Throughout the history of the Christian church, believers have looked forward to their final salvation. The return of Christ, the last judgment, and the eternities of heaven and hell are part of the historic confessions of faith. The Bible places great emphasis on the importance of the future resurrection of the dead (1 Cor. 15). Among those who base their theology on the Bible, these facts about the end times are not in serious dispute. However, there are many who have questions or disagreements about the sequence of the events described in biblical prophecy. Some prophetic passages set forth a picture of the day of the Lord as a horrible time of judgment, chaos, and persecution. Others speak of an era of peace and tranquility in which all know God. Whereas Isaiah 2:4 says "they will hammer their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks," Joel 3:10 says, "Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruning hooks into spears." Of course, we also know that many prophecies were fulfilled in the first coming of Christ. How do we sort these prophecies into the past, present, and future, and in what order do things take place? The sheer number of end-time prophecies in the Bible prohibits an exhaustive study, but I wish here to explain the conclusions I have made.
Before I present evidence and opinions, I want to stress the need for humility in this area of study. Most end-time prophecy is contained in genres of literature that are unfamiliar to most of us. It is exceedingly difficult to come at these prophecies without presuppositions and biases. My own views on this subject have changed somewhat over the years, and may continue to develop with more mature study. What I have found, though, is that Bible-believing Christians are united on the most important areas of end-time doctrine: that the dead will be raised, that Jesus really is physically coming back, that all things will be submitted to His visible Lordship, that all will stand before God to account for their lives on earth, and that believers will spend eternity with God in the new creation, while the rest pay the penalty for their sins. Of this much we can be unshrinkingly confident. Putting together timelines and charts is quite another matter, however. My desire is that there be no divisions among us as believers as to tribulational or millennial positions, only that we watch for the end, and encourage one another as we see the day approaching.
Revelation 20:1-6 describes a period of a thousand years during which Satan is chained and no longer deceives the nations, and martyred believers live and reign with Christ. At the end of this period, Satan is released and leads many nations in rebellion against Christ. They are wiped out, and the wicked dead are raised for the day of judgment. Early Christians took this prophecy quite literally; according to the historian Eusebius, John's disciple Papias spoke of "a millennium after the resurrection from the dead, during which the personal reign of Christ will be established on this earth." This view that the return of Christ will happen before the Millennium is called premillennialism.
During Eusebius' lifetime, Emperor Constantine made Christianity legal, and it became easier to see Christendom as a kingdom of Christ on earth, co-extensive with the Roman Empire. And so Eusebius saw the Millennium as a prophecy of the Church. If this is the case, then the Millennium is already being fulfilled, and there need not be any time between Christ's return and the end of the world. In this view, there is no literal millennial reign of Christ, hence the term amillennialism. This became the predominant view of the Church until the Protestant Reformation.
The Protestant Reformers and their descendants saw the Catholic Church not as the kingdom of God, but as the antichrist. They restored the premillennial view of the end times. However, as Protestant Christianity came to have greater influence, evangelical scholars went back to the amillennial view. A third view, postmillennialism, was popular among Puritans and suggested a future, worldwide revival: a kingdom yet to come, but before the return of Christ. It is a minority view today. The fourth major view, preterism, asserts that all biblical prophecies–including those of Jesus' return–were fulfilled by the end of the first century. Preterists associate the second coming of Christ with the destruction of Jerusalem's temple in A.D. 70. (See preterist.org for a defense of the preterist view.)
The rise of dispensationalism (for which see this article) introduced a new interpretation of premillennialism to the church. Through the teaching of John Nelson Darby, many Baptists and Congregationalists came to see prophecies of persecution, judgment, and a kingdom on earth were directed toward the Jews. The church would be removed from the earth during the "time of Jacob's trouble" (Jer. 30:7), which was identified with the tribulation of Revelation 6-18. Christ would return to rescue Israel, who would repent, and Christ would establish a kingdom for them on earth. This Millennium would be a time for the believing Jews, although Gentile Christians too would have a place.
Today, amillennialism is still common among conservative Presbyterians, Methodists, and Free Will Baptists. It is sometimes, unfortunately, confused with preterism, which is primarily held in Europe and some moderate churches in America. The dispensational form of premillennialism is now the majority view among Southern Baptists (who once were amillennial), and many evangelicals are being won to the view by Tim LaHaye's Left Behind series and the continuing prophecies of Hal Lindsey, Jack Van Impe, Salem Kirban, and others.
I am among the Christians who seek to recover the historic premillennialism of the early church and the Reformers. I am not a dispensationalist, but my view of the end is that the resurrection will come when Christ returns to establish His kingdom on earth.
The primary support for amillennialism is the assertion that the prophecies of Israel's restoration and of the Messianic kingdom are fulfilled in the church, the new Israel. Amillennialists also point to 2 Peter 3:1-12, which seems to associate the return of Christ with the physical destruction of the universe, both occurring on the "day of the Lord." I would respond that the "day of the Lord" is a general term for the entire eschaton (i.e., the end times as a whole) and need not be restricted to a 24-hour day. Alternately, a "day of the Lord" in the Old Testament could refer to any major act of God's judgment, and therefore could refer both to the judgments involved in establishing the kingdom, and to the judgment at its end.
My main reasons for holding a premillennial view are as follows:
Revelation 16-20 places the Millennium between the return of Christ and the destruction of the world. The visions of Revelation are not strictly in chronological order, but the last portion of the book is clearly set after the rest. Chapter 16 deals with the preparation for the final battle ("the war of the great day of God," 16:14). The verses that follow recount the victory of Christ and the doom of Babylon (17:1-19:10). Following the songs of victory is a series of visions that runs from 19:11 to near the end of the book without a break. Christ returns and makes war against the beast (19:11-19). The beast and his false prophet are thrown into the lake of fire (19:20-21), and Satan is chained for a thousand years (20:1-3). The first resurrection (of the righteous) occurs at this time, and those who are rasied reign with Christ for that same "thousand years" (20:4-6). When the thousand years are completed, Satan is released and leads a rebellion (20:7-10). The resulting judgment leads straight into the second resurrection (that of the wicked), the last judgment, and the new heaven and new earth (20:11-22:5).
Amillennialists claim that the chaining of Satan, whereby he "would not deceive the nations any longer" (20:3) refers to the unhindered spread of the gospel to all nations, whereas before, God's people were nearly all Israelites. But if we regard the return of Christ as still future, so also must be the judging of the beast and his false prophet. There is no temporal shift between the return of Christ to judge the beast, and the chaining of Satan at the beginning of the Millennium. It follows, then, that Christ's return must precede the Millennium of 20:1-10. And this Millennium precedes the destruction of this creation (20:11; 21:1), and so it must be distinct from the eternal new creation of chapter 21.
The Old and New Testament picture of God's kingdom does not fit the present church age very well. Clearly, there are some Old Testament prophecies of God's kingdom that are fulfilled in the church. Among these are Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Joel 2:28-32. Hebrews 8-9 speaks of the new covenant of Jeremiah 31 as already in effect, equating it with the gospel of Christ. Regarding the Joel passage, Peter explains the events of Pentecost by saying, "this is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel." The portion he quotes includes statements that are often erroneously associated with the events just before Christ's return.
But consider Isaiah 60:18, "Violence will not be heard again in your land, nor devastation or destruction within your borders; but you will call your walls salvation, and your gates praise." See also Isaiah 62:8-9, addressed to Jerusalem: "The LORD has sworn by His right hand and by His strong arm, 'I will never again give your grain as food for your enemies; nor will foreigners drink your new wine for which you have labored. But those who garner it will eat it and praise the LORD; and those who gather it will drink it in the courts of My sanctuary." Repeatedly the prophets promise that when Israel is regathered and the Messiah reigns, the nations will no longer harrass God's people, and there will be peace and harmony in all creation. But this has not ever been the case for Israel or for the believing Church. Similarly, Paul says in Romans 8:21 that "the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God"–to be accomplished at "the revealing of the sons of God" (8:19). Jesus also speaks of "the regeneration, when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne," and the disciples reign alongside Him (Matt. 19:28), a description that foreshadows Revelation 20 (compare Luke 22:29-30; Acts 3:19).
The kingdom of God has been operating since the first coming of Christ, but in this age it exists alongside the kingdom of the world. Many of the parables emphasize the surprising nature of the kingdom. At first, it appears insignificant, hidden, with much chaff mixed in among the grain. But the day will come when this age will end, and God's kingdom will be revealed for what it really is. In 1 Corinthians 15:24-26 and 28, Paul says that at Christ's coming, "then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be abolished is death.... When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all." Passages such as these (and there are dozens) cannot be describing the age of the church. The kingdom is here, but not in its final sense.We still struggle with death, persecution, and sin, and we still await the fulfillment of biblical promises that will be accomplished upon Christ's return.
Christ prophesied that war would continue until His coming, but the kingdom is a time without war. As a concrete example of the previous point, we may note that Isaiah says this in a long passage about God's kingdom: "Nation will not lift up sword against nation, and never again will they learn war" (Isa. 2:4). But what does Jesus say about the signs of His return? "You will be hearing of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not frightened, for those things must take place, but that is not yet the end. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and in various places there will be famines and earthquakes. But all these things are merely the beginning of birth pangs." (Matt. 24:6-8) Jesus knew that war would be part of history, not just immediately before His coming, but throughout the intervening age. Prophecies of peace in this world must then apply to the Millennium.
One purpose of the future return of Christ is to establish His visible kingdom on this earth. Just a few verses before the return of Christ in Revelation 19, a series of praises builds to this climax: "Hallelujah! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns" (19:6). This is the glorious hope of Christ's coming. Other verses that associate the coming of the kingdom with Christ's return are Isaiah 9:6-7; 11:1-16; 32:1-5; Jeremiah 23:5-6; 33:15-16; Luke 21:27-31; 23:42; 2 Thessalonians 1:5-8; and 2 Timothy 4:1.
Another way of looking at the sequence is by making the observation that Christ's return is associated with the battle of Armageddon, the climactic war between God and the enemies of His people. We see this in Revelation 19, but also much earlier in the Old Testament, as in Jeremiah 30:5-9; Daniel 7:13-14; and Micah 5:2-5. Also compare Isaiah 32:2-8 with 61:1-7, which Jesus partially quoted and applied to Himself in Luke 4:18-19. (see also Isaiah 2:10-21; 13:1-13; 63:1-6.) We also see many prophecies in which the peaceful kingdom follows God's judgment on the proud and oppressive: Isaiah 3:18-4:6; 16:4-5; 19:16-25; 24:1-26:21; Joel 3:1-21; Zephaniah 3:8-15; Malachi 3:1-5; and Psalm 110 taken with 1 Corinthians 15:24-28. Most descriptive is the long passage from Ezekiel 37:21 to 39:22, which bears a remarkable similarity with the last portion of Revelation. Zechariah 12 and 14 also tie together the Messiah's coming, the battle against Israel's enemies, and the establishment of the kingdom.
So taken together, these prophecies give us a picture of Christ returning, not just for His church, but (1) to rescue His people–Israel or the church or both–from their enemies, (2) destroy those enemies in judgment, and (3) establish a peaceful kingdom on earth, where He will dwell with His people.
Unconditional promises to Abraham regarding land have not been fulfilled, and must be fulfilled before this world is destroyed. Genesis 15 recounts the ratification of the covenant. God's promises to Abram were unconditional; God did not ask anything of Abram. Everything was at God's initiative, and in fact, it was God who walked through the blood to ratify the covenant; He did not require Abram to do so. Among the promises is this one: "To your descendants I have given this land, from the rivers of Egypt as far as the great river, the river Euphrates." (15:18). Moses repeatedly reminded the Israelites that the Promised Land was not given to them for their faithfulness, but because of God's promise to the patriarchs (Deut. 4:31; 7:6-8; 10:14-15). This land would be "an everlasting possession" (Gen. 17:8; 48:4).
Some might object that God's plan to give Israel the land forever changed when they forsook Him, and He sent them into captivity. However, we should not regard this as a change of plans, for God announced that this very thing would happen as early as the time of Moses (Deut. 32). He also prophesied that He would restore them from captivity (Deut. 30:1-6).
A remnant of Israelites returned from the Babylonian captivity beginning in 536 B.C., but the land remained under Persian control, and then Greek before becoming independent. Barely a century of security passed before Israel was swallowed up by the Roman Empire, and in A.D. 70, the temple was destroyed. The Jews were scattered over the world and were not brought back until 1948. But Israel today is not in peace and security, and the land it possesses is only a tiny sliver that does not even reach to the Jordan River. Today's Israel is smaller than New Jersey, but the land they were promised extends from the Nile to the Euphrates River, and includes land controlled by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and Iraq–nations that would not be too willing to give their territory to the Jews. Not even during the time of David and Solomon did Israel control this much land. I will grant that it is possible that Israel will come to possess this land in the normal course of history, but I think it more likely that it will only be occupied upon Jesus' return.
God has eternal covenants with the physical land of Canaan and particularly with Jerusalem and Mount Zion. God's concern is not just with the seed of Abraham. We often neglect that God has a relationship with the land itself. God has promised, "In Jerusalem shall My name be forever" (2 Chr. 33:4) .For other examples of this relationship, see 1 Kings 8:44-48; 11:32-36; 2 Kings 21:7; 23:25-27; 2 Chronicles 6:34-38; 12:13; 33:7; Psalm 132:13; Jeremiah 2:7; 16:18; Ezekiel 36:5; 38:16; and Joel 3:20-21. In 2 Chronicles 36:20-21 we see that the seventy years of Israel's captivity were determined by the number of sabbath years they had neglected. These sabbath years were to allow the land to rest from being farmed (Lev. 26:40-45). The Millennium will be a time for God's chosen locale to be freed from the defilement of sin. No wonder so many prophecies present the mountains, hills, and trees as rejoicing at God's deliverance!
The liberation of this creation must take place before it is destroyed. Romans 8:21 has already been mentioned, but bears special attention. Not only will the Promised Land be redeemed, but all creation will be set free from its bondage to corruption and decay. One important element of Old Testament kingdom prophecies is the lush, Edenic nature of the world under the reign of Christ. Whatever upheavals accompany the destruction of the wicked, the Millennium will be a time of refreshment and rejuvenation for nature as well as for God's people. We will see creation as God has always desired it to be.
On a side note, it is partly for this reason that I do not regard the Millennium as having to last exactly a thousand years. Considering how long nature has had to put up with sin, I would like to think the Millennium will be even longer. But that question is more in the realm of speculation. We can only conclude that a time presented as a thousand years–whether literal or symbolic–must be a very long time.
And so I conclude that the reign of Christ in Revelation 20 and at least some of the Old Testament prophecies, is a time distinct from the age of the church and also distinct from eternity.
What preachers call the rapture is actually a secondary element of the end-time resurrection of the dead. As Jesus promised in John 6:40, "Everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day." Lazarus' sister Mary confesses the same in John 11:24, that her brother would "rise again in the resurrection on the last day." This was prophesied at least as early as the time of Daniel: "Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt" (Dan. 12:2). I have already argued on the basis of Revelation 20:4-6 that some length of time separates the first resurrection–that of the righteous–from the second–that of the wicked.
Paul frequently mentions the resurrection, particularly the fact that it began with the raising of Christ from the dead and will culminate at His return. He gives particular attention to this future resurrection, first in 1 Thessalonians 4, and later in 1 Corinthians 15. In both sections he gives the bodily resurrection of believers as our hope, the reason we should not fear death. Hebrews 6:2 lists the resurrection as one of the "elementary teachings" about Christ. Belief in the resurrection is absolutely essential to saving faith (1 Cor. 15:12-19).
But when Christ returns to raise the dead, there will be some believers who are still alive. What of them? Paul addresses this question in both passages, and I will quote the relevant verses in full:
"For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep 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 not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord" (1 Thes. 4:14-17).
"Now I say this, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will 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 imperishable, and we will all be changed. For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality" (1 Cor. 15:50-53).
Christ will return with the souls of the saints who have died, and their bodies will rise. Then believers who are alive will be "caught up together with them." It is this catching up that we call the rapture. Since mortal bodies are not suitable for the kingdom of God, the bodies of all will be changed into immortal (but still material) bodies. From that moment on we will be with the Lord forever. John also recalls this transformation when he says, "when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is" (1 John 3:2).
This alone is not controversial. Christians throughout the history of the church have looked forward to the return of Christ and the resurrection of the dead together as their hope. Even heretical groups were more prone to overemphasize Christ's return through false predictions than to deny or allegorize it. The reason for the controversy is that the majority of evangelical Christians, primarily those in Baptist circles, believe that Christ's return is imminent and will rescue them from a fast-approaching time of tribulation. But in holding this belief, they place themselves at odds with historic church teaching and with other evangelicals, such as Presbyterians, who have never held this view. Many have confused this controversy with the fight against liberalism, and thus doubt the genuine faith of those who believe the tribulation must come first.
It was John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) who first proposed a pretribulational rapture. His view of the end was a theological inference from a fundamental concept of dispensationalism: the sharp distinction between Israel and the church. Old Testament prophecies regarding Israel's re-establishment and time of tribulation, the "seventieth week of Daniel," could not be fulfilled unless the Gentile church were removed from the earth. But since the Messiah's return is to bring an end to Israel's suffering, it follows that the rapture of the church must precede this period of tribulation, and be a separate event from what we usually think of as the return of Christ.
C. I. Scofield, and later Charles Ryrie, helped popularize the pretribulational rapture, explaining that Christ's return would be in two phases: first, a secret coming for His saints (like a thief in the night), and second, a public coming with His saints (for the battle of Armageddon). Since the re-establishment of Israel as a nation in 1948, dispensationalists have largely abandoned the theological argument that fulfilled prophecy is prevented by the presence of the church, and they have instead sought to demonstrate the pretribulational rapture by appeal to the Bible. Since that time, other rapture views have developed, such as midtribulational, pre-wrath, and partial rapture views. Some progressive dispensationalists have also adopted a post-tribulational view.
Many of the end-time prophecy books have to do with the immediacy of the rapture, and many authors–such as J. R. Church, John Hagee, Grant Jeffrey, Salem Kirban, Peter and Paul Lalonde, Hal Lindsey, Jack Van Impe, and Edgar Whisenant–have predicted the year or even the day of Christ's return and seen the date pass. Nearly every generation since the apostles has believed that Christ's return was close at hand, and so the present end-times mania should not itself cause us to doubt the pretribulational view. I myself was "pretrib" until a few years ago, when I sought to use biblical arguments to prove the view in the face of opposition from "post-trib" evangelicals I knew and respected. What I found was that the arguments for a pretribulational rapture did not stand close scrutiny. I also discovered that the passion about the rapture often completely overshadowed the more important hope of the resurrection, which is the focus of the event everywhere the Bible speaks of it.
I realize that, at least in my denomination, I am in the minority on this issue. I ask my readers to consider these arguments carefully and submit to the perspective that is consistent with the Bible, even if it requires a change of mind.
The explicit statement of 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 is that the antichrist must come before the rapture. Some time after the writing of 1 Thessalonians, Paul apparently received word that the church in Thessalonica had been told that "the day of the Lord had come." It is evident from 3:10-13 that some had even stopped working to await the rapture. In 2:2, Paul appears uncertain whether this announcement came through a prophecy, spoken message, or letter, but this false teaching claimed to have Paul as its origin. The apostle denounced all such messages as forgeries. The assurance he gave to the Thessalonians "with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to Him," was that it would not come "unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction."
Through the rest of the chapter, Paul describes the man of lawlessness in terms very similar to those applied to the beast in Revelation 13. Most evangelicals regard this man as identical to the antichrist of 1 John 2:18. The word for apostasy here is apostasia, which has the general sense of rebellion, and in this context refers to the rebellion of the man of lawlessness.
Pretribulationists often look to 2:7 as teaching the exact opposite: "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." In other words, the power of antichrist is already at work (as also in 1 John 2:18), but the full rebellion is being held at bay by some restraint. The gender of the restrainer is grammatically masculine, so that a personal restrainer would seem to be in view. Many (myself among them) believe that the restrainer is the Holy Spirit. Most pretribulationists claim that the releasing of that restraint requires the removal of the Holy Spirit from the earth, which would require the removal of the church. Thus, 2 Thes. 2:7 is a veiled reference to the rapture. The problem here is that there are saints on earth during the Great Tribulation–see argument 7–and the Spirit that indwells them (as inheritors of the promise of Acts 2:39) does not restrain the beast's activity. As W. A. Criswell–himself a pretribulationist–says in his study Bible, "During the Tribulation, the Holy Spirit's ministry of restraining evil will be moved out of the way. This is not a departure of the Holy Spirit but only a temporary cessation of one of His gracious ministries." In any case, even the most respected evangelical scholars regard 2:7 as a difficult or obscure text, and it is unwise to use such a verse to defend a doctrine that is not well established by other texts. Verses 1 through 4, however, make it quite clear that our gathering to the Lord, the rapture, will not take place until after the antichrist begins his rebellion. This is reinforced in verse 8, where Jesus will kill the antichrist "by the appearance of His coming," which can only refer to the coming in verse 1.
(I should clarify that this argument presumes the described rebellion is an end-times event and not, as most amillennialists believe, an event that has already begun or even passed by now. I am adopting the pretribulational view of the antichrist and the Great Tribulation for the purpose of this argument: to show that if pretribbers are correct in their view of the antichrist, they must be wrong in their view of the rapture.)
Purported promises of rescue from tribulation do not necessitate removal from the earth prior to the start of the Great Tribulation. The main biblical defense of a pretribulational rapture consists of verses that promise deliverance for the church. Many of these seem straightforward when presented as answers to the question, "Will the present church be on earth during the Great Tribulation?" But these verses do not attempt to answer that question, and are in fact quite irrelevant to it.
Matthew 24:37-41; Luke 17:26-36. Jesus compares the last days to the days of Noah, and in that context speaks of "one taken and the other left" at His coming. Dispensationalists have taken from this that Noah's protection from the Flood is analogous to the removal of believers from the tribulation via the rapture. There are three problems with this interpretation. The first is an inconsistency with dispensational Old Testament typology. According to the Scofield Study Bible, it is Enoch who is a type of "those saints who are to be translated before the apocalyptic judgments.... Noah, left on the earth, but preserved through the judgment of the Flood, is a type of the Jewish people, who will be kept through the apocalyptic judgments..." (note on Gen. 5:22).
The second problem is that the purpose of the Noah analogy in Matthew and Luke is that of judgment, not of rescue. "The flood came and took them all away" (Matt. 24:39). Took whom away? One in the bed, one of the men in the field, one of the women grinding. The faithful are not those who are taken, but those who remain.
The third problem is that the verses to follow speak of the wicked being taken away, not the righteous. In Matthew 24:42-51, the master returns to his household, puts the faithful servant in charge of his possessions (he remains in the household), and casts the evil servant outside, "with the hypocrites; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." In Luke 17:37, the disciples ask Jesus, "Where, Lord?"–meaning where "they" are taken. Jesus' response is, "Where the body is, there also the vultures will be gathered." Whatever we make of His reply, it cannot be referring to heaven. So we see that this passage speaks not of a rapture from judgment, but of Christ's return to judge the wicked. The righteous will be untouched by the judgment Christ deals out at His return.
Luke 21:36. At the close of Luke's account of the Olivet Discourse, in which Jesus prophesies the destruction of the temple and the signs of His coming, He says, "But keep on the alert at all times, praying that you may have strength to escape all these things that are about to take place, and to stand before the Son of Man." To many who hold the pretrib. view, this sounds like the rapture. But even if we assume that Jesus is speaking of escape from harm during the Great Tribulation (and there is wide disagreement on that point), what strength is required to escape through rapture? In the pretribulational view, the rapture is not a reward given only to the most faithful believers, nor is it something we strive to attain or achieve by our own efforts. It is a right that we have as children of God not to be subject to His wrath–1 Thes. 5:9, which pretrib. advocates believe refers to the wrath of the tribulation. It is more likely, in the context of the discourse, that this escape is related to 21:21, "Then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains...." The word used for escape in verse 36 (literally, "flee away") is related to the word for flee in verse 21. Both verses indicate that it is the person's responsibility to flee at the sign that these things are about to take place. They are not references to the rapture.
1 Thessalonians 1:10. Paul says the Thessalonians turned to God "to wait for His Son from heaven...who rescues us from the wrath to come." If Christ comes to rapture the church and take it to heaven to wait out the tribulation, then certainly Christ's return is a rescue. But this also fits well with the events of Christ's public return at the end of the tribulation. The return of Christ initiates the battle of Armageddon, where the Lord wars against His enemies and those who have oppressed His people. (Other references to Armageddon are given in point 4 of the Millennium section.) In the post-tribulational scheme, when Christ returns, we will be drawn to Him and will be rescued both from His wrath on our enemies, and also from the wrath our enemies would deal out toward us. That this is the rescue in view is evident from the first chapter of 2 Thessalonians: "For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, when He comes to be glorified in His saints on that day, and to be marveled at among all who have believed–for our testimony to you was believed." (1:6-10). Therefore, 1 Thessalonians 1:10 refers to a public return of Christ for judgment, not a prior, private rapture of the Church.
1 Thessalonians 5:9. Paul assures the Thessalonians that "God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ." And this comes just ten verses after the most detailed description of the rapture. When I was awaiting a pretribulational rapture, this was the verse I relied on. But there are two reasons I believe this is a promise of something greater. First, the previous verses speak of putting on the armor of God (including the helmet of the hope of salvation) so that we might live as sons of light, whereas the sons of darkness will be overtaken by destruction. Truly, we will not suffer this wrath. But how do we get from that assertion to the idea that we will be off-planet when this wrath falls upon the wicked? The Israelites in Egypt were quite well protected when the plagues fell there (Exod. 8:22; 9:6, 26; 10:23). Given the close parallels between the Egyptian plagues and those of Revelation, is it not more likely that this is how believers will be protected–in the midst of tribulation? Secondly, 1 Thessalonians 5:10 defines our salvation as living together with Christ–not as rescue from a temporal wrath, but from an eternal one. Death, persecution, temptation, and other trials we may face whether before or during the tribulation cannot ultimately harm us, because we are destined to be with the Lord forever.
2 Peter 2:9. "The Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trial." But how does this speak of the rapture? Peter, like Jude, gives the examples of God's judgment on fallen angels, the Flood civilization, and Sodom and Gomorrah, and mentions the preservation of Noah and the rescue of Lot. In particular, Peter points out how Lot was "tormented day after day" by Sodom's sins. He was rescued from trial (a word often translated temptation), while the godless were punished. Peter's point is not apocalyptic prophecy (which he discusses in chapter 3), but that the present false teachers afflicting the church would be punished, and the faithful in the church would be preserved, and God knew how to rescue them from the temptation to follow these false teachers. I cannot conceive of this verse being taken as a rapture prophecy by its original audience, or by anyone reading it in context.
Revelation 3:10. This verse is perhaps the most powerful weapon in the pretrib. "arsenal," because it clearly speaks of preservation from harm during the Great Tribulation: "Because you have kept the word of My perseverance, I also will keep you from the hour of testing, which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth." On the surface, this appears to be a clear promise of rescue. And it is. But is it a pretribulational rapture?
One problem is that this promise is made to the church of Philadelphia because of their own faithfulness, and is not the more general promise to "the one who overcomes" which accompanies each of the seven church letters. The following church, Laodicea, receives no such promise. It will receive judgment. This fact is especially devastating to dispensationalists who view the seven churches as representing seven periods of church history. It is Laodicea who will see the last days. But if so, then could we not conclude that Philadelphia is promised a delay of the judgment, which will instead fall during the time of Laodicea? Such a view would be more in line with a post-tribulational or partial-rapture interpretation. But this is only a problem for some dispensationalists.
The more important reason this verse does not promise a pretribulational rapture is the wording of the promise. "I also will keep you from" the hour of testing. The Greek here is tereso ek. Many articles have been written on the preposition ek in this verse, but the best way to explain the meaning of the words here is to look at their only other use in the Bible. In John 17:15, Jesus prays, "I do not ask You to take them out of the world, but to keep them from the evil one." The next closest verse in usage has the preposition apo, "to keep oneself unstained from the world" while helping widows and orphans (Jam. 1:27). Both the verses in John and James speak of protection in the midst of involvement in the world. In light of the meaning of keeping from as used in the New Testament, we have to admit that Revelation 3:10 may be promising protection on earth, rather than in heaven.
No biblical prophecies make any distinction between two returns of Christ or two phases of one return. The New Testament consistently speaks of only one return of Christ, "whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things" (Acts 3:21). The various words used, His appearing, His parousia, His being revealed, are used interchangably. We only have one coming, one return to look for. It is telling that pretrib. advocates never speak of the rapture as the Second Coming and the return for Armageddon as the Third Coming. Instead, they divide the Second Coming into two "phases." But they do so without Scriptural authority.
One explanation, a weak one in my opinion, is that sometimes in prophecy, Christ is returning "for" His saints, and sometimes He is returning "with" His saints (Zech. 14:5; 1 Thes. 3:13; Jude 14), and so these must logically be two different occasions. One flaw in this argument is that when Christ returns for the rapture in 1 Thessalonians 4:14, He will "bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus," to be reunited with their bodies. In other words He comes both with His saints and for His saints at the same time. The second flaw is that "saints" (literally, "holy ones") can refer to angels, and Jesus is accompanied by angels during His public return for judgment in 2 Thessalonians 1:7. The phrase "with His saints" does not necessarily indicate a coming distinct from the rapture.
The best argument that can be made for this division is that Christ's first and second comings were not clearly distinguished in the Old Testament, nor was there a sharp difference between the Millennium and the eternal New Jerusalem. The entire period from Bethlehem forward is the "last days," from the Old Testament perspective. Some would apply this "telescoping" of prophecy to the New Testament as well. Perhaps the apostles did not forsee the difference between the two phases of Christ's return, but we can today. However...on what grounds can we understand New Testament prophecy better than the ones who received it? How can we make the division with such authority without biblical warrant? Or has God given some new, fuller revelation that should constitute a third Testament for our Bibles? I have yet to see a single passage of Scripture that speaks of two returns of Christ in the manner of the pretribulational scheme.
Prophecies of Christ's return consistently present it as a visible, public event, even when the resurrection is in view. Pretribulationists readily admit that Old Testament prophecies of Christ's final coming relate to the coming of judgment and the establishment of His kingdom on earth. The nations are gathered for a worldwide spectacle, and on that day, all will know that the Lord is God. And so in order to support the view of a rapture separate from this return, pretrib. advocates must look for New Testament prophecies of a secret, private coming. In this view, Jesus appears in the clouds, not setting foot on earth; the resurrection and the rapture occur, and they all return to heaven. To those left behind, the entire proceedings manifest themselves as an unexplained, instantaneous disappearance of millions of people. Only those who are taken have any idea that Jesus is involved at all. This makes for great novels and entertaining movies, but does this fit the biblical picture?
The public nature of Christ's return is clear from passages such as Luke 17:24, "Just like the lightning, when it flashes out of one part of the sky, shines to the other part of the sky, so will the Son of Man be in His day." Remember also the passage from 2 Thessalonians chapter 1, already quoted, in which Jesus is "revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire." Revelation 1:7 combines prophecies from Daniel and Zechariah to proclaim, "Behold, He is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him."
Pretribulationists grant that there will be a public return of Christ, after the tribulation. But, they say, that coming must be separate from the rapture, because the rapture has to come before the tribulation. However, look closely at the two key passages that describe the rapture. In 1 Corinthians 15:52, the transformation of resurrected and raptured bodies takes place "in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye," but this is also "at the last trumpet, for the trumpet will sound." Similarly, 1 Thessalonians 4:16 says, "The Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God." However literally we take these prophecies, it is clear that the shouts and trumpets are an announcement of what is taking place. (On a side note, the only archangel in the Bible is Michael, who is Israel's guardian according to Daniel 12:1. His involvement may be further support for a link between the rapture and Christ's return to defend Israel.) The Olivet Discourse, recorded in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, also connects the gathering of believers with Christ's coming, in which "all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory. And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other" (Matt. 24:30-31). The resurrection and the rapture take place during a public return of Christ.
We also see that the return of Christ is spoken of as His revelation, or His appearing, in many verses (Col. 3:4; 1 Tim. 6:14; 2 Tim. 4:8; Titus 2:13; 1 Pet. 1:7). In some of these verses, we are encouraged to walk righteously on this earth until His appearing (1 Tim. 6:14), suggesting that we will not be raptured seven years before that appearing.
So what becomes of Christ's return "as a thief in the night"? Jesus' use of such language appears in the Olivet Discourse, whose description of Christ's return is very public, as quoted above. In Matthew 24:43, Jesus says that a homeowner would not allow his house to be burglarized if he knew when the thief was coming. (The same comparison is made in Luke 12:39.) But this analogy only has to do with the unknown timing of the thief's arrival. The phrase as commonly used first occurs in 1 Thessalonians 5:2–"For you yourselves know full well that the day of our Lord will come just like a thief in the night." But this must be taken along with the next verses, in which destruction falls on the wicked when they do not expect it. But we "are not in darkness, that the day would overtake [us] like a thief." In these verses, the wicked do not believe the Thief is coming at all, but we are to be on watch for it. We look next in 2 Peter 3:10: "the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat...." This verse describes the destruction of the physical universe, not the rapture. Finally, Revelation 16:15 gives the promise, "Behold, I am coming like a thief," in the passage that describes the battle of Armageddon. But again, pretrib. advocates acknowledge that the return of Christ for Armageddon is a public coming.
Prophecies of the resurrection in the context of the tribulation place the tribulation first. Four examples will suffice to show the sequence of events as they occur in biblical prophecy. The first is 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4, already discussed, which says that our gathering to the Lord will not come until after the antichrist is revealed. The second is Daniel 11-12. Much of Daniel 11's prophecy was fulfilled by Antiochus Epiphanes, a Greek ruler who oppressed the Jewish people in the 160s B.C. But around 11:36, Daniel speaks clearly of the end times, and of events premillennialists would usually associate with the Great Tribulation. In Daniel 12:1-2, the angel says, "Now at that time Michael, the great prince, who stands guard over the sons of your people, will arise. And there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time; and at that time your people, everyone who is found written in the book, will be rescued. Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt." The resurrection follows the tribulation in this passage.
A third passage that places the resurrection at the end of the tribulation is the Olivet Discourse. In Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, Christ's return and the gathering of the elect are described after the events surrounding the "abomination of desolation," a reference to the seventieth week of Daniel 9:27. Finally, the Book of Revelation gives the fullest description of tribulation events, from chapter 6 to chapter 16. The bowl judgments of chapter 16 prepare the way for Armageddon, and chapters 17 through 19 elaborate on the fall of Babylon at the return of Christ. When Christ returns to set up His kingdom, the "first resurrection" occurs (20:4-5). Under the pretrib. scheme, all Christians are resurrected seven years before this time, and this "first resurrection" is only for Old Testament believers and tribulation martyrs. The great difficulty, if this is true, is that the resurrection toward which the church looks, our "blessed hope" in the pretrib. scheme, doesn't count as a resurrection in John's book. In light of the clearer passages discussed above, it is evident that this first resurrection is for all the righteous.
Prophecies of the tribulation as a time of trouble for "Jacob" do not preclude the presence of the church. In Jeremiah 30:5-7, the prophet foretells a "time of Jacob's distress" prior to their final conversion to serve the Messiah. The Olivet Discourse has to do with people in Judea. Ezekiel 38-39 and other Old Testament passages speak of the nations besieging Israel. It was this emphasis on Israel that led John Nelson Darby to conclude that the church would be absent during this tribulation period. One problem with this view, one that cuts at the heart of dispensationalism, is that "Israel" may refer to the church at large, and not just to national Israel (Rom. 9:6-8; Gal. 3:28-29). This possibility is further supported in Revelation 1:7. That verse takes Zechariah 12:10-14, which deals with the tribes of Israel, and applies it to "all the tribes of the earth." But the greater problem is that there is no biblical or logical reason that the Gentile-dominated church must be removed from the earth for the Jews to face distress.
There is a body of believers present throughout the prophecies of Revelation. One argument for a pretribulational rapture is that the word "church" does not appear after Revelation 3:14. Pretrib. advocates presume that John's transportations in 1:10 or 4:2 are symbolic of the rapture. (This despite the fact that prophets such as Ezekiel and Zechariah were also transported without such symbolism, and that seers of apocalyptic visions do not act as symbols themselves.) But even though the word church does not appear, there are many references to believers on the earth during this time.
Assuming that the entirety of chapters 6 through 18 refers to the Great Tribulation (a view held by nearly all pretribulationists), we first see evidence of believers on earth in Revelation 6:9-11. Many souls are slain "because of the word of God, and because of the testimony which they had maintained," and they cry out for vengeance. They are told to wait a little longer, "until the number of their fellow servants and their brothers who were to be killed even as they had been, would be completed also." We are five seals into the tribulation, and there are martyrs yet to take place.
In chapter 7, we see the 144,000 sealed; they are "bond-servants of our God" from every remaining tribe of Israel. We may debate whether there are exactly 144,000 of them, or whether they are biologically or spiritually Israelite, but they are definitely Christians, because according to 14:4, they "follow the Lamb wherever He goes." Later in that chapter, a countless multitude appears in heaven, having come out of the tribulation. These do not cry out, "How long?" as the earlier group did, but the manner and timing of their departure to heaven is debatable. In any event, the text says that they were on earth during the Great Tribulation.
Revelation 9:4 indicates that those with the "seal of God on their foreheads"–the 144,000 of chapter 7–are protected from at least some of God's judgments on the earth. I will not deal here with the question of the two witnesses of Revelation 11, but some believe they represent God's people on earth at this time. Chapters 13 and 14 describe the beast and his prophet, who persecute the saints (13:7, 10; 14:12). The description of the beast's enemies as "the saints" ought to confirm that these are Christians. These saints are victorious over the beast and appear in heaven in chapter 15, singing the songs of Moses and of the Lamb. The laments for Bablyon refer to its persecution of the saints in 17:6 and 18:24, and include the call, "Come out of her, My people."
Finally, in 19:7-10, following the lament for Babylon, a voice declares that the bride of Christ "has made herself ready," and that her garments consist of "the righteous acts of the saints." These are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb. The references to saints in the preceding chapters make it clear that the saints in view were in the tribulation, and are the bride of Christ, the church.
Pretribulationists will explain that these saints are those who believe the gospel during the tribulation, but either rejected it or had not heard it before the rapture. But where is this said? This explanation is only necessary if we have already concluded that all other saints have been removed. Since Revelation nowhere states that these believers were unbelievers until the tribulation began, their presence should count as evidence for the presence of the church in the tribulation period.
But are there not also believers in heaven during the tribulation? Many interpreters believe the twenty-four elders represent the Old and New Testament saints (twelve tribes plus twelve apostles). But these cannot be said to represent the entirety of the church, because, as we have just seen, they are joined by believers who die during the Great Tribulation itself. There are believers in heaven right now, as you are reading–all those who died in Christ. But that does not imply that there are no believers on earth, now or during the tribulation.
The wedding supper of the Lamb, if a literal event, does not take place in heaven during the tribulation, but afterward. If the rapture takes place before the tribulation, what are believers doing all that time? Pretrib. advocates usually believe there will be at least two events. Most of them place the believers' judgment here, making it a separate occasion from the day of judgment described in Revelation 20, and also separate from the sheep-and-goats judgment of Matthew 25. (I discuss these in my article on Judgment Day.) They also say it is during the tribulation that we will enjoy the wedding supper of the Lamb.
The first problem with this view has to do with the supper's place in the text. By this point in Revelation, we are past the judgments of the Great Tribulation and are now discussing Christ's return and final defeat of Babylon. This is the coming of the bridegroom, and it is for this that the bride is now ready. Furthermore, the event does not take place at Revelation 19:7-10; rather, a blessing is pronounced: "Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb." Invitations are sent out before an occasion, not during it. The logical place for this reception is following the uniting of the two when Christ returns to earth. Indeed, it is arguably not until 21:2 that we would place this dinner, when the New Jerusalem comes down from heaven "made ready as a bride adorned for her husband," words very similar to those of 19:7.
The second problem with the pretrib. view of the supper is its parallel with the banquet parables. In Matthew 8:11, Jesus says many from the north, south, east, and west will dine with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. Nearly identical words are used to describe a banquet in the kingdom of God in Luke 13:29. It is common in biblical prophecy to use banquet imagery to describe the fellowship of God's kindgom. But notice that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are included at this banquet. According to the pretrib. view, Old Testament believers are not resurrected until after the tribulation.
The third difficulty is that the saints who live during the tribulation miss out on the judgment seat of Christ and the wedding supper. Would such momentous events not be for all believers? There is no biblical warrant for placing the wedding supper during the tribulation; such a chronology seems instead to be an attempt to give believers something to do in heaven while all these exciting things are happening on earth. It cannot function as a persuasive argument in favor of a pretrib. rapture.
Our hope in Christ's return is not to be in heaven, but to be with Christ.
One key logical claim I have heard against the post-trib. scheme is that Jesus is supposed to be coming back to take us all to heaven. We sing, "When Christ shall come with shout of acclamation and take me home," and "Then He'll call us home to heaven." It doesn't seem to make sense that we would be caught up to meet Christ in the air, only to come back down to earth again. Shouldn't there at least be some interval of time up there–like, say, seven years? Well, the hymn tradition that we will be resurrected or raptured up to heaven comes from the many centuries that amillennialism has dominated the church. For most of church history, even among Baptists, there was no Millennium for Christ to set up, nothing more to do. When He returned, the show was over for this universe. Premillennialism holds that Christ will reign on earth. Whereas some ask why Christ would bother gathering us into the air without taking us to heaven, perhaps the question should be, why Christ would return to rapture the church and not stay to finish the job of establishing His kingdom.
The problem with this kind of reasoning is that God doesn't always do things the way we would–and for this we should be grateful. Peter addressed similar concerns in 2 Peter 3:9, when some were wondering why Christ was taking so long to come back. The usual post-trib. explanation for the rapture is that it makes our bodies incorruptible and gathers us all together to be where the Lord is. We do not have to travel from Ohio, London, Khartoum, Seoul, and the International Space Station, and find our way to Jerusalem to be with Christ. We are transported there miraculously, "in the twinkling of an eye." And as for being with Christ, even on earth, we might well sing, "That will be glory, be glory for me."
As for the biblical evidence, no passage on the resurrection or the rapture gives the heavenly realms as the destination. Right now, Christ is in heaven, and so those who die and are "with the Lord" (2 Cor. 5:6; Phil. 1:23) are indeed in heaven. But look at the following texts: John 14:3, "If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also." First Thessalonians 4:17, "so we shall always be with the Lord." First Thessalonians 5:10, "whether we are awake or asleep, we will live together with Him." Second Thessalonians 2:1, "with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him."
(For what it's worth, most of our "heaven" hymns speak of dying and going to heaven rather than being taken there at Christ's return. Only three or four songs reflect the view being criticized here.)
The blessed hope of the church throughout history cannot be a reprieve from seven troublesome years, but the coming of God's kingdom on earth. I offer this as an argument because I believe it is one of the most deeply troubling aspects of pretribulational literature. Dispensational authors repeatedly speak of a pretrib. rapture as the "blessed hope" of the church, and see any other timing for the rapture as an assault on that hope. (See, for example, Tim LaHaye's book Rapture Under Attack.) For one thing, this is wrong exegetically, from the very fact that the phrase "blessed hope"is taken from Titus 2:13, which identifies that hope as "the appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour, Christ Jesus." This is the public return of Christ, which even in the pretrib. scheme takes place at the end of the tribulation.
This focus is also misplaced from the tenor of statements throughout the New Testament about awaiting Christ's coming and our final salvation. What we look for is the revelation of Christ for who He is, in all His power and glory. We look for Jesus to reign. We look for the opposing nations to see God. We look for deliverance, for vindication, for relief from the troubles of this age. We look for resurrection from the dead, the reuniting of our souls with imperishable bodies. We look for the time when we will be with the Lord forever, and be like Him. All these things will happen upon Christ's return.
Instead, too many Americans, having been sheltered from the decades of persecution that Christians in other countries presently endure, are willing to believe that this "blessed hope" is all about escaping seven years of such persecution. Truly, the judgments of God against the wicked will be unparalleled, and the antichrist is given free reign to make war on the saints. But believers have faced a great deal of trouble many times in history. Read John Foxe's Book of Martyrs, or reports of what is happening today in Sudan, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere. Pagans and false churches have been systematically cruel toward Christians for centuries, and we in America should not get so complacent as to think we are immune to persecution. I fear how pretribulationists would react if they suddenly found themselves in the tribulation, completely unprepared for what they are about to face.
We are not to expect the rapture at any moment, but to look for signs of its coming.
One more logical reason for a pretribulational rapture is the idea that Christ's return must always be imminent–it could happen at any time. Therefore, it must constantly be "the next event on God's calendar." No prophesied event–such as the tribulation–can be known to precede it, or else we could simply wait for that event before preparing to meet God.
I believe there are three concepts about Christ's coming that are commonly confused: 1) Jesus is coming soon. 2) The timing of Jesus' return is unknown. 3) Jesus could come right now. The third of these (imminency) is not implied by or equal to either of the two previous ideas. With regard to the first statement, "soon" is a relative term, since we were in the "last days" as early as Pentecost (Acts 2:17), and have been in "the last hour" since 1 John 2:18, over 1900 years ago. As for the second, knowing the day or the hour cannot preclude looking for signs that the time is very close. "When you see all these things, recognize that He is near, at the door" (Matt. 24:33).
For one thing, we know that there have been times when the rapture was not imminent. For example, Jesus prophesied Peter's death in John 21:18-19. Obviously, the rapture could not occur while Peter was still alive. Similarly, Paul was promised in Acts 23:11 that he would preach in Rome, so he would not have been looking for the rapture during his imprisonment in Caesarea, his trials, and his ship voyage. And when pretribulational end-time experts proclaim a world event to be a sign that the rapture is near, it would seem that the rapture was not imminent prior to that event, because the sign had not been fulfilled. Key examples are the establishment of Israel as a nation in 1948, Saddam Hussein's vision for rebuilding Babylon, and reports of plans for Israelis to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. And if the (erroneously) claimed rise in the frequency of earthquakes and famines is a sign that the rapture is near, was the rapture imminent when the frequency of natural disasters was normal?
The Bible never says that Jesus could come at any time, only that the time was unknown. What's the difference? As I write, I do not know what time I will wake up tomorrow, but I know it will not be in the next five minutes, because I have not even gone to bed yet. I don't know the day or the hour of my marriage, but since I am not even seeing anyone, my marriage is not imminent. The biblical instruction for us is to be alert, and watch, so that at the signs that the end is approaching, we will be ready. Just to cite a few examples, see Matthew 24:42-43; 25:13; Mark 13:33-37; Luke 12:35-48; 21:36; Romans 13:11; 1 Thessalonians 5:6; Hebrews 10:25; and Revelation 3:3.
Placing the tribulation before the rapture does not encourage spiritual laziness, as is often charged. Perhaps the rapture is not imminent, but Matthew 24:15-22 indicates that the tribulation will be such a distress that we will not have time to get things together if we are not already prepared for it. As I discuss in my next point, I believe the signs of Christ's coming are the events of the tribulation. It is the tribulation that is imminent, and we should be ready for whatever God has planned.
One final objection related to this point, is that if the tribulation is exactly seven years, or 1,260 days, or 1,335 days, would it not be possible for post-tribbers to calculate the day Christ will return, once the antichrist is revealed? I would say no for this reason: Matthew 24:22 and Mark 13:20 say that "for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short." We are not told by how much the time is shortened. The length of the tribulation could be anywhere from a few months to almost seven years. A detailed timeline of the eschaton will simply not be possible.
There is a remarkable similarity between the events of the tribulation and the signs of Christ's return. There are a few pretribulational authors who agree with me on this point. To uphold the imminency of the rapture, they would say that there are no signs of the rapture, only signs of Christ's final return, and that these signs will appear during the tribulation. But if, as I have argued, we are told to look for these signs, and if those signs are fulfilled in the tribulation, then it stands to reason that we (the church) will be here when the signs are fulfilled.
I mention this connection also because most pretrib. authors and preachers are usually referring to the rapture when they speak of the return of Christ. His return at the end of the Tribulation almost never gets a sermon or book to itself. (In fact, I was in my teens before I even heard of Christ's public return.) Much prophecy talk today consists of locating current events and matching them up with biblical prophecies. Some developments appear legitimate to notice, such as the increase in godlessness and the spreading of the gospel. Others are ridiculous–I have seen television preachers who claim that cloning is prophesied in the Bible, and who use biblical prophecy to reveal who was "really" behind the September 11 attacks.
These end-time prophecies often focus on events that pave the way for the kingdom of the antichrist. The experts usually cite negative developments and conclude that things have never been so bad, so the end must be just around the corner. But often, things have been worse before, and will certainly be much, much worse during the tribulation. Just as importantly, terrible periods of history have often been followed by sweeping revivals. Just because things will be bad just before Christ's return does not mean there can't be intervening periods of improvement between now and then. The following table shows parallels between biblical signs of the end and prophecies of the tribulation.
Sign of the End
(Possible) Tribulation Prophecy
"Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom..." (Matt. 24:7; Mark 13:8; Luke 21:10)
"I looked, and behold, a white horse, and he who sat on it had a bow; and a crown was given to him, and he went out conquering and to conquer...and another, a red horse, went out; and to him who sat on it, it was granted to take peace from the earth, and that men would slay one another; and a great sword was given to him." (Rev. 6:2, 4)
"and in various places plagues and famines" (Luke 21:11; Matt. 24:7; Mark 13:8)
"Authority was given to them over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword and with famine and with pestilence and by the wild beasts of the earth." (Rev. 6:8)
"and earthquakes" (Matt. 24:7; Mark 13:8; Luke 21:11)
"I looked when He broke the sixth seal, and there was a great earthquake." (Rev. 6:12); "And in that hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell; seven thousand people were killed in the earthquake." (Rev. 11:13); "And there was a great earthquake, such as there had not beeen since man came to be upon the earth, so great an earthquake was it, and so mighty. (Rev. 16:18)
"and there will be terrors and great signs from heaven." (Luke 21:11)
"There followed peals of thunder and sounds and flashes of lightning... and there came hail and fire, mixed with blood, and they were thrown to the earth... and something like a great mountain burning with fire was thrown into the sea... and a great star fell from heaven, burning like a torch... and a third of the sun and a third of the moon and a third of the stars were struck, so that a third of them would be darkened and the day would not shine for a third of it, and the night in the same way." (Rev. 8:5, 7, 8, 10, 12)
"Then they will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of My name." (Matt. 24:9; cf. Mark 13:9-13; Luke 21:12-17)
"It was also given to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them.... All who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain." (Rev. 13:7-8); "The image of the beast would even speak and cause as many as do not worship the image of the beast to be killed." (Rev. 13:15)
"Many false prophets will arise and will mislead many." (Matt. 24:11)
"He performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down out of heaven to the earth in the presence of men. And he deceives those who dwell on the earth because of the signs which it was given him to perform in the presence of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who had the wound of the sword and has come to life." (Rev. 14:13-14)
"Because lawlessness is increased, most people's love will grow cold." (Matt.24:12)
"The rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands, so as not to worship demons, and the idols of gold...and they did not repent of their murders nor of their sorceries nor of their immorality nor of their thefts." (Rev. 9:20-21); "Men were scorched with fierce heat; and they blasphemed the name of God who has the power over these plagues, and they did not repent so as to give Him glory." (Rev. 16:9)
"But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved." (Matt. 24:13; Mark 13:13; cf. Luke 21:19)
"Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on!" (Rev. 14:13)
"This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come." (Matt. 24:14; Mark 13:10)
"And I saw another angel flying in mid-heaven, having an eternal gospel to preach to those who live on the earth, and to every nation and tribe and tongue and people; and he said with a loud voice, 'Fear God, and give Him glory, because the hour of His judgment has come.'" (Rev. 14:6-7)
As an additional note, I would point out again that we have been in the "last days" since the time of the New Testament. Some of these signs may characterize the past two thousand years of history, and not just the days immediately before the eschaton proper. For example, the scoffers and evil men of 2 Timothy 3 and 2 Peter 3 apply to the first century as easily as today. Nevertheless, in light of Matthew 24:32-34, I believe that the generation that sees the end-time events of the Olivet Discourse (i.e., the Great Tribulation) will also see the return of Christ.
But I don't want to go through the tribulation!
This is the last and most difficult hurdle in moving away from the pretribulational position. I fought this for quite a while. As evangelicals, we love the doctrines that give us security and that mean good things for us: biblical inerrancy, God's unchanging love, the faithfulness of His promises, the perseverance of the saints, eternity in heaven. But we may shy away from the difficult things: eternal punishment in hell, the necessity of repentance for salvation, warnings of what not to do in worship, rules that conflict with cultural trends, and every point of Calvinism besides perseverance. The pretrib. scheme is without doubt the most comfortable premillennial view, and the post-trib. is the most difficult to like.
But we cannot pick our doctrines based on what we like the most. If we could, I would go for postmillennialism, because I would love to see the whole world come to Christ, and see the true church reign unchallenged across the globe. But God has revealed truth to us in the Bible because we cannot make reality ourselves, or figure it out without His help. God has already decided how the future will be, and He has told us all He wants us to know about it. I believe He has told us enough to know the order of events with regard to the tribulation, return of Christ, resurrection, rapture, Armageddon, the Millennium, the final rebellion, Judgment Day, and the new creation. That this requires thought and study should be no surprise; the same is true for many important doctrines. I encourage you to think through what the Bible says about these things, and use your best, prayerful judgment to discover which scheme, if any, fits the biblical message. And even if you do think a pretribulational rapture is more likely, even the possibility that the church will go through at least part of the tribulation makes it wise to prepare for that eventuality.
This is an area of end-time prophecy where my interpretation is not solid. Is the tribulation described in Revelation 6-16 limited to the years just before Christ's return, or does it span the entire church age? Strong arguments can be made for both cases. Here are some thoughts to consider:
The entire church age is in "the last days." (Acts 2:17; Rom. 13:11; Phil. 4:5; 1 John 2:18)
Just as the kingdom of God is "already but not yet" here, mingled with the present age, there may also be an "already...not yet" aspect to the Great Tribulation.
The Olivet Discourse, which closely resembles Revelation, is about the destruction of the temple, which took place in A.D. 70.
Many of the incidents and attitudes described in Revelation have historical parallels in the church age.
Given the symbolic nature of apocalyptic literature, some of the judgments described may have fallen already, though not literally.
The antichrist in 1 John appears to be not so much an individual as a kind of person or institution; the same may be said for the beast of Revelation.
Some Protestants who relate the antichrist to Roman Catholicism believe the "1,260 days" are the years from 538 to 1798, during which the Roman church dominated Europe.
However...
We have good reason to believe Revelation was written long after the time of Nero and the fall of Jerusalem.
The severity of judgments in Revelation is not exaggerated, and nothing like the trumpet or bowl judgments has ever been seen.
It is evident that many of the tribulation events are said to prepare the way for Christ's return, and so must immediately precede it.
Second Thessalonians 2 definitely identifies an individual. Perhaps the "many antichrists" who have come in 1 John 2:18–Antiochus Epiphanes, Herod, Nero, etc.–are mere foreshadowings of the one to come.
No event in history so far quite fits the whole situation we see described in the Olivet Discourse or Revelation 6-16.
There must be some significance to the repeated figure of three and a half years in association with the end.
At this point in my study, I am inclined to say that the events that dispensationalists identify as the Great Tribulation will indeed take place immediately prior to Christ's return. The seventieth week of Daniel remains to be fulfilled, and it is during the last half of that week that these judgments and persecutions will take place. Right now, the power of lawlessness is being restrained, but in the end it will be let loose, and Satan will have a short time to ravage the earth before Christ returns. It remains for believers to ready themselves to be faithful witnesses during this time, and to "encourage one another even more as we see the day approaching."
Well, you've read this far. Want some more on the end times?
This Generation Shall Not Pass Away...
There are at least four views of statement, "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things come about." The sentence appears in the Olivet Discourse, in Matthew 24:35, Mark 13:30, and Luke 21:32.
Some interpreters believe "this generation" refers to the one in which Jesus lived, and the people to whom He was speaking. The Son of man would come in their lifetime. Preterists and some amillennialists believe most or all of the Olivet Discourse has to do with the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in A.D. 70, and relate Christ's return to the displacement of Judaism by Christianity. Others holding this view are liberals who believe that Jesus (or whoever composed the prophecy) believed the end would come in that century but was mistaken.
Some interpreters believe "this generation" should be translated as "this race," and refers to the Jews. In this view, this is not an end-time prophecy so much as an assurance that the Jewish people would never die out. I once held to this view, and it is a very encouraging promise in light of the many attempts (some by the institutional church) to extinguish the Jews throughout history. I believe the Bible does promise this, and that the continuation of biological Jews is necessary given their significance in end-time prophecy. But I no longer regard Jesus statement here as having that intent.
Many interpreters, perhaps the majority of popular writers, relate the verse to the parable of the fig tree that precedes it (Matt. 24:32; Mark 13:28; Luke 21:29-30). Numerous times in the Bible, the nation of Israel is compared to a fig tree (Matt. 21:18-22=Mark 11:12-14, 20-26; Luke 13:6-9). From this metaphor, these interpreters conclude that the greening of the fig tree in the parable refers to the re-establishment of Israel as a nation, which took place in May 1948. This view has led some to set dates for Christ's return on the basis of Israel's restoration. Thus, 1968, 1988, and 1998 were years commonly mentioned as potential return dates–depending on how long a generation is. More conservative is the view that at least some who lived to see Israel's restoration (i.e., born before 1948) will be alive when Christ returns. This view will continue to have some respect for another fifty years or so. In the meantime, I would have readers consider that Luke's version of the parable says, "Behold the fig tree and all the trees; as soon as they put forth leaves, you see it and know for yourselves that summer is near." This makes the fig tree only an incidental example of natural progressions that let us know when the seasons are about to change. Also, the fig tree is not a terribly common metaphor for Israel. Elsewhere, God's people are compared to an olive tree (Rom. 11) or a vine (Isa. 5; John 15), as well as less arborific metaphors such as a body (1 Cor. 12) and a building (1 Pet. 2:5).
I connect Jesus' statement to His preceding sentence: "So, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door" (Matt. 24:33=Mark 13:29=Luke 21:31). The fig trees' leaves represent the signs Jesus has just given over the course of the chapter. Definite historical events will be the cue for some generation of believers that Christ will be coming in their lifetime. The signs Jesus most emphasizes in the discourse are the "abomination of desolation" and "Jerusalem surrounded by armies"–both preceded with the words when you see, and both allusions to Old Testament prophecies. These events will take place during the Great Tribulation, and so I believe the statement is directed toward the faithful people of that time. Not only is it a call for readiness, but it is also an assurance that the Tribulation and its persecution will not last very long, and will not result in the extinction of the righteous.
Relevant background information: Wild fig trees provided food for the poor and grew primarily on lower ground. Egyptians used their wood for coffins. The tree (sometimes called the sycamore in our English versions) grows about forty feeet high and has horizontal branches that are easy to climb. These branches put forth their leaves in late spring. Any wild figs on the Mount of Olives would not yet have put forth their leaves when Jesus gave the discourse (early April, just before Passover), but they would in a few weeks' time. Could it have been the fig trees that led the disciples to ask about Jesus' kingdom just before his ascension, which took place about two months later (Acts 1:6)?
For a concise statement of my beliefs about the end times, see my Declaration of Faith.
