----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
JUDY SIEGEL, THE JERUSALEM POST Sep. 18, 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
Nazi murderers of the mentally handicapped were treated much more
leniently in postwar German courts than their counterparts who killed
Jews during the Holocaust, according to a new study by a University
of Florida doctoral student in history.
Because they were unable to testify, the mentally handicapped lacked
organization and advocates to make their case and often were faceless
victims secretly murdered in asylums originally meant to help them,
said researcher Shane Stufflet.
In contrast, the Jews pulled together to elicit sympathy by
demonstrating that their murdered contemporaries were fellow Germans,
he maintained.
"If you murdered a Jew, you were much more likely to get a sentence
and get a stiffer sentence than if you murdered the mentally
handicapped," said Stufflet, whose study is the first to calculate
the disparity. "The mentally handicapped were seen as a burden on
society and so judges, and especially lay judges, did not consider
their murders to be as great a crime."
More than half of the Nazis tried for crimes against the mentally
handicapped – 57 percent – were acquitted, said Stufflet, who now
teaches at Rollins College, the University of Central Florida and
Lake Mary High School.
Of the 43% of defendants found guilty in cases involving mentally
handicapped victims, only 1.6% received life sentences, none of which
were served, he said. In contrast, only 24% of the Nazis tried for
crimes against the Jews were acquitted, with about 11% receiving life
sentences, said Stufflet, who did most of his research at the state
archives in Munich and the US Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington
D.C.
Patricia Heberer, historian at the Center for Advanced Holocaust
Studies at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum, said Stufflet's research
is important because these so-called "euthanasia crimes" are an under
studied chapter of history. The medical profession shielded its own,
often falsely certifying the perpetrators as physically unable to
stand trial, Heberer said. "These physicians, nurses and bureaucrats
who administered the 'euthanasia program' often did get away with
murder," she said.
Because of their larger numbers and greater visibility in German
society before the Holocaust, Jews were seen as more "human" victims
and the postwar judiciary was quick to condemn their deaths, Stufflet
claimed.
The same shift in attitudes that resulted in a smooth transition
from "enemy" to "victim" for Jews did not occur with the mentally
handicapped, he said. "One was more than twice as likely to be
acquitted for murdering a mentally handicapped person and nearly
seven times as likely to receive a life sentence for killing a Jew,"
he said.
In the 1950s and '60s, the German government denounced incidences of
anti-Semitism, such as desecration of synagogues and Jewish
cemeteries, but subtle prejudice against the mentally handicapped
remains today, Stufflet said. Although laws have been passed to
protect the rights of the mentally handicapped, they are not as fully
integrated into public life as they are in the US, he said.
One reason for this disparity is that Germany didn't begin
integrating the handicapped into public schools until the late 1970s,
while the US started doing so nearly two decades earlier as part of
the civil rights movement, he said. The first mentally handicapped
victims of Nazi murder were children in asylums, around late 1939 or
early 1940, about a year before those on Jews began, he said.
"Children were either starved or injected with Luminal or morphine
and the killings were soon expanded to adults," he said. "When the
Nazis realized they couldn't murder as many people as they wanted in
that fashion, they started experimenting with gas." Basements in six
asylums were modified to create gas chambers, with hookups added for
diesel trucks to pump in carbon dioxide, he said.
Because the victims were hidden from view, many families were not
suspicious when they received a death notice, Stufflet said. "The
Nazis would send them a fake letter saying the family member had
suddenly taken ill and been transported to another institution, and
the next letter would state that the person had died," he said.
An estimated 70,000 to 75,000 mentally handicapped children and
adults were killed in the gassing program, with about 200,000 more
dying from starvation or injection, Stufflet said.
Unlike some Jews, who testified at various trials about the
atrocities committed against them and won judges' sympathy, the
mentally disabled were unable to make arguments in the witness stand
because of their limitations, he said. "Judges did not hear firsthand
the dramatic and oftentimes brutal stories of how victims were
selected, transported, stripped naked and led into gas chambers," he
said.
one of those "stinking, servile,
homeless LOSERS!" Riding around the world in
filthy cattle cars (with the SWINE, no less!) or
in boxcars with other untouchables of my ilk.
Then I started worshiping KALI, the
Goddess/Mother of Hindu Fame, and NOW, I have a 3
bedroom house, a Amatuer Radio station, a Rare
Vintage Gibson Guitar, 2 pickup trucks, a Olds
Cutless Supreme, a Dodge Ram Van, and even a GOLD
MASTER CARD & SILVER VISA CARD! Unfortunately,
I'm STILL a ugly old toothless HAG! But, so what?
I used to live in San Francisco, (in the HEART of
the Tenderloin,) and would ride the Bus up to
Gurnesville to "party" with the Effite Snobs, so
I know ALL about you folks there in the Grove! We
did the Same things EVERY DAY in the Clubs South
of Market (I was respectfully called "the Cruel
Mistress" by my slaves') but I fell on Hard Times
& found myself a RAILROAD TRAMP! I tried to turn
to Jesus, he said "I don't want no stinking
Jewish Hobo sluts!" I tried Allah, I won't relate
HIS answer (I cannot speak Arabic, anyway,) then
I turned to the Wonderful Goddess KALI, and She
Saved me! I am now RICH beyond ALL my
expectations! If I live another 500 years I might
attain the Wealth & Fame of my Great Uncle, the
late Edward (Eddie) Bernays. However, I
digress...in fact, I don't think there was any
point I intended to make at all...come Visit my
Web Page...
lijahradioprophet>
ities.com/elijahradi
oprophet/hobojoanna
=====
The most successful tyranny is not the one that
uses force to assure uniformity but the one that
removes the awareness of other possibilities, that
makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are
viable, that removes the sense that there is an
outside.
Winston Churchill once said, if you're not a
liberal when you're young, you have no heart; if
you're not a conservative when you're old, you have
no mind.
Far out in the uncharted backwaters of the
unfashionable end of the
western spiral arm of the Galaxy lies a small
unregarded yellow sun.
Orbiting this at a distance of roughly ninety-two
million miles is
an untterly insignificant little blue-green
planet whose ape-descended
life forms are so amazingly primitive that they
still think digital
watches are a pretty neat idea.
Is the Pretribulation Rapture Biblical? Is the Pretribulation Rapture
Biblical? Brian M.
Schwertley One of the most popular teachings today in Evangelical and
Charismatic churches is
the doctrine of the pretribulation rapture. The pretribulation
rapture teaching is that there are two
separate comings of Christ. The first coming is secret and occurs
before the future seven year
tribulation. At this coming Jesus comes for the saints (i.e., all
genuine believers) both living and
dead. These saints meet the Lord in the air and then are taken to
heaven to escape the horrible
judgments that take place during the seven year tribulation. At the
end of the great tribulation
Jesus returns to the earth with the saints. This coming is not secret
but is observed by all. At this
coming Christ crushes His opposition, judges mankind and sets up a
one thousand year reign of
saints upon the earth (the millennium). Some pretribulation advocates
speak of two separate
comings while others prefer to speak of one coming in two separate
stages or phases (phase
one is the secret rapture and phase two is the visible coming in
judgment). Hal Lindsey likes to
refer to the rapture as "the great snatch." He writes: "The word
for `caught up' actually means
to `snatch up,' and that's why I like to call this marvelous coming
event `The Great Snatch'! It's
usually referred to as the `Rapture,' from the Latin word rapere,
which means to `take away' or
`snatch out.'"1 Although the pretribulation rapture doctrine is very
popular and is even
considered so crucial to Christianity that it is made a test of a
person's orthodoxy in some
denominations, Bible colleges and seminaries, the exegetical and
theological arguments used by
its advocates are all classic cases of forcing one's theological
presuppositions onto particular
texts (eisegesis). The purpose of this brief study is to show that
the pretribulation rapture theory
is not plainly taught or directly stated in any place in Scripture,
cannot be deduced from biblical
teaching, contradicts the general teaching of the Bible regarding
Christ's second coming and
was never taught in any branch of the church prior to 1830. The
Origin of the Pretribulation
Rapture Teaching Whenever a Christian encounters a doctrine that has
not been taught by
anyone in any branch of Christ's church for over eighteen centuries,
one should be very suspect
of that teaching. This fact in and of itself does not prove that the
new teaching is false. But, it
should definitely raise one's suspicions, for if something is taught
in Scripture, it is not
unreasonable to expect at least a few theologians and exegetes to
have discovered it before.
The teaching of a secret pretribulation rapture is a doctrine that
never existed before 1830. Did
the pretribulation rapture come into existence by a careful exegesis
of Scripture? No. The first
person to teach the doctrine was a young woman named Margaret
Macdonald. Margaret was
not a theologian or Bible expositor but was a prophetess in the
Irvingite sect (the Catholic
Apostolic Church). Christian journalist Dave MacPherson has written a
book on the subject of
the origin of the pre-tribulation rapture. He writes: "We have seen
that a young Scottish lassie
named Margaret Macdonald had a private revelation in Port Glasgow,
Scotland, in the early
part of 1830 that a select group of Christians would be caught up to
meet Christ in the air
before the days of Antichrist. An eye-and-ear witness, Robert Norton
M.D., preserved her
handwritten account of her pre-trib rapture revelation in two of his
books, and said it was the
first time anyone ever split the second coming into two distinct
parts or stages. His writings,
along with much other Catholic Apostolic Church literature, have been
hidden many decades
from the mainstream of Evangelical thought and only recently
surfaced. Margaret's views were
well-known to those who visited her home, among them John Darby of
the Brethren. Within a
few months her distinctive prophetic outlook was mirrored in the
September, 1830 issue of The
Morning Watch and the early Brethren assembly at Plymouth, England.
Early disciples of the
pre-trib interpretation often called it a new doctrine."2 John Nelson
Darby (1800-1882), who
was the leader of the Brethren movement and the "father of modern
Dispensationalism," took
Margaret Macdonald's new teaching on the rapture, made some changes
(she taught a partial
rapture of believers while he taught that all believers would be
raptured) and incorporated it into
his Dispensational understanding of Scripture and prophecy. Darby
would spend the rest of his
life speaking, writing and traveling, spreading the new rapture
theory. The Plymouth Brethren
openly admitted and were even proud of the fact that among their
teachings were totally new
ones which had never been taught by the church fathers, medieval
scholastics, Protestant
Reformers or the many commentators. The person most responsible for
the rather widespread
acceptance of Pretribulationalism and Dispensationalism among
Evangelicals is Cyrus Ingerson
Scofield (1843-1921). C. I. Scofield published his Scofield Reference
Bible in 1909. This
Bible, which espoused the doctrines of Darby in its notes, became
very popular in
Fundamentalist circles. In the minds of many a Bible teacher,
fundamentalist pastor and
multitudes of professing Christians, Scofield's notes were
practically equated with the word of
God itself. If a person did not adhere to the Dispensational,
Pretribulational scheme he or she
would almost automatically be labeled a modernist. Today there is a
whole plethora of books
advocating the pretribulation rapture theory and the Dispensational
understanding of the end
times. Given the fact that among professing Christians the pre-trib
rapture is still wildly popular,
a comparison of this theory with scriptural teaching is warranted. We
will see that the typical
arguments offered in favor of this theory are in conflict with the
Bible. Revelation 3:10 A
passage of Scripture that is considered crucial for a defense of the
pretribulation rapture position
is Revelation 3:10. "Because you have kept My command to persevere, I
also will keep you
from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test
those who dwell on the
earth." It is argued that this passage refers to the great
tribulation ("the hour of trial which shall
come upon the whole world") and that the church is promised a
physical removal from the
world for protection. The "from the hour of trial" (ek tes horas tou
peirasmou) is interpreted in a
spatial sense. The preposition ek, translated from, is interpreted as
a preposition of motion. The
saints will be taken out from within the earth to heaven. Thus, they
are kept or preserved from
the hour of trial. The pretribulation interpretation of Revelation
3:10 is totally off the mark for a
number of reasons. First, standard biblical methods of interpretation
must be completely ignored
to apply this passage to a future tribulation two thousand years in
the future. The letter is
addressed to a specific church (Philadelphia) in Asia Minor in the
first century. The specific
promise that is made by Jesus is given to the Philadelphian
Christians and cannot be applied
directly to all the churches of Asia Minor or the universal church.
For example, the church of
Smyrna is told that they "will have tribulation ten days. Be faithful
unto death" (Rev. 2:10). They
are to take comfort in the fact that they cannot be hurt by the
second death (2:11). They are not
promised protection from the coming time of tribulation. Further, the
promise to the
Philadelphian Christians is based on their past behavior: "Because
you have kept
[eteresas—aorist active indicative]...I also will keep." "The
aorist `didst keep' states the
historical fact. The church held fully and completely to the Word as
was stated in v. 8: `and
didst keep my Word.'"3 Because the promise is based on the behavior
of a particular church in
Asia Minor it cannot be universalized to include all Christians in
the distant future. To do so is to
render the commendation to the Philadelphians meaningless. Second,
the time indicators within
the passage render impossible the idea that the promise was not to
take place for two thousand
years. The passage says that the hour of trial is about to happen. "I
also will keep thee from the
hour of trial that is about to come upon all the world" (Rev. 3:10,
Young's Literal Translation of
the Bible). When the verb mello is joined to the present infinitive
which is what is found in
Revelation 3:10 (tes mellouses erchesthai), it always expresses
imminence. When Jesus says
that the hour of trial is about to come, He means it will happen
soon.4 To place the promise
thousands of years away is a denial of the plain meaning of the Greek
language. Chilton writes:
"Does it make sense that Christ would promise the church in
Philadelphia protection from
something that would happen thousands of years later? `Be of good
cheer, you faithful, suffering
Christians of first century Asia Minor: I won't let those Soviet
missiles and killer bees of the
20th century get you!' When the Philadelphian Christians were worried
about more practical,
immediate concerns—official persecution, religious discrimination,
social ostracism, and
economic boycotts—what did they care about Hal Lindsey's lucrative
horror stories?"5 Third,
the Pretribulationist's idea that ek (from) in verse 10 is used in a
spatial sense and thus refers to
the saints being moved outside of the earth away from tribulation is
not supported by the
immediate or broader context of the book of Revelation. This novel
interpretation cannot be
found in any theological work or commentary prior to 1830 when the
pre-tribulation theory was
first espoused by Margaret Macdonald in western Scotland. Also, it is
a historical fact that the
church of Philadelphia was not taken to heaven during the tumult and
persecution that took
place soon after the Philadelphian Christians received this prophecy.
The idea that Revelation
3:10 refers to the rapture is a classical case of reading one's own
preconceived opinions into a
text. The most logical understanding of ek (from) in Revelation 3:10
is that Christ will protect the
Philadelphian Christians from the soon-to-come trials. This
understanding is exactly how the
identical Greek phrase is used in John 17:15: "keep them from the
evil one." Jesus' prayer does
not refer to a spatial separation but to protection from the wiles of
Satan. The church of
Philadelphia is not going to be beamed out of the Roman empire but it
will be protected and
preserved through the coming trials.6 Further, according to the
Dispensational understanding of
the great tribulation, all genuine Christians must be raptured at the
beginning of the tribulation
while the Jews must stay on earth and go through the tribulation. The
problem with this view is
that it involves both an abandonment of the literal principle of
interpretation and an arbitrary
interpretation of the word "from" (ek). In other words when ek is
used of Christians it means
they will be raptured to safety in heaven, but when it is used of
Jews it means they will remain on
earth but receive protection. Oswald T. Allis writes: "Jer. xxx. 7
declares, `but he shall be saved
out of it' (literally, `from it'). Dan. xii. 1 says only, `thy people
shall be delivered.' In Rev. iii. 10
we read, `I also will keep thee from (ek) the hour of trial.' In
chap. vii. 14 we are told of those
`who have come out of (ek) the great tribulation.' Matt. xxiv. 22 by
speaking of the shortening
of the days of the tribulation clearly implies that the elect will
pass through it. John xvii. 15
illustrates the ambiguity of the preposition `from' (ek in the same
sense of `out of,' `away from')
the world, `but that thou shouldest keep them from (ek) the evil.'
the purpose of the sealing of
the servants of God before the pouring out of the plagues (vii. 3)
favors the view that they are to
pass unscathed through them. Why should not the same apply to Rev.
iii. 10? It seems rather
inconsistent to insist that `from' in Jer. xxx. 7 must mean that
Israel will pass through the
tribulation, but that `from' in Rev. iii. 10 must mean that the
church of Philadelphia, and by
implication the entire church then on earth, will not pass through it
but be delivered from it by
rapture."7 Dispensationalists, who are the chief advocates of the
pretribulation rapture, claim
that they are the champions of a literal approach to biblical
interpretation. They say that a literal
approach to prophecy logically leads to the pretribulation view. Yet
there are a number of
important passages such as Revelation 3:10 where Dispensationalists
take a very non-literal
approach while their theological opponents take a very literal
approach. It has already been
noted how the literal view of Revelation 3:10 has been totally
ignored in order to posit a
tribulation and rapture thousands of years in the future. This
contradiction to the literal method of
interpretation is also found in their overall view of the letters to
the seven churches. According to
C. I. Scofield and the vast majority of Dispensational authors, the
seven churches of Revelation
chapters 2 and 3 represent seven consecutive chronological periods of
church history.
According to the general outline of this scheme the church of
Philadelphia represents a period of
church revival and great missionary activity (A.D. 1750-1925) while
Laodicea (the seventh
century) represents the final period of church history, which is one
of compromise and apostasy.
This interpretation raises a number of questions. 1.) If the seven
churches are seven consecutive
periods of church history, why is the rapture passage in the sixth
period, the time of revival and
not the seventh and last period, the time of apostasy? If
Dispensationalists were to be consistent
they could not claim Revelation 3:10 as a proof text for the rapture.
The Dispensational view of
Revelation contains serious internal contradictions. 2.) There is not
one thing within the text or
context of this passage that indicates that the seven letters are
somehow prophetic of seven long
periods of church history. Although such an interpretation may be
popular, one is not obligated
to hold to a view that has no exegetical basis. 3.) The
interpretation that claims the seven
churches are seven long periods of church history is a very non-
literal approach to biblical
interpretation. Dispensational scholars are fond of accusing
Amillennial and Postmillennial
expositors of spiritualizing various Scripture passages. Yet the idea
that the seven letters are
long periods of church history is itself a blatant example of
spiritualizing Scripture. The
Dispensational slogan of "literal whenever possible" is a claim that
obviously is not a reality.
Revelation 4:1 Another proof text for the pretribulation rapture
theory is Revelation 4:1, "After
these things I looked, and behold, a door standing open in heaven.
And the first voice which I
heard was like a trumpet speaking with me, saying, `Come up here, and
I will show you things
which must take place after this.'" Pretribulationists cite this
verse and then remark that the
church is not observed on earth again until Revelation 19 when
believers return to earth for the
millennial reign of Christ. Pretribulationists reason that since the
church is not mentioned as being
on earth during the great tribulation after Revelation 4:1, then
John's removal to heaven must be
equated with the rapture. Hal Lindsey gives us an example of the
typical Pretribulationist
understanding of this verse. He writes: "It's important to note that
the Church has been the main
theme of Revelation until Chapter 4. Starting with this chapter, the
Church isn't seen on earth
again until Chapter 19, where we suddenly find it returning to earth
with Christ as He comes to
reign as King of kings and Lord of lords.... Although Revelation 4:1
does not specifically refer
to Christ's reappearance at the Rapture, I believe that the Apostle
John's departure for heaven
after the church era closes in Chapter 3 and before the tribulation
chronicle begins in Chapter 6
strongly suggests a similar catching away for the Church."8 Does
Revelation 4:1 and the fact
that the word church (ekklesia) is not mentioned in chapters 4
through 18 prove or support the
pretribulation rapture theory? There are a number of reasons why this
argument in favor of
Pretribulationism should be rejected. First, this argument is an
argument from silence in which
the idea of the pretribulation rapture is presupposed and then
imposed upon this section of
Scripture. In the immediate context (Revelation 4:2) it says that
John the apostle is transported
to the throne room of heaven. Not one word is uttered that suggests
that John represents the
church or that the people of God as a whole are taken to heaven.
Also, there is not any mention
or any indication whatsoever of a descent by Christ or a resurrection
of the saints. In Revelation
4:1 there is mention of a trumpet but this is not the trumpet blast
announcing the rapture. It is a
voice that has a sound of a trumpet just like the voice of authority
that John heard in Revelation
1:10, "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day, and I heard behind me a
loud voice, as of a
trumpet." What occurred in Revelation 4:1 with John was no different
than the transportation
and throne room scenes experienced by other prophets (e.g., Ezek.
1:1, 22-28; 8:3-4 [Ezekiel
is apparently below the crystal sea looking up to the throne room];
Isa. 6:1 ff.; 2 Cor. 12:1-4).
Second, the argument from silence is arbitrarily applied to
Revelation and could be used to
prove many heretical doctrines if applied to other theological
topics. The argument from silence
consistently applied would not prove the rapture of the saints but
the annihilation of the saints,
for not only is the word church (ekklesia) not used of the saints on
earth in chapters 4 through
18, it also is never used of the saints in heaven. Does this mean
that all the saints have vacated
heaven and moved to Limbo or some other place during these chapters?
No. Of course not!
This argument, if consistently applied, leads to an incredibly absurd
conclusion. The word
church (ekklesia) does not even occur in the book of Revelation until
Revelation 22:16. Does
this mean the church is not involved in the second coming, the
resurrection or white throne
judgment? No. Obviously not! An argument that proves too much is
worthless. Further, the
reasoning that Pretribulationists use to make Revelation 4:1 a proof
text for the rapture could
also be used to prove many dangerous and heretical doctrines. In the
book of Esther the words
for God and Jehovah do not occur even once. Does this fact mean that
God does not exist, or
that God is a deistic absentee landlord of the universe? No. It
certainly does not. It should be
clear to everyone from this example that arguments from silence are
useless. Third, a careful
examination of Revelation 4 through 19 proves conclusively that the
church is on earth during
this period. John does not use the word church (ekklesia) in these
chapters but given the nature
of apocalyptic literature where allusions to the Old Testament are
constantly used to
dramatically portray coming events, the non-use of the word church in
the highly symbolic
prophetic section of the book is not surprising. In chapter 6 after
the opening of the fifth seal the
martyred saints ask God to avenge their deaths on the
persecutors "who dwell on the earth" (v.
10). These martyred Christians are told wait "until both the number
of their fellow servants and
their brethren, who would be killed as they were, was completed" (v.
11). The phrase fellow
servants and brethren is used in Revelation to describe Christians in
Revelation 6:11, 19:10 and
22:9. Paul uses the same terminology in Colossians 1:7; 4:7. There is
not a shred of evidence to
support the idea that those martyred during the tribulation are a
Jewish remnant. These are
Christians of every nation (cf. Rev. 7:9, 14) who die because the
church of Christ is persecuted
on earth. In Revelation 7 there are the 144,000 saints of God.
Dispensationalists argue that this
large group refers to literal Israel and not the New Testament church
which has been raptured.
This view is based on a literal understanding of verse 4: "One
hundred and forty-four thousand
of all the tribes of the children of Israel were sealed." Although
the idea of "literal whenever
possible" is good, Revelation 7:4 ff. is obviously not meant to be
interpreted literally. In
Revelation chapter 7 God uses the imagery of the old covenant
Israel's military camp divisions
(1 Chron. 4-7) to symbolize the new covenant church of God as an
overcoming conquering
army of Jehovah. This is evident for the following reasons. First,
the book of Revelation often
employs descriptions of Old Testament Israel directly to the new
covenant church. The church
is called a kingdom of priests (textus receptus—kings and priests)
which is an allusion to the
Old Testament identification of Israel in Exodus 19:6 (found in
Revelation 1:6; 5:10; 20:6). The
church of Jesus Christ is identified as the New Jerusalem—the gates
of which bear the names of
the twelve tribes of Israel. The foundation of the city bears the
names of the twelve apostles.
Second, we are specifically told in Revelation itself that the
144,000 are those redeemed by
Jesus Christ from among men. "These are the ones who were not defiled
with women, for they
are virgins. These are the ones who follow the Lamb wherever He goes.
These were redeemed
from among men, being firstfruits to God and to the Lamb" (Rev.
14:4). Third, the literal
interpretation of Revelation 7:4ff ignores the fact that ten of the
twelve tribes had disappeared in
Assyria. Virtually all the ten tribes had inter-married with pagans
and had long ago lost their
ethnic identity. Further, "if Israel according to the flesh were
meant, why should Ephraim and
Dan be omitted? Surely not all the people in the tribe of Dan were
lost. Not Reuben but Judah
is mentioned first. Remember that our Lord Jesus Christ was of the
tribe of Judah (Gn.
49:10)."9 Fourth, the teaching of the New Testament is that the
church which is composed of
both Jews and Gentiles is the true Israel of God (cf. Rom. 2:28-29;
9:6; Gal. 6:16; 1 Pet. 1:1;
2:9-10). James, writing to Christians, even calls them "the twelve
tribes which are scattered
abroad" (Jas. 1:1). Paul taught that all who believe in Christ are
the true sons of Abraham
(Rom. 4:11-17; Gal. 3:7); that the middle wall of partition has been
removed by Christ; the
believing Jews and Gentiles are one body (Eph. 2:14ff.). The church
of Christ is one building
(Eph. 2:20-22) and one bride (Eph. 5: Rev 21:9ff.). Fifth, that the
144,000 refers to all
believers is proved from Revelation 9:4 where the demonic scorpions
are told they can only
harm those who do not have God's seal on their forehead. Are we to
believe that Jewish
believers are protected while their Gentile brothers are left to
perish? Of course not! The church
of Jesus is definitely still on earth during the great tribulation. 2
Thessalonians 2:6-7 Another
argument for the pretribulation rapture is based on 2 Thessalonians
2:6-7, "And now ye know
that which restraineth, to the end that he may be revealed in his own
season. For the mystery of
lawlessness doth already work: only there is one that restraineth
now, until he be taken out of
the way" (ASV). The standard Dispensationalist understanding of this
passage is that the
restrainer spoken of is the Holy Spirit. Pretribulationists argue
that since the Holy Sprit dwells
and works to restrain evil by means of the church, a removal of the
Spirit entails a removal of
the church. Once the church is raptured the Antichrist will be
revealed. Although this passage is
a difficult one that has resulted in many different interpretations,
the idea that this passage
teaches the removal of the Holy Spirit is theologically impossible
and totally contradicts the
Dispensationalist's own interpretation of the events that are
supposed to take place during the
tribulation. After the rapture a Jewish remnant of 144,000 is
converted to Christ. These Jews
will be the greatest evangelists the world has ever seen, who bring
multitudes to Christ from
every nation. What is wrong with this understanding of Scripture? It
places the Dispensationalist
in the position of either denying his own interpretation of 2
Thessalonians 2:6-7 or of denying the
biblical teaching regarding the Holy Spirit's role in converting
sinners. The Bible teaches that no
one can be converted without the regenerating and drawing power of
the Holy Spirit (Ezek.
36:25-26; Jn 1:13; 3:5-8; Ac. 5:31; 11:18; 16:13-14; 1 Cor. 2:12-14;
2 Cor. 4:6; Eph. 2:1, 5;
Col. 2:11; Tit. 3:5). Yet, Pretribulationists teach that the 144,000
Jews are converted after the
departure of the Holy Spirit. They also teach that the preaching of
these converted Jews will be
a hundred times more fruitful without the Holy Spirit than the
preaching of the church with the
Holy Spirit throughout the so-called church age. Multitudes are said
to be converted to Christ
from every nation during the absence of the Holy Spirit in only 1260
days! The truth is that if the
Holy Spirit is removed, there would be no converts during the
tribulation—not even one.
Realizing the obviously unbiblical nature of the standard view, many
modern Dispensationalists
argue that the Holy Spirit is not taken away, "but `taken out of the
way;' thus the Holy Spirit will
continue a divine activity to the end-time, though not as a
restrainer of evil through the
church."10 In other words the Holy Spirit doesn't go away to heaven,
He merely gets out of the
way so that the anti-Christ can have sway over the masses. This
interpretation avoids the
absurdity of mass conversions without the Holy Spirit. However, it
also removes 2
Thessalonians 2:6-7 as a proof text for the pretribulation rapture.
If the Holy Spirit doesn't leave
the scene but merely ceases to restrain the forces of evil as He had
before, there is no longer
any reason to suppose that this passage indicates the rapture of the
church. The idea that the
Holy Spirit is dependent on the church to restrain evil is not
supported by Scripture. Further,
even if the restraining power of the Holy Spirit came by means of the
church, would not the
massive revival throughout the earth caused by the preaching of the
converted Jewish remnant
also be a restraining of evil by Christ's disciples (His church)?
Dispensationalists can not have it
both ways. Therefore, this passage has nothing to do with the
rapture. Another reason that this
passage should not be considered a proof text for the rapture is
Paul's teaching in the immediate
context. The Thessalonians were troubled because of false teaching
regarding the day of Christ.
Many within the church believed that the day of the Lord had already
taken place. Paul wants to
remove any misconceptions regarding this coming day by pointing out
that certain events must
take place before this coming. Paul says there must first be a
falling away or rebellion and the
man of sin must be revealed. Then he gives certain details regarding
the man of sin and when
these things will occur. What is particularly interesting regarding
this section of Scripture is that it
proves that the Thessalonians who had previously received
instructions by Paul did not know
anything about a pretribulation rapture. If they had been taught such
a doctrine then they would
have known that the day of the Lord could not have taken place, for
the rapture had not yet
occurred. Furthermore, it proves that Paul did not believe in a
pretribulation rapture (or that he
was negligent in his instructions), for Paul says nothing about a
rapture that is to occur seven
years before the day of the Lord. If Paul believed in pretribulation
rapture one would expect him
to say: "Don't be deceived that the day of the Christ has already
come, brethren. It can only
come after you have been raptured to heaven. The fact that you are
still on earth is proof
positive that it had not yet occurred." Paul does not tell the
Thessalonian brothers to look for the
rapture but to look for an apostasy (or rebellion) and the man of
sin. If the pretribulation rapture
theory were true, why would Paul instruct these Christians to look
for events that are supposed
to happen during the tribulation, when the church is not supposed to
be around? It is obvious
that Paul presupposes that the church will indeed be present on earth
during the great tribulation.
1 Thessalonians 5:9 One of the most popular arguments for the
pretribulation rapture is based
on 1 Thessalonians 5:9, "For God did not appoint us to wrath, but to
obtain salvation through
our Lord Jesus Christ." It is argued that the great tribulation is an
unprecedented time of God's
wrath falling upon the whole world. Since believers are specifically
told that they are not
appointed to wrath, it is only logical to conclude that the church
will be removed from the earth
before God's wrath is poured out. This removal is the rapture of the
saints. This argument for
the rapture is fallacious for a number of reasons. First, it assumes
that the wrath spoken of in
verse 9 is the wrath poured out during the tribulation. The context
of chapter 5 however makes
it abundantly clear that the wrath spoken of in verse 5 is not the
wrath of the tribulation but the
wrath that occurs at the second coming of Christ—the day of the Lord
(cf. 1 Th. 5:1-3).
Second, it assumes that the only method at God's disposal for
protecting the church from His
wrath is a total removal from the earth. An examination of the wrath
of God in both testaments
reveals that the Pretribulationist assumption is totally unwarranted.
When God poured out His
wrath upon Egypt, He spared the people of Israel (cf. Ex. 8:22-23;
9:4-6, 11, 26; 10:23; 11:7;
12:23; 14:28-29) without first removing them out of the land. The
prophet Isaiah says explicitly
that God can judge the earth without harming His own covenant people
who remain on earth.
"Come, my people, enter your chambers, and shut your doors behind
you; hide yourself, as it
were, for a little moment, until the indignation is past. For behold,
the LORD comes out of His
place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity; the
earth will also disclose her
blood, and will no more cover her slain" (Isa. 26:20-21). The nail in
the coffin to the
Pretribulationist use of 1 Thessalonians 5:9 comes from the book of
Revelation which shows
that God's people are protected from His wrath during the
tribulation. In Revelation 6:16 it is
the heathen that ask the mountains and rocks to protect them from the
wrath of the lamb. A
wrath that falls as a response to the prayers of persecuted and
martyred saints (Rev. 6:9-11).
After the fifth trumpet is sounded, the locusts of destruction are
ordered by God only to harm
"those men who do not have the seal of God on their foreheads" (Rev.
9:4). God's saints are
specifically protected from harm. In Revelation 9:20-21 we are told
that these plagues were
directed to wicked men. Revelation 14:9-10 says that those who are to
experience God's wrath
and undiluted indignation are those who receive the mark of the
beast; who worship the beast
and his image. This obviously excluded Christians. Revelation 16:1-2
says that God's wrath (the
first bowl) is only to be poured out on the worshipers of the beast,
who have his mark. Once
again believers are excluded. In 16:9 and 11 those who receive God's
plagues are identified as
blasphemers who refuse to repent. A careful reading of Revelation
demonstrates that although
God's people experience persecution, death and harm at the hands of
wicked men they are
carefully and lovingly excluded from every act of God's wrath. God's
wrath only falls upon
those who are the enemies of Christ and His church. The wrath that
falls on the wicked is God's
loving response to the prayers of His saints. Does the church need to
be completely removed
from the earth to be spared from God's wrath, as Pretribulationists
assert? The Scriptures
answer that question with an emphatic "no!" The "Children in the
Millennium" Argument One
argument that is used by both pre and mid-tribulationists is based on
the necessity of human
beings entering the millennium with natural, non-glorified bodies.
Premillennialists teach that
during the millennium people with glorified bodies will dwell side by
side with people who have
not yet been glorified. The millennium must begin with people who are
converted after the
rapture yet before the second coming so that procreation can occur
during the millennium.
Natural bodies and procreation are necessary because descendants are
needed who will rebel
against Christ at the end of His earthly reign. If the rapture and
second coming occur at the
same time, then all believers would have glorified bodies and there
would be no natural
descendants who could rebel. Christians with glorified bodies cannot
rebel because one aspect
of glorification is losing the ability to commit sin. This argument
may have an effect upon historic
Premillennialists who believe in a literal one thousand year reign of
Christ on earth that is to
begin immediately after the post tribulation rapture and second
coming occurs. It, however, has
no effect upon those (Amillennial and Postmillennial) believers who
reject Premillennialism as
unscriptural. Because the Bible very clearly teaches in both the
gospels and epistles that the
second coming of Christ, the rapture, the resurrection and judgment
of the righteous and the
wicked are to occur on the same day (the day of the Lord)
Premillennialism with its separate
resurrections and judgments must be rejected. Note the following
passages. Matthew 25:31-
46—"When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels
with Him, then He will
sit on the throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered
before Him, and He will separate
them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the
goats. And He will set the
sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. Then the King
will say to those on His right
hand, `Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared
for you from the
foundation of the world....' Then He will also say to those on the
left hand, `Depart from Me,
you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his
angels....' And these will go
away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal
life." Matthew 13:30—"Let both
[the righteous and the wicked] grow together until the harvest, and
at the time of harvest I will
say to the reapers, `First gather together the tares and bind them in
bundles to burn them, but
gather the wheat into my barn'" (cf. Mt. 13:47-50). John 5:28-29—"Do
not marvel at this; for
the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His
voice and come forth—those
who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have
done evil, to the
resurrection of condemnation." John 6:39-40—"This is the will of the
Father who sent Me, that
of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up
at the last day. And this is the
will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes
in Him may have
everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day" (Cf. Jn.
6:44, 54). From these passages
we learn that Christ taught a general judgment of all men, not just
the wicked. Jesus plainly
taught that there will be a general resurrection in which all men
will be raised on the same day.
There is nothing in the New Testament regarding a partial bodily
resurrection which is followed
by another bodily resurrection or 1000 years (or for the
Dispensationalist, 1007 years). Further,
Jesus taught that the bodily resurrection of the dead and the day of
judgment occur on the last
day. The designation last day means the end of human history. It
precludes another thousand
years of non-glorified earthly existence. The epistles of Peter and
Paul are even more explicit in
their rejection of Premillennialism. 2 Thessalonians 1:6-10—"...it is
a righteous thing with God to
repay with tribulation those who trouble you, and to give you who are
troubled rest with us
when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels,
in flaming fire taking
vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey
the gospel of our
Lord Jesus Christ. These shall be punished with everlasting
destruction from the presence of the
Lord and from the glory of His power, when He comes, in that Day, to
be glorified in His saints
and to be admired among all those who believe, because our testimony
among you was
believed...." For the apostle Paul, the punishment of the wicked and
the reward of the righteous
are to occur simultaneously, immediately following the second coming
of Christ. There is nothing
here teaching separate comings. There is nothing about a secret
rapture. There is no 7 year,
1,000 year or 1,007 year gap between the glorification of the saints
and the destruction of the
wicked. According to Paul they occur the same day ("that Day"), the
day Christ returns.
Further, note that Christ comes from heaven to crush His enemies and
judge the world. Jesus
does not crush the wicked from His earthly throne in Jerusalem, as
Premillennialists assert. Note
also that there are no wicked people left to populate the earth
during the millennium, and the
saints will all have glorified bodies. 1 Corinthians 15:23-26, 50-54—
"But each one in his own
order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ's at
His coming. Then comes the
end…. The last enemy that will be destroyed is death…. Now this I
say, brethren, that flesh and
blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit
incorruption. Behold, I tell
you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed—in
a moment, in the twinkling
of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the
dead will be raised
incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put
on incorruption, and this
mortal must put on immortality.... Then shall be brought to pass the
saying that is written: `Death
is swallowed up in victory.'" According to Paul, the second coming of
Christ and the
glorification of the saints will occur immediately prior to the final
state. Christ returns, the saints
receive immortal, glorified bodies "then comes the end." (The adverb
eita, translated then in
"then comes the end" in the New Testament, never refers to a long
period of time. It is the
adverb used to denote a short period of time.) There is no place in
Paul's understanding of the
second coming to put a 1,000 year reign. When Christ returns, the
kingdom is delivered to the
Father. Furthermore, after Christ's return, death is completely
destroyed and abolished. How
can there be converts in the millennium who live, have children and
die, if death is abolished at
the second coming? 1 Thessalonians 5:1-4, 9-10—"But concerning the
times and the seasons,
brethren, you have no need that I should write to you. For you
yourselves know perfectly that
the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night. For when they
say, `Peace and safety!' then
sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant
woman. And they shall
not escape. But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day
should overtake you as a
thief.... For God did not appoint us to wrath, but to obtain
salvation through our Lord Jesus
Christ, who died for us, that whether we wake or sleep, we should
live together with Him."
Once again the apostle Paul teaches that the day of the Lord is a day
of deliverance for the
saints but wrath for the wicked. Paul does not tell believers, to
look for a secret rapture seven
years before the second coming. He points them to the second coming
itself when both parties,
believers and unbelievers will be dealt with. Believers are
to "watch, and be sober" in
preparation for the second coming (1 Th. 5:6). When Christ returns
they will "live together with
Him" (1 Th. 5:10) but unbelievers will receive God's wrath—sudden
destruction will come
upon them (1 Th. 5:3). If Christians are to be secretly raptured away
from the earth seven years
before Christ's second coming, then why do the Scriptures repeatedly
teach that Christians are
to remain on earth until the revelation of Christ? The resurrection
of the righteous and the
wicked and the final judgment both occur on the same day, the day of
the Lord (Mt. 13:47-50;
25:31-34, 41; Jn. 5:28-29; 6:3-40, 44, 54; Rom. 2:5-8, 16; 1 Th. 5:1-
4, 9-10, etc.). 2 Peter
3:4-10—"`Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers
fell asleep, all things
continue as they were from the beginning of creation'.... But the
heavens and the earth which are
now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day
of judgment and perdition
of ungodly men.... But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in
the night, in which the heavens
will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with
fervent heat...." Peter teaches
that the second coming, the day of judgment and the beginning of the
final state occur
contemporaneously. Like Paul, Peter says that these events occur on
the "the day of the Lord."
According to Premillennialism Christ does not come on the day of
judgment, because He is
already on earth ruling from Jerusalem. But Peter says that when
Christ returns, the judgment
occurs and then the heavens and the earth are destroyed. The
Premillennialist believes that
Christ will return and rule on earth for 1,000 years before the
elements are destroyed. Thus
Peter's account of Christ's coming totally contradicts Premillennial
doctrine.11 The "Translation
Versus Return" Argument Another pre-tribulationist argument is based
on the difference
between the translation of the saints at the rapture and the return
of Christ to earth to establish
His millennial kingdom. It is argued that the rapture of the saints
is a catching away up into the
air. However, the return of Christ is a returning to earth.
Therefore, since the rapture and
second coming describe two very different activities (one is a
catching up while the other is a
going down) they must be two separate events separated by time.
Pretribulationists also argue
that a clear demarcation exists between the rapture and second coming
on the basis that at the
rapture no judgment occurs but at the second coming there is a
judgment. Once again this is
supposed to prove that the rapture and second coming are two separate
events that take place
at different times (a seven-year difference). These Pretribulationist
arguments should be rejected
for the following reasons. The idea that the difference between the
translation of the saints and
the return of Christ proves the pretribulation rapture theory is an
argument begging the question.
In other words it assumes what it sets out to prove. It is true that
the rapture and the return to
earth are not exactly the same events. This point, however, tells us
nothing regarding the time
sequence of these events. Jesus could meet the saints in the air as
He returns to earth. There is
no scriptural reason to assume a seven year gap between the rapture
and return. Given the
passages discussed in our consideration of Premillennialism, the
rapture, second coming, and
general judgment all occur on the same day. The saints meet Christ in
the air and return to earth
with Him. What about the argument that at the rapture no judgment
takes place but at the
second coming there is a judgment? As noted above there is no
biblical reason to take events
such as the rapture, second coming and judgment that all are to occur
the same day and insert
several years between them. What is particularly devastating to the
Pretribulationist is the fact
that when Paul discuss the second coming and gives us the most
explicit passage in the New
Testament on the rapture he connects Christ's descent with both the
rapture and the judgment
of the wicked. "But I do not want you to be ignorant, brethren,
concerning those who have
fallen asleep, lest you sorrow as others who have no hope. For if we
believe that Jesus died and
rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus.
For this we say to you by
the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the
coming of the Lord will by no
means precede those who are asleep. For the Lord Himself will descend
from heaven with a
shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God.
And the dead in Christ will
rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up
together with them in the clouds
to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the
Lord.... For you yourselves
know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the
night. For when they say,
`Peace and safety!' then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor
pains upon a pregnant
woman. And they shall not escape. But you, brethren, are not in
darkness, so that this Day
should overtake you as a thief" (1 Th. 4:13-17; 5:2-4). Note that
Paul connects the second
coming, the rapture and the destruction of the wicked all together.
He presents them as
coterminous and not separated by seven years. Everything will take
place on that "Day"
(5:4)—the day of the Lord. Furthermore, 1 Thessalonians 4:16
explicitly teaches that the
rapture is a public event, not secret: "For the Lord Himself will
descend from heaven with a
shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God."
Oswald T. Allis exposes
the fallacious manner in which Pretribulationists make subtle
distinctions in Paul's terminology
which the apostle himself never intended. He writes: "The question
which confronts us is this. If
the distinction between the rapture and the appearing is of as great
a moment as
Dispensationalists assert, how are we to explain Paul's failure to
distinguish clearly between
them? And the failure of other writers, Peter, James and John, to do
the same? Paul was a
logician. He was able to draw sharp distinctions. If he had wanted,
or regarded it important, to
distinguish between these events, he could have done so very easily.
Why did he use language
which Dispensationalists must admit to be confusing? Feinburg [a
noted Dispensationalist
scholar] made the following surprising statement regarding the three
words we have been
discussing: `We conclude, then, that from a study of the Greek words
themselves the
distinctions between the coming of the Lord for His saints and with
His saints is not to be
gleaned' (Premillennialism or Amillennialism? p. 207). Such an
admission raises the question
whether the distinction itself is valid. If the distinction is of
importance, Paul's ambiguous
language is, we may say it reverently, inexcusable. If the
distinction is negligible, accuracy of
statement would be quite unnecessary. We conclude, therefore, that
the language of the New
Testament and especially of Paul not merely fails to prove the
distinction insisted on by
Dispensationalists but rather by its very ambiguity indicates clearly
and unmistakably that no
such distinction exists."12 The "No Signs Verses Many Signs" Argument
A popular
Pretribulationist argument is based on the idea that passages which
discuss Christ's second
coming indicate that many signs will proceed the second coming, while
passages that discuss the
rapture mention no signs. Feinberg writes: "In Matthew 24:32-51 our
Lord makes it clear that
these signs are to alert the believers that His coming is near: `Even
so, when you see all these
things, you know that it is near, right at the door' (Matt. 24:33).
On the other hand, there is no
mention of any signs or events that precede the Rapture of the church
in any of the Rapture
passages. The point seems to be that the believer prior to this event
is to look, not for some
sign, but the Lord from heaven. If the Rapture was a part of the
complex of events that make up
the Second Advent, and not distinct from it, then we would expect
that there would be a
mention of signs or events in at least one passage."13 In other words
you can't have signs and
no signs at the same time. Therefore, the rapture and second coming
must occur at different
times. The signs verses no signs argument should be rejected for a
number of reasons. First, the
idea that certain signs will precede the second coming of Christ is
based on an incorrect
interpretation of Matthew 24. The signs of Matthew 24:6-33 (wars,
famines, pestilence,
earthquakes, false prophets, etc.) are signs not of the second coming
but of the destruction of
Jerusalem in A.D. 70 by the armies of Titus. This is indicated by the
context (Mt. 23), the
disciples' question (Mt. 24:3), the time indicator (Mt. 24:34) and
the parallel passage in Luke
21:20. After noting the signs Jesus said, "Assuredly, I say to you,
this generation will by no
means pass till all these things take place" (Mt. 24:34). Kik
writes: "Viewing what is obvious
from this sentence, one would judge that every thing mentioned in the
previous verses were to
be fulfilled before the contemporary generation would pass away. That
is certainly the evident
meaning, and one that may be taken as literal. The generation living
at the time of Christ would
not pass away until all things he had mentioned hereto were
manifested."14 Second, passages
which are used as proof texts for no signs before the rapture are
better interpreted as referring
to the second coming itself and not just the rapture. A favorite
passage for Pretribulationists is 1
Thessalonians 5:2 which says, "the day of the Lord so comes as a
thief in the night." The coming
as a thief in the night is interpreted to mean that the rapture comes
secretly. That is, it is a
surprise. There are no signs that precede it. The problem with such a
view is: 1.) The phrase
"day of the Lord" is consistently used in the New Testament to refer
to the day of judgment
which occurs a the second coming; and, 2.) The context of 1
Thessalonians 5:2 clearly indicates
that the day of the Lord is a day when the enemies of God will be
destroyed (cf. 1 Th. 5:3).
Christians are told to watch and live sober because they know the day
of judgment is coming (1
Th. 5:6ff.). The signs vs. no signs argument simply has no exegetical
support. Conclusion
Although the pretribulation rapture theory is very popular today,
given arguments that are
offered in support of this doctrine we must declare
Pretribulationalism to be contrary to the clear
teachings of Scripture. Simply put, there is not one shred of
evidence that can be found in the
Bible to support the pretribulation rapture. The typical
Pretribulational arguments offered reveal
a pattern: of imposing one's presuppositions onto a text without any
exegetical justification
whatsoever; of finding subtle meaning between words and/or phrases
that were never intended
by the author; of spiritualizing or ignoring passages that contradict
the Pretribulational paradigm;
and, of imposing Pretribulationalism upon passages that actually
teach the unity of the
eschatological complex (i.e., the rapture, second coming, general
resurrection, and general
judgment all occur on the same day—the day of the Lord). It is our
hope and prayer that
professing Christians would cast off this escapist fantasy and return
to the task of personal
sanctification and godly dominion. -----------------------------------
--------------------------
-------------------
Is the Pretribulation Rapture Biblical? Is the Pretribulation Rapture
Biblical?
Brian M. Schwertley
One of the most popular teachings today in Evangelical and
Charismatic churches is the doctrine
of the pretribulation rapture. The pretribulation rapture teaching is
that there are two separate
comings of Christ. The first coming is secret and occurs before the
future seven year tribulation.
At this coming Jesus comes for the saints (i.e., all genuine
believers) both living and dead. These
saints meet the Lord in the air and then are taken to heaven to
escape the horrible judgments
that take place during the seven year tribulation. At the end of the
great tribulation Jesus returns
to the earth with the saints. This coming is not secret but is
observed by all. At this coming
Christ crushes His opposition, judges mankind and sets up a one
thousand year reign of saints
upon the earth (the millennium). Some pretribulation advocates speak
of two separate comings
while others prefer to speak of one coming in two separate stages or
phases (phase one is the
secret rapture and phase two is the visible coming in judgment). Hal
Lindsey likes to refer to the
rapture as "the great snatch." He writes: "The word for `caught up'
actually means to `snatch
up,' and that's why I like to call this marvelous coming event `The
Great Snatch'! It's usually
referred to as the `Rapture,' from the Latin word rapere, which means
to `take away' or
`snatch out.'"1
Although the pretribulation rapture doctrine is very popular and
is even considered so crucial
to Christianity that it is made a test of a person's orthodoxy in
some denominations, Bible
colleges and seminaries, the exegetical and theological arguments
used by its advocates are all
classic cases of forcing one's theological presuppositions onto
particular texts (eisegesis). The
purpose of this brief study is to show that the pretribulation
rapture theory is not plainly taught or
directly stated in any place in Scripture, cannot be deduced from
biblical teaching, contradicts
the general teaching of the Bible regarding Christ's second coming
and was never taught in any
branch of the church prior to 1830.
The Origin of the Pretribulation Rapture Teaching
Whenever a Christian encounters a doctrine that has not been taught
by anyone in any branch of
Christ's church for over eighteen centuries, one should be very
suspect of that teaching. This
fact in and of itself does not prove that the new teaching is false.
But, it should definitely raise
one's suspicions, for if something is taught in Scripture, it is not
unreasonable to expect at least a
few theologians and exegetes to have discovered it before. The
teaching of a secret
pretribulation rapture is a doctrine that never existed before 1830.
Did the pretribulation rapture
come into existence by a careful exegesis of Scripture? No. The first
person to teach the
doctrine was a young woman named Margaret Macdonald. Margaret was not
a theologian or
Bible expositor but was a prophetess in the Irvingite sect (the
Catholic Apostolic Church).
Christian journalist Dave MacPherson has written a book on the
subject of the origin of the pre-
tribulation rapture. He writes: "We have seen that a young Scottish
lassie named Margaret
Macdonald had a private revelation in Port Glasgow, Scotland, in the
early part of 1830 that a
select group of Christians would be caught up to meet Christ in the
air before the days of
Antichrist. An eye-and-ear witness, Robert Norton M.D., preserved her
handwritten account of
her pre-trib rapture revelation in two of his books, and said it was
the first time anyone ever split
the second coming into two distinct parts or stages. His writings,
along with much other Catholic
Apostolic Church literature, have been hidden many decades from the
mainstream of
Evangelical thought and only recently surfaced. Margaret's views were
well-known to those
who visited her home, among them John Darby of the Brethren. Within a
few months her
distinctive prophetic outlook was mirrored in the September, 1830
issue of The Morning Watch
and the early Brethren assembly at Plymouth, England. Early disciples
of the pre-trib
interpretation often called it a new doctrine."2
John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), who was the leader of the
Brethren movement and the
"father of modern Dispensationalism," took Margaret Macdonald's new
teaching on the
rapture, made some changes (she taught a partial rapture of believers
while he taught that all
believers would be raptured) and incorporated it into his
Dispensational understanding of
Scripture and prophecy. Darby would spend the rest of his life
speaking, writing and traveling,
spreading the new rapture theory. The Plymouth Brethren openly
admitted and were even
proud of the fact that among their teachings were totally new ones
which had never been taught
by the church fathers, medieval scholastics, Protestant Reformers or
the many commentators.
The person most responsible for the rather widespread acceptance
of Pretribulationalism
and Dispensationalism among Evangelicals is Cyrus Ingerson Scofield
(1843-1921). C. I.
Scofield published his Scofield Reference Bible in 1909. This Bible,
which espoused the
doctrines of Darby in its notes, became very popular in
Fundamentalist circles. In the minds of
many a Bible teacher, fundamentalist pastor and multitudes of
professing Christians, Scofield's
notes were practically equated with the word of God itself. If a
person did not adhere to the
Dispensational, Pretribulational scheme he or she would almost
automatically be labeled a
modernist.
Today there is a whole plethora of books advocating the
pretribulation rapture theory and
the Dispensational understanding of the end times. Given the fact
that among professing
Christians the pre-trib rapture is still wildly popular, a comparison
of this theory with scriptural
teaching is warranted. We will see that the typical arguments offered
in favor of this theory are in
conflict with the Bible.
Revelation 3:10
A passage of Scripture that is considered crucial for a defense of
the pretribulation rapture
position is Revelation 3:10. "Because you have kept My command to
persevere, I also will
keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole
world, to test those who dwell
on the earth." It is
