Appendix B

Pretribulationism, the teaching that the church will be taken out of the world before the time of the great tribulation is a serious error. There is no question that the Scriptures teach the visible second coming of the Lord Jesus in glory with His angels, and that when He comes the church will be caught up to meet Him in the air;²⁰⁹ but no Scriptures state or imply that the Lord Jesus is coming before the great tribulation.

Those who teach and believe this doctrine are not doing so out of some malicious desire to misrepresent the Lord's Word. On the contrary, they sincerely believe that the Bible teaches this doctrine.

However, an examination of the Scripture passages most often cited and the doctrinal reasoning employed to support pretribulationism reveal faulty Bible study methodology.

The cornerstone of this faulty methodology is the reading of unclear passages of Scriptures in the light or bias of the pretribulation hypothesis. Correct Bible study requires that unclear passages of Scripture should be read in the light of clearer passages of Scripture that speak about the same subject. Scripture interprets Scripture.²¹⁰ A clearly stated hypothesis should never be used to clear-up the meaning of an unclear Scripture passage. Only context, language, intent of the author and other clearer Scripture passages can be used.

The following is an example of reading an unclear Bible passage in the light of a hypothesis:²¹¹

Hypothesis:The apostle John never died a mortal death. Jesus said He did not want John to die. He remains alive to the present day. This is proved by the following Scripture:

Jesus said to him [Peter], “If I want him [John] to remain until I come, what is that to you?” (John 21:22)

Incorrect conclusion: Jesus said He wanted John to stay alive until His second coming. Therefore John is still alive.

Notice what happened in the above example. The hypothesis, with all of its details, was introduced first. This created a certain light or context in the mind of the reader. Next, a passage was read to support the hypothesis.²¹²The context was ignored. The hypothesis achieved undeserved authority because it seems to be speaking about something Jesus said.

It is a fact of John’s gospel that, “This saying went out among the brethren that the disciple would not die; yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die; but only, “If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you?” (John 21:23)

It is clear from the context that John set the record straight. Jesus did not teach that John would not die. But there remains to this day those who propose that John did not die a mortal death.

In England, in the early 1800's, the doctrine of the pretribulation rapture of the church grew from the use of the above method.²¹³ A clear hypothesis was stated, and various, much less specific passages were appealed to for support. In an environment of renewed interest in prophecy the doctrine grew like wildfire.

Following is an examination of some of the Scriptures most often cited to support the pretribulation hypothesis. After examining the passage, and the arguments presented for the meaning of the passage, ask these questions: What does this passage clearly and unmistakably say? If the meaning of the passage is not clear by itself, what clear and unambiguous Scripture passages or methods am I using to understand the passage? Am I arriving at the meaning of the Scripture with the aid of the hypothesis?

1 Thess 5:9 "For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ."

Pretribulation reasoning:

The great tribulation is uniquely a time of God's wrath.

God's wrath is poured out on all inhabitants of the earth.

God has not destined true believers for wrath.

Incorrect conclusion The church cannot be present on the earth during the time of the great tribulation, and therefore must be raptured before the great tribulation.

Problems with this reasoning:

It is true that God's wrath is poured out during the great tribulation (Rev. 6:17, 15:1, 16:1). But it is not true that all persons on the earth at the time of the tribulation are the subjects of God's wrath. The book of Revelation speaks about saints living on earth during the time that God's wrath is being displayed (7:14, 11:3-12, 12:6/17, 13:7, 14:12, 16:15). The Lord Jesus taught his disciples that the saints would be on the earth during the great tribulation, and then gathered together after the tribulation (Matt. 24:3-31, note vv. 29-31). The saints are not the target of God's wrath during this time but are persecuted by the beast (Rev. 13:7). God's wrath, when He comes, is directed toward those who are persecuting the saints, and provides relief for the suffering saints (2 Thess. 1:6-10).

Thus, being present on earth during the great tribulation does not contradict the fact that "God has not destined us for wrath...." When the true believers are present during the time of the tribulation, and looking forward to the rapture, they will be comforted and encouraged when they read: "God has not destined us for wrath but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ."

Rev. 3:10 "Because you have kept the word of my perseverance, I also will keep you from the hour of testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell upon the earth."

Pretribulation reasoning:

The church in Philadelphia is promised that they will be "kept from the hour of testing."

Philadelphia, the church addressed, must represent the entire church prior to the time of the great tribulation.

The "hour of testing" is interpreted to mean the entire time of the great tribulation.

To be "kept from the hour of testing..." is interpreted to mean that the church will be raptured from the earth.

Incorrect conclusion: The church is promised that it will be raptured from the earth before the time of the great tribulation.

Problems with this reasoning:

In Revelation chapters 2 and 3, seven churches are addressed. Five churches are warned to repent while two churches, Philadelphia and Smyrna, are consoled and encouraged. To interpret the church of Philadelphia as representative of the entire church violates the context that presents it as one of seven churches. There is no passage of Scripture that suggests that Philadelphia alone represents the entire church at the time preceding the great tribulation, while all the other six churches do not! Such an assertion is an arbitrary reading in the "light" of pretribulation hypothesis, not the results of careful exegesis.

The "hour of testing" may be the time of the great tribulation, or it may be some segment before, during or after the great tribulation. Whatever the meaning, the promise to be kept from it is only significant to the church in Philadelphia.

To be "kept from the hour..." may mean a number of things including death before the onset of a particular time, or preservation and protection during such time.²¹⁴ To insist that "kept" means "raptured" is an arbitrary reading in the light of a hypothesis, not the result of any Scripture passage that teaches "kept" equals "raptured." It might be reasonable to suggest "kept" equals "raptured" if we had any passage of Scripture that presented the church being raptured (caught-up, removed, gathered) before the great tribulation; no such passage exists. To conclude the meaning of this passage in the "light" of pretribulation hypothesis, and then use this passage as the basis of the pretribulation hypothesis is an example of blatant, dangerous circular reasoning.

Probable meaning of the passage:

Revelation chapter 1 identifies all the churches as lampstands. In chapters 2 and 3 both Philadelphia and Smyrna stand without criticism before the Lord while the other five churches are warned to repent. Chapter 11 describes the ministry, death, resurrection and rapture of two witnesses after identifying these two witnesses as "the two lampstands that stand" (i.e., the churches of Philadelphia and Smyrna).²¹⁵ These two churches are protected by God while they carry out a unique ministry for three and one half years. After their ministry is finished the beast makes war with them and kills them. After three and one half days they are resurrected and raptured into the presence of the Lord. The protection by the Lord for their witness during forty-two months, and then their subsequent rapture before the events of the bowls is the probable realization of the Lord's earlier promise to Philadelphia.

2 Thess. 2:7 "For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way."

Pretribulation reasoning:

"He who now restrains..." is a reference to the Holy Spirit, the church or the Holy Spirit as He indwells the church.

The phrase "...taken out of the way..." equals the events of the rapture.

The man of lawlessness appears (and consequently the tribulation begins) only after "he who now restrains" is "taken out of the way".

Incorrect conclusion: The church is raptured before the tribulation begins.

Problems with this reasoning:

There is no general agreement among commentators regarding the meaning or even proper translation of the text here rendered as "he who now restrains." It might better be translated, "... he who now holds fast...." In either case the hypothesis is improperly imported to understand "taken out of the way" equals "raptured out of the world."

The phrase "...taken out of the way..." is literally "...comes to be out of the midst...."²¹⁶ It is an explanation of the results of apostasy that precede the revelation of the man of sin introduced at the beginning of the passage. Notice that the appearance of the man of sin is again discussed in verse eight.

The general context and language of second Thessalonians chapter 2 does not support, and in fact contradicts, the pretribulation hypothesis.

The apostle Paul introduces this discussion with the fact that the apostasy would precede the appearance of the man of lawlessness and, consequently, the day of the Lord. The apostle does not introduce the passage with notification to the Thessalonians that they would be raptured before the appearance of the man of sin. On the contrary the apostle argues that:

(1) apostasy, a falling away from the faith, would happen first

(2) the man of lawlessness would appear

(3) the man of lawlessness and day of the Lord had not yet appeared because

(4) the apostasy had not occurred

(5) the Thessalonians were holding fast the faith (the opposite of apostasy).

Whatever the meaning of 2 Thessalonians 2, it is necessary to notice that rapture (our "gathering together to Him") is discussed as an event that follows apostasy and the revelation of the man of lawlessness (v. 3).

If Paul wanted to convince this church that the day of the Lord had not yet occurred, then all he had to say (if pretribulation rapture is true) is, "The rapture happens first, and you Thessalonians HAVE NOT BEEN RAPTURED!" He did not.²¹⁷

The Pretribulation hypothesis points to the fact that the great tribulation is the time of "Jacob's trouble" (Jer. 30:7). It is then inferred from this that the church is not the focus of the tribulation and would not be expected to be on the earth during this time. However, it is obvious from a casual reading of Jer. chapter 30 that the nations of the world are all drawn into the events described there. The fact that this period of time is called "Jacob's trouble" does not invite us to conclude that others, including the church, must be absent from the earth.

In addition, the fact that this period of time is called "Jacob's trouble" does not invite us to conclude that "Jacob" is not in fact the church, or a name equivalent to the church in end-times. Indeed, in the first century of the church's existence, "Jacob" was in fact the predominant member of the church. The pretribulation argument that "Jacob's trouble" is not the church's trouble would have been non-sense to John himself (a Jew) and the early recipients of the book of Revelation.

The Term "Church" Not In Revelation Chapters 4-21

It is claimed that since the term "church" does not occur from Revelation chapters 4 through 21, the church is not involved in the events portrayed, and therefore, logically, must have been raptured before these events. However, seven churches are addresses in chapters 2 and 3 and they are not portrayed as raptured anywhere in those passages. So, logically, we would expect to find them where we left them, in Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea. One pretribulation author suggested that John is a symbol of the church, and portrays the rapture of the church when he is instructed to "...come up here..." (4:1). But this method would leave the gate wide open for us to interpret almost any symbol as the church in chapters 4 though 21.

This argument from silence is self-destructive to the pretribulation hypothesis since the word for rapture, or any description of it, does not occur with reference to the specific term "church" anywhere in Revelation.

This approach neglects to recognize that the language of Revelation largely employs symbols, some of which represent the church. The churches are immediately portrayed in chapters 1 through 3 as golden lampstands. If we find the term "lampstand," or any other term synonymous with church in chapters 4 through 21 then the argument from silence fails by definition. But, even if no term for the church is found in these chapters, an argument from silence proves only what it says, nothing.

However, four terms for church are used in Revelation chapters 4 through 21. "Lampstand," "temple" and "city" are used in chapter 11, and, in chapter 21 we find "bride." John is instructed to "...rise and measure the temple of God..." (11:1), a symbol that stands for the whole church elsewhere in the Bible (1 Cor. 3:16; Eph. 2:21). Then the chapter describes the ministry of two witnesses during the time of the great tribulation, and identifies these two witnesses as "the two lampstands that stand before the Lord." Since we were introduced in chapter 1 through 3 to seven lampstands (the whole church), and noticed that two of these lampstands stood without accusation before the Lord, the two lampstands of chapter 11 are obviously these churches.²¹⁸ These two churches were distinguished from the other five when John measured those who worship at the altar from the outer court. Paul uses language picturing the church as a virgin betrothed to Christ, in his second letter to the church of Corinth (2 Cor. 11:2), while Peter describes the church as "...the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem...church of the first born..." (Heb. 12:22-23).

As mentioned above, saints are mentioned throughout the chapters that describe the events of the tribulation. How is it possible to be a post-Pentecost saint and not be a member of the church, unless one imports a hypothesis that explains (???) how tribulation saints are not in the church?

Revelation 22:16 specifically says that the testimony of the book of Revelation is "for the churches."

The Term "Rapture" Not In Matthew 24:31

It is argued that since the term "rapture" is not used in Matthew 24:31, the rapture is not meant. It is also argued that the statements made in Matthew 24 by the Lord Jesus to His disciples are to be interpreted as directed to Israel in the last days, not Christians of the Church, although the term "Israel" is not used to describe His disciples! On the other hand it is argued that the Lord Jesus was addressing the same disciples as Christians of the Church (not Israel) a short time later, John 14, and that He spoke to them about a pretribulation rapture of the church. But the terms church and rapture are not used at all in this passage, and none of their possible synonyms are related to the time of the tribulation.

However, the gathering of saints from the sky (an accurate description of rapture, cf. 1 Thess. 4:15 ff.) is described in detail in Matthew 24:31, specifically occurring "after the tribulation of those days..." Matthew 24:29.

Pretribulationism improperly insists that the doctrine of the imminent return of Christ be stated thus:

Christ can and should be expected to return and rapture the church at any moment. No prophetic events will intervene between now and the rapture of the church.

To support imminence, John 14:3 and 1 Thessalonians 4-5 are cited. But even a superficial reading of these passages reveals that the coming of the Lord is not discussed as an event to be expected at any moment. Even when the apostle Paul writes that the day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night (1 Thess. 5:2), he emphasizes that such is the case only for unbelievers. He clearly states that the day will not overtake the Thessalonians like a thief (1 Thess. 5:4)!

Since these Scriptures do not teach the imminent return as defined by pretribulationism, one author reasons in the following manner:

If the teaching of Christ had been to the intent that His coming for them was after the Great Tribulation, it is difficult to see how this message (John 14) would have been a source of solace to their troubled hearts.²¹⁹

If our source of joy or sorrow is related to our personal circumstances of suffering or the lack of it in this life, then I understand Walvoord's statement. But if the source of the disciples (and our) joy lies in being with the Lord, from whom we are now parted, then I do not understand Walvoord's statement at all. The Lord Jesus' words in John 14 and 1 Thess 4:13-18 are a limitless source of comfort in that we know that in spite of death or tribulation Jesus has overcome the world and is coming again for us. To postulate, as Walvoord does, that Jesus was comforting His disciples by assuring them of no tribulation or involvement in the Great Tribulation virtually contradicts everything He had stated to them up to this point.²²⁰

If it is true that even one prophetic event remains to be fulfilled before the coming of Christ, then imminence as defined by the pretribulation hypothesis, is discredited. (The reader is urged to review at this point the things that will precede "our gathering together to Him" in 2 Thess 2:1-7.)

These arguments are perhaps the most difficult of all to defeat. Whatever a Christian teacher of good reputation teaches is likely to be believed by a great number of others who trust that teacher. Here, the lessons of history should caution us. Loyalty to a reputable teacher or pastor is important, but we are never relieved of the responsibility to search the Scriptures. Loyalty and respect do not suggest or imply the sort of mindless obedience that has been at the foundation of very large cults surrounding notorious charismatic personalities.

There is no question that pretribulationism is popular today. The best selling fictional Left Behind series proved its popularity. But not one apostle or church father ever taught pretribulationism. There is no record that pretribulationism was ever taught before the early 1800's. (For a review of what was believed in the early church go to this link.)