Prooftexting and the Post-Tribulation Rapture

“...and she brought forth a male son, who is about to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, and her child was snatched up to God and to His throne...” (Rev. 12:5, LSV)

Merriam-Webster defines a proof text as “a Scriptural passage adduced as proof for a theological doctrine, belief, or principle.”  Every side in a theological or doctrinal debate will put the spotlight on certain passages to add weight to their argument.  For every proof text offered by those who subscribe to salvation by faith and works, there is a counter-proof text highlighted by those who argue for salvation by faith alone and the gospel of grace.

The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him. (Prov. 18:17, ESV)

Proof texts are necessary to make any doctrinal argument, yet overusing them and neglecting seemingly contradictory passages often gives rise to prooftexting.  This is an errant and fallacious practice that causes one to miss the forest for the trees, so to speak.  It causes the proponent to resort to a number of fallacies including argumentum ab auctoritate (“argument from authority”), petitio principii (“assuming the premise”), and straw man.  Wikipedia defines the issue with prooftexting quite well:

Prooftexting (sometimes “proof-texting” or “proof texting”) is the practice of using isolated, out-of-context quotations from a document to establish a proposition in eisegesis (introducing one's own presuppositions, agendas, or biases).

To summarize: there is a place for proof texts and all arguments have them, but they have to be used contextually, comprehensively, and correctly.

Growing up in the Restoration Movement (“churches of Christ”) I was well-versed in the several passages of Scripture that seem to indicate the necessity of baptism for salvation—Acts 2:38 chief among them:

Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.  And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”

To me and many others this passage seemed so clear, so unambiguous.  How could anyone disagree that water baptism was essential for salvation?  And so I thought for many years, until I came face to face with the many passages that speak of salvation by faith alone, such as Ephesians 2:8–9, John 3, John 6, and numerous epistles like Romans and Galatians.  Remember, as the ancient God-breathed proverb says, “The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.”  What may seem to be an ironclad argument, might not be quite so strong on further examination.

These seemingly contradictory sola fide passages troubled me and I was determined to get to the bottom of this all-important question.  I had read dozens upon dozens of articles from those on both sides of the debate, but in the end I couldn't be fully convinced one way or the other.  This led me to go straight to God's word for the answers and I set out to do a full inventory of every single passage of Scripture in the New Testament that spoke of individual salvation.  My inventory included every passage I could find relating salvation to faith, salvation to baptism, salvation to works, or any combination thereof.

In the end, the result of my inventory (which I wrote about here and here) rocked my world.  There are 88 verses in the New Testament that clearly indicate salvation is through faith alone, or in some instances stated in the inverse—that salvation is not a result of works.  On the other hand, there are 24 verses that seem to tie works to salvation and only five that speak of baptism in such a way (Acts 2:38; Mk. 16:16; 1 Pt. 3:21; Col. 2:12; Rm. 6:4).  As a result, I was left with a much clearer picture and had to identify what, if any, contradiction remained.

I discovered that earlier in my life I had been prooftexting with five verses in such a way that I couldn't see the 88!  Similarly, many legalists prooftext their anti-gospel view using James chapter 2 and a handful of other passages, similarly excluding the proverbial elephant in the room of sola fide.  My eyes were opened to the good news of Christ like never before and these 29 verses suddenly became easy to reconcile:

• Of the five passages on baptism, only one—1 Peter 3:21—mentions water anywhere in the context, and it's in a different light than I had thought: the Apostle Peter says it isn't water that saves, but is rather the appeal to God for a clean conscience (cf. Rm. 10:9, 13).  Paul makes a similar distinction in 1 Corinthians 1:17.  What of the other four verses?  The answer had already been given in Scripture, but I hadn't recognized it—John baptized with water, but (adversative particle δέ in the Greek) Christ baptizes with the Holy Spirit (Mt. 3:11; Mk. 1:8; Lk. 3:16; Jn. 1:33; Acts 1:5).  Our work has only ever been to believe in the One God sent (Jn. 6:29), whereas God's work is to baptize us in His Holy Spirit, applying Christ's righteousness to our account, which is made possible by His efficacious death and resurrection.  That's what happened on the day of Pentecost nearly 2,000 years ago.
• Regarding the 24 passages on works, four occur in the synoptic Gospels in the context of law-keeping outside of the dispensation of grace (Mt. 3:10; 6:15; 13:41; Lk 3:9).
• Four occur in James' epistle, a letter written within the age of grace, to the Diaspora—the dispersed Israelites among whom were believers who were under extreme social pressure to renounce Christ and observe the Torah; James makes clear in his thesis that the issue he is addressing isn't faith vs. works, but rather when one says (“λέγῃ”) he has faith, but doesn't actually have faith (Jas. 2:14).  Those who claim to trust in Christ yet rely on the Torah for righteousness are deceiving themselves (Jas. 2:10–13; 3:2).  In Acts 15:12–14 James himself affirms Peter's declaration of sola fide for both Gentiles and Jews, which was given in Acts 15:7–11.
• Philippians 2:12 contains the well-known statement where believers are exhorted to “work out [their] own salvation with fear and trembling,” but in an epistle which already affirms sola fide (Phil. 3:9), the meaning is quite clear: we are never exhorted to work for our salvation.  That would be a blasphemous contradiction of the good news.  To the contrary, Paul is exhorting believers to work out from their already existing, established, positional security in Christ Jesus.  Christ is our rock and foundation and upon this Rock our non-salvific works are built up unto the Lord (1 Cor. 3:11–15; Eph. 2:10).
• Hebrews 10:26 warns that the one continuing in sin has no sacrifice for sins left, since Christ is the once-for-all sacrifice.  This verse is perhaps the most infamous example of prooftexting since the entire subject of the book of Hebrews—chapter 10 in particular—is that Christ's atoning sacrifice was complete and that if the Jews (“Hebrews”) continue in their unbelief by relying on the Mosaic Law, they will be lost.  Thus the “sinning” spoken of in Hebrews 10:26 isn't the general sin that everyone, both believer and unbeliever alike, commits (Rm. 3:10, 23; 7:7–25), but is the specific sin of unbelief in Christ (cf. Jn. 8:24; Rm. 14:23), which will result in horrible judgment (vv. 28–31; cf. vv. 38–39; 3:14–19; 4:1–11). 
• Four verses occur in Revelation (vv. 2:23; 3:2; 20:12, 13).  Revelation 20:12–13 specifically pertains to the unsaved dead in the second resurrection who will indeed be judged by their deeds and cast into the lake of fire.  Revelation 2:23 doesn't mention salvation and might even be excluded from this list.  Revelation 3:2 is more ambiguous.  It doesn't specifically mention salvation either and appears to be addressed directly to the angel of Sardis rather than the believers there (v. 1).  Salvation by means of Christ's atoning death is the clear teaching of Revelation (Rev. 1:4–6; 5:9–10; 7:13–14; 12:11; see also here).
• The remaining 10 verses are contained within 1st and 3rd John—nine in 1 John alone.  Interestingly, similar to Revelation 2:23 and 3:2, none of these 10 verses mention salvation (1 Jn. 2:4, 5; 3:6–9; 15; 4:20; 5:18; 3 Jn. 1:11), though they do paint a stark contrast between the children of light and the children of darkness—a major theme in John's epistles.  However one interprets these Scriptures, they have to be viewed in light of John's unambiguous statements regarding salvation by faith alone (Jn. 1:12–13; 16–17; 29; 3:14–18; 5:24; 6:28–29; 1 Jn. 3:1–5; 4:4; 5:4–5; Rev. 1:4–6; 5:9–10; 7:13–14; 12:11).

In the same way that we have obtained the clear theme and message of Scripture regarding salvation by inventorying as many passages as we can find on the subject and resolving the apparent contradictions caused by prooftexting, we can do the same in regard to the timing of the rapture.

We have written many articles demonstrating how clear and unambiguous the Scriptural case for the pre-tribulational rapture truly is—even going so far as to say that a literal interpretation of Scripture necessarily leads to the pre-tribulation conclusion:

Prophecy Basics: Setting the Record Straight

Pre-Trib Rapture Evidence: Top 10

Who Are the 24 Elders?

Who is the Male Child of Revelation 12?

Revelation 12: Escape to a Place Prepared

Passing the Torch

The Pre-Trib Rapture is Solid Biblical Truth

The Antichrist, the Restrainer, and the Remnant

Extra-Biblical Evidence for the Pre-Trib Rapture

250 Reasons for the Pre-Trib Rapture

But now I want to address the three primary proof texts used by those arguing for a post-tribulation rapture of the Church, demonstrating that these are easily reconciled to the pre-trib view.

---

1. “For that day shall not come...” (2 Thess. 2:3)

One of the largest eschatological battlegrounds in Scripture is 2 Thessalonians 2.  The fight centers around a single word:

And we ask you, brothers, in regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of our gathering together to Him, that you are not quickly shaken in mind, nor be troubled, neither through spirit, neither through word, neither through letters as through us, as that the Day of the LORD has arrived; do not let anyone deceive you in any way, because if the departure [ἀποστασία] may not come first, the man of lawlessness may [not] be revealed—the son of destruction... (2 Thess. 2:1–3, LSV)

In v. 3 the King James supplies “that day shall not come”—words not found in any manuscripts, including the manuscripts the King James was translated from.  Adding to Scripture, KJV?  Many subsequent English translations have maintained this interpolation or something similar.  This addition doesn't significantly impact the meaning of the text, but our greater concern is with the Greek word ἀποστασία (transliterated into English as “apostasy”), which is translated in the Bishops' Bible and most subsequent English translations as “apostasy, rebellion, or falling away.”  The Bishops' Bible of 1568 was novel in this regard and it served as the textual basis for the King James of 1611.  All English translations prior to the Bishops' Bible chose the more literal rendering departure or departing.  It's important to note that the translators of the Bishops' Bible and the King James were highly concerned with upholding the predominance of the Church of England and stamping out any resistance (aka apostasy) and this bias can be seen in various places in the text.  The more generic Protestant and gospel-centric Geneva Bible, which was completed just eight years prior to the Bishops' Bible, maintained the normal, literal rendering departure.

Now the interesting thing about 2 Thessalonians 2 is that a number of prominent pre-tribulation scholars believe that apostasia in v. 3 does in fact signify a spiritual defection of sorts in the last days and that this understanding doesn't impact the pre-trib doctrine.  In other words, the issue that Paul is tackling here—in their interpretation—is not the rapture so to speak, but is the fact that a spiritual defection during the Tribulation will precede the Antichrist.  The thinking goes that this parallels Daniel 8:23.  The pre-trib rapture precedes both.

In this sense, the translation of apostasia is not decisive against the pre-trib doctrine.  On the other hand, if apostasia does in fact refer to the spatial departure of the Church, then 2 Thessalonians 2:3 decisively disproves the post-tribulational view.  And herein lies the reason why the apostasy view of 2 Thessalonians 2:3 is so militantly defended by those opposed to the pre-trib view, because if they lose the battle over v. 3, there's no other ground to stand on.

I've studied the scholarly works on both sides of the debate surrounding 2 Thessalonians 2:3, but I'm left unconvinced by the apostasy camp.  The issue is pretty simple really.  Apostasia literally means “a standing away from, a standing apart from, a departure.”  Its verbal correspondent ἀφίστημι (transliterated aphistémi) means “to leave, to depart.”  It's used 14 times in Scripture: 11 times purely referring to spatial departure, two times in the context of religious apostasy, and once in the context of political revolt (Acts 5:37).  Context is king in each instance.

Despite what some would argue, the noun apostasia is no different.  It is only used twice in Scripture; aside from the instance in 2 Thessalonians 2, it is also used in Acts 21:21 referring to a departure or forsaking of Moses.  Acts 21:21 is particularly interesting because it becomes clear that apostasia is defined by the context ἀπὸ Μωϋσέως (“from Moses”) and without the contextual linkage the word wouldn't be able to stand by itself.  I inventoried other extra-biblical Koine usages of the word from before the 2nd century and in each instance the context had to be clearly supplied to define what the departure was from.  Even in the handful of places the word is used in the LXX, it never stands alone as apostasy.  It is clear that this word simply means departure—in extra-biblical sources a departure from political opponents; in Acts 21:21 a departure from Judaism; and in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 a departure from the world.

The context of 2 Thessalonians 2 is abundantly clear:

And we ask you, brothers, in regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of our gathering together to Him, that you are not quickly shaken in mind, nor be troubled, neither through spirit, neither through word, neither through letters as through us, as that the Day of the LORD has arrived...

Paul couldn't be any more clear: Christians should not be shaken or troubled by the rabble-rousers who say that the Day of the LORD (aka the Tribulation) has begun.  “Our gathering together to Him” must come first.  This is the plain teaching that the Apostle Paul had already taught the Thessalonians in his first epistle (1 Thess. 4:13–5:11; cf. 1 Thess. 1:10).

In 1 Thessalonians, not only is the rapture event described immediately before the Tribulation within the same passage (1 Thess. 4:16–17 vs. 1 Thess. 5:1–3), but Paul also laces his first epistle with promises of escape for both living and dead believers (1 Thess. 1:10; 4:18; 5:3–4 “they” do not escape, but “you” do; also 1 Thess. 5:9).

Furthermore, it is noted that 2 Thessalonians 2:7 directly parallels v. 3:

...for the secret of lawlessness already works, only the [one] now restraining [will do so] until he may come out of [the] midst, and then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the LORD will consume with the Spirit of His mouth, and will nullify at the appearance of His coming... (2 Thess. 2:7–8, LSV)

In v. 3 the Antichrist is not revealed until the “departure.”  In v. 7 the Antichrist is not revealed until the Restrainer is removed.  V. 7 is a clear reference to some sort of spatial departure of an entity that restrains the Antichrist's revealing, therefore v. 3 almost certainly refers to the same.  Now the common view is that the Restrainer is the Holy Spirit, and this is true, but it must be qualified.  The Holy Spirit is God and God is omnipresent.  His removal would result in the immediate disintegration of the cosmos.  There is nowhere where God is not.  Thus the Restrainer is more properly the Holy Spirit-indwelt Church—the mystical body of Christ, which is one new man (Eph. 2:15), the corporate seed of Abraham (Gal. 3:29), and the male child of Revelation 12:5.  V. 7 disproves the view that the departure of v. 3 is a spiritual “falling away.”

The Antichrist may very well be here on earth as I write this, but he will not be revealed until we're gone.

Further reading:

The Falling Away: Spiritual Departure or Physical Rapture? by Dr. Andy Woods

Thistles in Thessalonians by Greg Lauer

---

2. “This is the first resurrection...” (Rev. 20:5)

Some post-tribulation rapture proponents such as Oneness Pentecostal Irvin Baxter use the reference to “the first resurrection” in Revelation 20:5–6 as proof positive that the pre-trib doctrine is false.  The theory goes that because this resurrection occurs after the Tribulation there cannot be a resurrection of the Church before the Tribulation.

And I saw thrones, and they [that] sat on them, and judgment was given to them, and the souls of those who have been beheaded because of the testimony of Jesus, and because of the word of God, and who did not worship the beast, nor his image, and did not receive the mark on their forehead and on their hand, and they lived and reigned with the Christ one thousand years; and the rest of the dead did not live again until the one thousand years may be completed; this [is] the first resurrection. Blessed and holy—he who is having part in the first resurrection; the second death has no authority over these, but they will be priests of God and of the Christ, and will reign with Him one thousand years. (Rev. 20:4–6, LSV)

On its face, going only by this small snippet of Scripture, the argument seems pretty solid.  However, not only is the argument faulty, but the passage itself has two key hints of the pre-trib rapture (#2 and #3 below).

1. What is meant by “the first resurrection”?  “First” can mean several different things—even in a literal sense: “first” can have a sequential meaning (e.g., an ordered list: first... second... third), a priority meaning (e.g., “the king has first priority” or “she's my first choice”), and a type meaning (e.g., “the first type is pizza, the second type is tex-mex”).

The post-tribulation view insists that first must here refer to sequence only and thus their view is boxed in by using only one of the three meanings of the word.  In reality, the Revelation 20 passage is the weakest of the three main post-trib proof texts.  The post-trib resurrection of Revelation 20 is unequivocally not the first sequential resurrection in the Bible.  Fully 11 others occur prior:

• The resurrection of a widow's son from Zarephath by Elijah (1 Kgs. 17).  Note that the first listed resurrection in the Bible was of a Gentile nonetheless!
• The resurrection of the son of a woman from Shunem by Elisha (2 Kgs. 4).
• The resurrection of a man who was thrown on the bones of Elisha (2 Kgs. 13).
• The resurrection of Jairus' daughter by Jesus (Mk. 5).
• The resurrection of a man from Nain by Jesus (Lk. 7).
• The resurrection of Lazarus by Jesus (Jn. 11).
• The resurrection of Jesus Himself.
• The resurrection of many saints shortly after Christ's resurrection (Mt. 27).
• The resurrection of Tabitha by Peter (Acts 9).
• The resurrection of Eutychus by Paul (Acts 20).
• The resurrection of the Two Witnesses at the mid-point of the Tribulation (Rev. 11).

Some have countered that Revelation 20 must refer only to the first resurrection into immortality.  They seem to forget our Lord Jesus Christ Himself!  Jesus is the firstborn from the dead (Col. 1:18) and we, the Church, are called by the same name (Heb. 12:23; cf. Jas. 1:18).  We share in the blessings, authority, and inheritance of Christ (Jn. 14:13; 15:16; Rm. 8:17; 2 Cor. 5:21; Eph. 1:3; 2:6; Rev. 2:26–28; 3:21).  We, like Christ, suffer tribulation in this present age, but we do not suffer the wrath of God that is poured out during the specific period of time allotted for God's wrath known as “The Time of Jacob's Trouble” (Jer. 30), “Daniel's 70 Week” (Dan. 9), or “The Day of the LORD.”  John 14:1–3, 1 Thessalonians 1:10, 1 Thessalonians 5:3–4, 1 Thessalonians 5:9, and Revelation 3:10 are conclusive.  Furthermore, the Old Testament describes a group of saints escaping before the Tribulation (Isa. 26:17–21; 66:7–9; Zeph. 1:14–2:3).

And Jesus wasn't the only one resurrected into immortality—the many saints of Matthew 27 probably fit the bill, too.  Still to come, the Two Witnesses will be resurrected and taken to Heaven three and a half years before the “first” resurrection of Revelation 20:4–6.

So what is meant by the first resurrection?  The answer is simple: it's a resurrection of type, priority, and sequence.  The first resurrection is the type of resurrection unto life.  Those resurrected prior to the post-millennial Great White Throne judgment event are partakers of the resurrection of life.  They are atoned for by the blood of the Lamb.  Broadly speaking, this includes the Church, the Old Testament saints, and the Tribulation saints.  In that these are resurrected unto life—and are resurrected prior to those raised after the millennial period who are judged by deeds rather than atonement (Rev. 20:12–15)—these are also first in priority and sequence.


2. Only dead saints are raised into immortality in Revelation 20.  The only group mentioned to be resurrected in Revelation 20 are those who did not worship the beast and who did not take the mark—all of whom were beheaded (Rev. 20:4; cf. Rev. 6:9–11; 7:9–17).  Likewise, given that it has been over 2,000 years, all the Old Testament saints are also dead when resurrected (Ez. 37:1–14; Dan. 12:12–13).  Where are the living Christians mentioned in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 and 1 Corinthians 15:51 that Paul speaks of who will be changed and caught up?  They are nowhere to be found because God took them (cf. Jn. 14:1–3; Isa. 26:19–21; Zeph. 2:3; Rev. 3:10; cf. Gen. 5:24).


3. In Revelation 20 a separate group is mentioned before the dead are raised.  They are sitting on thrones.  It's the Church.  “And I saw thrones, and they [that] sat on them, and judgment was given to them...”  The only group in the book of Revelation mentioned to be sitting on thrones are the 24 elders and the 24 elders unequivocally represent the collective, glorified Church.

---

3. “After the tribulation of those days...” (Mt. 24:29)


Perhaps the most cited passage in all of Scripture by the post-tribulation camp—their ultimate proof text, as it were—is found in the 24th chapter of Matthew, known as the Olivet Discourse.

And immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give her light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken; and then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in the sky; and then will all the tribes of the earth strike the breast, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of Heaven, with power and much glory; and He will send His messengers with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His chosen from the four winds, from the ends of the heavens to the ends thereof. (Mt. 24:29–31, LSV)

At first glance, their argument makes quite a bit of sense.  Paul spoke of the gathering of believers in 1 Thessalonians 4 and 2 Thessalonians 2.  And in 1 Thessalonians 4:16–18 and the corresponding passage of 1 Corinthians 15:51–53, this gathering of believers occurs at the sound of a trumpet.  Matthew 24:29 makes clear that the gathering spoken of in v. 31 occurs “after the tribulation of those days...”

This though is where the similarities end.  Like 2 Thessalonians 2, Matthew 24 doesn't provide the definitive counterpunch that the post-trib perspective would need, because both sides have already agreed that there is a gathering after the Tribulation as attested in the previous section.  The Old Testament saints are gathered after the Tribulation (Dan. 12:12–13; cf. Ez. 37) and the Tribulation saints are gathered after the Tribulation, as well (Rev. 20:4; 7:14).

Regarding the trumpet, it has been noted that there may be an important distinction between the angelic-oriented trumpet of Matthew 24 and the “trumpet call of God” in 1 Thessalonians 4.  This could be the case, but I don't make too much of this.  The more important distinction is that Church Age believers are gathered by Christ (Jn. 14:1–3) to Christ (1 Thess. 4:16–18) in the air.  The gathering of the saints at the end of the Tribulation outlined in Matthew 24 is accomplished by angels to an unspecified location.  Whereas Christ's parousia to the Church occurs in the air, His parousia to Israel occurs on the Mount of Olives (Zech. 14:4; Acts 1:10–12).

Trying to mix these two separate gatherings is unnatural, given that the gathering of the Church involves believers quite literally leaving the earth to fly up into the sky just as Jesus flew up into the sky at His ascension.  If we are to regard Jesus' promise to His disciples in John 14:1–3 for its plain sense, then the destination of believers who will be gathered to Christ in the air can't be earth.  It must be Heaven.  And indeed, believers being caught up into Heaven prior to the Tribulation (or Great Tribulation in the case of the Two Witnesses) is already a strong theme in Scripture (Rev. 4:1–4; 12:5; 3:21; 2 Cor. 12:2–4; cf. Gen. 5:24; 2 Kgs. 2:11; Rev. 11:12).

The mere fact that a trumpet is blown at both the gathering of the Church (1 Thess. 4:16) and at the gathering of the elect in Matthew 24 (v. 31) is not grounds for connecting the two events.  Trumpets were blown at all the festivals of Israel.  And not just the festivals, but also general gatherings of the people—both for meetings and for war.  Trumpets are routinely employed throughout Scripture and in the book of Revelation we can read of nine trumpets sounding—the trumpet of Christ two times (Rev. 1:10; 4:1) and the seven angelic trumpets in the midst of the Tribulation.

Connecting the various eschatological events may seem complex, but it needn't be.  Thinking it to be too complicated to have a resurrection before the Tribulation and one after, some post-tribulation proponents argue that Occam's razor necessitates a post-tribulation resurrection alone (which I addressed in the previous section).  However, this is a misuse of Occam's razor.  The principle isn't just “find the simplest explanation,” it's “find the simplest explanation that fits all the facts.”  “Plurality should not be posited without necessity.”  The pre-tribulation rapture is necessary because it's promised to the Church (Rev 3:10; 4:1; 5:8–10; 12:5; 20:4; 1 Thess. 1:10; 4:16–18; 5:4; 9; 2 Thess. 2:3, 7; 1 Cor. 15:51–52; Acts 15:14–16; Zeph. 1:14–2:3; Jn. 14:1–6; Isa. 17:10–11; 26:17–21; 57:1–2; 66:7–9; Lk. 21:36; Deut. 32:21).

Just as the Jews had oversimplified the eschatological plan of God and couldn't foresee Christ's first coming, His atoning sacrifice, their second dispersion, or the Church Age, so too I'm afraid many Christians today are oversimplifying the final end of the age events, and in so doing are not able to offer the encouraging words and great hope that all believers should be able to hold onto (Jn. 14:1–3; 1 Thess. 4:18; 5:4–9; Tit. 2:11–15; Heb. 10:25).

In my humble opinion, the complexities of eschatology are most clearly resolved by the pre-tribulation model, which allows for a prima facie interpretation of the book of Revelation, as well as a chronological reading of the vision:

• Chapter 1: “Write the things that you have seen...”
• Chapters 2–3: “And the things that are...” (aka the Church Age)
• Chapter 4–on: “And the things that are to take place after this...” (the rapture in chapters 4–5; Tribulation in chapters 6–18; the return of Christ in chapter 19; the post-trib resurrection, millennial period, Gog and Magog war, and final judgment in chapter 20; and the new heavens, new earth, and New Jerusalem in chapters 21–22)

Now the book of Revelation is not a western-style chronology, but it is chronological as I explain in my article The Day of the LORD.  It's a Semitic chronology in the style Genesis 1–2.  It is also built with a very clear chiastic structure.  As frequently noted, the ekklésia (“church”) is mentioned frequently in chapters 1, 2, and 3, but isn't mentioned even once in chapters 4–21.  The only mention of the ekklésia outside of the first three chapters is found in Revelation 22:16 at the tail end of the book after the narrative is completely finished.

A final point regarding the two gatherings: Christ returns at the end of the Tribulation with saints already in tow (Rev. 19:11–16; Jd. 1:14–15; cf. Dan. 7:13–14), as well as angels in the stellar armada.

...because of this be glad, you heavens, and those who dwell in them; woe to those inhabiting the earth and the sea, because the Devil went down to you, having great wrath, having known that he has [a] short time. (Rev. 12:12, LSV)

---

Final Thoughts

Over the years we've presented countless reasons why the pre-tribulational rapture is more than a doctrine—it's a promise.  And many of these reasons coming from a man who was himself unsure for a long time.  I was post-trib, pre-wrath, and pan-trib, and sometimes I was waffling over those in the same day!  Pre-trib seemed too good to be true.  That's until I found grace.  We will suffer in this world and millions of believers have been martyred for their faith, but none of those who genuinely trust in Christ will suffer the wrath of God that is poured out during the Tribulation's 21 judgments.

It isn't easy escapism.  It's trusting the Blood.  I don't have to purify myself during the Tribulation, because I'm already pure.  I don't need the righteous acts of the saints, because I have the righteous act of Christ on the Cross imputed to my account.  While the pre-trib rapture is not a promise necessary to believe in for salvation, it does seem that a great many Christians who reject it are still living under law.

The Lord's coming is imminent—not random as some pre-trib proponents teach, but soon.  That is to say, the next major prophetic event to be fulfilled is not the revealing of the Antichrist, the Abomination of Desolation, or the seals, trumpets, and vials of wrath, but is the rapture of Christ's Church from the earth.  It's imminent because the next thing we'll see is Christ, not Antichrist.  We look for Jesus, not the false messiah who comes later.  We are awaiting the coming (parousia) of Christ for His Church, not the coming of Christ to the Mount of Olives to tread down the wicked as grapes in the winepress.  Who taught you that there are two comings of Christ?  Certainly not Scripture.  There are three comings of Christ: first to Judea some 2,000 years ago as the spotless Lamb, second to His Church as the longing Bridegroom, and third to the Mount of Olives as the conquering King.

Scripture affirms that Christians will be alive when Christ comes to snatch us up (1 Thess. 4:17–18; 1 Cor. 15:51–53).  Scripture also affirms that the gates of hell (literally Hades) will not prevail against the Church, yet during the Tribulation the saints of God are all killed and are all overcome by the Antichrist (Rev. 13:7, 15; 20:4).  Your bug out bag, MREs, and hole in the ground won't matter a lick in the Tribulation, because you and your family will not survive it if you intend to follow Christ to the bitter end.  My hope is Jesus Christ who delivers me from the wrath to come.  He will keep me from the trial coming on the whole world to test the inhabitants therein.

~ MARANATHA ~

Newer Post Older Post