are not crowned with victors' crowns received as rewards, nor are they seated on thrones, which throne speaks of royal dignity and prerogative, nor are angels robed in white as a result of judgment. The impossibility of this view argues for the second view which sees them as resurrected redeemed men, who are clothed, crowned and seated on thrones in connection with royality in Heaven.

Since, according to Revelation 5:8, these twenty-four are associated in a priestly act, which is never said of angels, they must be believer-priests associated with the Great High Priest. Inasmuch as Israel is not resurrected until the end of the seventieth week, nor judged nor rewarded until the coming of the Lord according to Isaiah 26:19-21 and Daniel 12:1-2, these must be representatives of the saints of this present age.

Since they are seen to be resurrected in heaven at the beginning of the seventieth week, it is concluded that the church must have been raptured before the seventieth week begins. If the church is not resurrected and translated here, how could the church be in Heaven in Revelation 19:7-11?

For further discussions of the identity of the twenty-four elders, please read Section 4 of the Chapter 5 of this course.

Reason 14: The problem behind 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18

The Thessalonian Christians had misunderstood the relation between the resurrection and the saints who were asleep in Christ to the rapture. Paul wrote that at the rapture the living would not have an advantage over the dead in Christ.

If the Thessalonians had believed that the church would be going through the seventieth week they would have rejoiced that some of their brethren had missed this period of suffering and were with the Lord in the Heaven without experiencing the outpouring of wrath on the earth. If the church were going through the tribulation it would be better to be with the Lord in the Heaven than to have to await the events of the seventieth week. They would be praising the Lord that their brethren were spared these events instead of feeling that those had missed some of the Lord's blessings (i.e. rapture).

These Christians evidently believed that the church would not go through the seventieth week and in their anticipation of the return of Christ mourned for their brethren, whom they thought had missed the blessing of this event (i.e. rapture).

Reason 15: The announcement of peace and safety

In 1 Thessalonians 5:3 Paul tells the Thessalonian church that the Day of the Lord will come after the announcement of "peace and safety." This false security will lull many into a state of lethargy in relation to the Day of the Lord so that that day comes as a thief. This announcement that has produced this lethargy precedes the Day of the Lord.

If the church were in the seventieth week there would be no possibility that, during the period when believers are being persecuted by the beast to an unprecedented degree, such a message could be preached and find acceptation so that men would be lulled into complacency. All the signs would point to the fact that they were not in a time of "peace and safety." The fact that the visitation of wrath, judgment and darkness is preceded by the announcement of such a message indicates that the church must be raptured before that period can begin.

Reason 16: The relation of the church to governments

The church is instructed to be in subjection to human governments (1 Peter 2:13-16; Titus 3:1; Romans 13:1-7). According to Revelation 13:4 the government during the seventieth week is controlled by Satan and is carrying out his will. Because of the relationship of the church to governments in this age and because of the Satanic control of government in the seventieth week, the church must be delivered before this Satanic government manifests itself. The church could not subject herself to such a government.

Reason 17: The destiny of the church

The destiny of the church is a heavenly destiny. When we study the destiny of the saved in the seventieth week we find that their expectation and promise is earthly (Matthew 25:34). If the church is on earth during the seventieth week all who are saved during that period would be saved to a place in the body of Christ. If the rapture did not take place till the end of the seventieth week, and part of the saved went into an earthly blessing and part into a heavenly destiny, the body of Christ would be dismembered and the unity destroyed. Such dismemberment is impossible. This can only indicate that those saved during this seventieth week to go into the Millennium must have been saved after the termination of the program for the church.

Reason 18: The message to Laodicea

In Revelation 3:14-22 John gives a message to the church in Laodicea. This church represents the final form of the professing church, which is rejected by the Lord and vomited out of His mouth because of the unreality of its profession. If the church goes into the seventieth week in its entirety and not just the professing portion of it, it would have to be concluded that this Laodicean church is the picture of the true church.

The true church could not go through the persecutions of the seventieth week and still be lukewarm to her Lord. The persecution would either fan the fire and turn the lukewarmness into an intense heat, or else it would extinguish the fire altogether. The other alternative is to see that the true church terminates with the Philadelphia church, which is removed from the earth according to the promise of Revelation 3:10 before the tribulation begins, and the false professing church, from which the true has been separated by rapture, is left behind, rejected by the Lord, and vomited out into the seventieth week to reveal the true nature of her profession so that such may be rejected justly by the Lord.

Reason 19: The waiting remnant at the second advent

Passage such as Malachi 3:16; Ezekiel 20:33-38; 37:11-28; Zechariah 13:8-9; Revelation 7:1-8, indicate clearly that when the Lord returns to earth there will be a believing remnant in Israel awaiting His return. Along with these are passages such as Matthew 25:31-40 and such parables as Matthew 22:1-13 and Luke 14:16-24 that show that there will be a multitude of believers among the Gentiles who will believe and await His return.

There must also be group of believing Gentiles who can receive, through faith, the benefits of the covenants in His reign. These groups go into the Millennium in their natural bodies, saved, but not having experienced death and resurrection (Matthew 25:31-40; Revelation 7:9-17).

If the church were on earth until the time of the second advent, these saved individuals would have been saved to a position in the church, would have been raptured at that time, and consequently there would not be one saved person left on the earth. These considerations make necessary the pre-tribulation rapture of the church, so that God may call out and preserve a remnant during the tribulation in and through whom the promises may be fulfilled.

Reason 20: The sealed 144,000 from Israel

As long as the church is on the earth there are none saved to a special Jewish relationship. All who are saved are saved to a position in the body of Christ (i.e. church) as indicated in Colossians 1:26-29; 3:11; Ephesians 2:14-22; 3:1-7. During the seventieth week the church must be absent, for out of the saved remnant in Israel God seals 144,000 Jews, 12,000 from each tribe (Revelation 7:14). The fact that God is again dealing with Israel on this national relationship, setting them apart to national identities, and sending them as special representatives to the nations in place of the witness of the church, indicates that the church must no longer be on earth.

Reason 21: The great object of satanic attack

According to Revelation 12, the object of satanic attack during the tribulation period is "the woman" who produced the child. Since this child is born "to rule all nations with a rod of iron" (Revelation 12:5), it can only refer to Christ, the one whose right it is to rule. The Psalmist confirms this interpretation in Psalm 2:9, which is admittedly Messianic. The one from whom Christ came can only be Israel.

At the time Satan is cast out of Heaven (Revelation 12:9) he goes forth with "great wrath because he knoweth that he hath but a short time" (Revelation 12:12). The church must not be here, for, since it is the "body of Christ," it would be the object of satanic attack then as it has been all through the age (Ephesians 6:12) if it were present. The reason Satan turns against Israel can only be explained by the absence of the church from that scene.

Reason 22: The apostasy of the period

The complete apostasy of the period on the part of the professing church prevents the church from being in the world. The only organized church ever mentioned in the tribulation period is the Jezebel system (Revelation 2:22) and the harlot system (Revelation 17 and 18). If the true church were on earth, since it is not mentioned as separate from the apostate system, it must be a part of that apostasy. Such a conclusion is impossible. The believing witnesses, converted during the period, are specifically said to have kept themselves from defilement by this apostate system (Revelation 14:4). Since the church is not mentioned as also having kept herself from this system it must be concluded that the church is not there.

Reason 23: The promises to the true church

There are certain passages of Scripture which definitely promise the church a removal before the seventieth week.

1. "I will keep thee from the hour of temptation" (Revelation 3:10). John is promising a complete removal from the sphere of testing, not a preservation through it.

2. "God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Thessalonians 5:9). The contrast in this passage is between wrath and salvation from that wrath. 1 Thessalonians 5:2 indicates that this wrath and darkness is that of the Day of the Lord. A comparison of this passage with Joel 2:2; Zephaniah 1:14-18; Amos 5:18 will describe the darkness mentioned here as the darkness of the seventieth week. A comparison with Revelation 6:17; 11:18; 14:10, 19; 15:1, 7; 16:1, 19 will describe the wrath of the Day of the Lord.

3. Paul clearly teaches that our expectation is not wrath, but the revelation of "His Son from Heaven." This could not be unless the Son were revealed before the wrath of the seventieth week falls on the earth (1 Thessalonians 1:9-10).

Reason 24: The agreement of typology

If a teaching is contrary to all typology it cannot be a true interpretation. Scripture abounds in types which teach that those who walked by faith were delivered from the visitations of judgment which overtook the unbelieving. Such types are seen in the experience of Noah (Genesis 6:13-9:19) and Rahab (Joshua 2:1-24; 6:1-17), but perhaps the clearest illustration is that of Lot (Genesis 18:20-19:25). In 2 Peter 2:6-9, Lot is called a righteous man. This divine commentary will shed light on Genesis 19:22, where the angel sought to hasten the departure of Lot with the words "Haste thee, escape thither; for I cannot do anything till thou be come thither." If the presence of one righteous man prevented the outpouring of deserved judgment on the city of Sodom, how much more will the presence of the church on earth prevent the outpouring of divine wrath until after her removal.

2.2.5.2 Conclusion

A number of reasons for belief in the pretribulation rapture position have been presented. Some of them are particularly applicable to the midtribulation rapture position and others applicable to the posttribulation rapture position. The pretribulation doctrine is not based on these arguments singly, but rather they are considered as cumulative evidence that the church will be delivered by rapture before the inception of Daniel's seventieth week. I conclude that the pretribulation rapture position is correct.

3. REFERENCES AND RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER STUDY

1. The Bible and Future Events, Chapter 2, Academie Books, Zondervan Corporation, 1973 Edition, by Leon J. Wood.

2. Lectures in Systematic Theology, Chapter XLII, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, 1992 Edition, by Henry C. Thiessen.

3. Things to Come, Chapters X to XIII, Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing Co., 1st printing 1964, 1996 reprint, by J. Dwight Pentecost.

Return to Table of Contents

Go to Chapter Ten