Advocates for each of the several views about the rapture of the church, and its timing all claim to have scripture supporting their view. Certainly, such is the case for the Pre-tribulation Rapturists. Obviously, they can’t all be right. Many if not most Pre-tribulation Rapturists (PTRs) are very dogmatic and adamant that their view is the only biblical view. Some will claim many passages and verses of scripture to support their view. Tim LaHaye in his book Revelation Unveiled gives a chart citing 26 Rapture passages, which he contrasts with what he defines as 22 Second Coming passages. His point is that these 26 versus the 22 support his contention that there are actually two separate events represented, two future comings of Christ, the first to the air to rapture the church, the second His coming to judge the unsaved world. This is a tactic often used by men to try to make their readers believe that there is an abundance of scripture to prove their point or view, knowing that most readers will not actually critically examine those references to see it they actually do or not. The reality is that all that is really needed is one maybe two or three passages that actually speak to the issue, making the point. As is far too common, none of those passages support LaHaye’s contention that there will be a rapture before the Tribulation period, without heavy doses of his forced interpretations involving circular reasoning. In reality, not one of those cited actually addresses the main issue of the timing of the rapture, though there are several which do which he seems to overlook. Some of those somewhat relevant passages do support the fact of the rapture, but don’t address the timing. This is the same for all those who attempt to support this view of the rapture.
There are a few passages which are most commonly cited as proof texts to support the claim that the Bible teaches a rapture of the church before the Tribulation Period begins. They are John 14:1-3, Acts 1:-11, 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, 1 Thessalonians 5:9, 2 Thessalonians 2:7, Revelation 3:10 and 4:1. Each are cited and examined in the following.
John 14:1-3 “1Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. 2In My Father’s house are many rooms; if that were not so, I would have told you, because I am going there to prepare a place for you. 3And if I go and prepare a place for you, I am coming again and will take you to Myself, so that where I am, there you also will be.”
This is a great proof text for the doctrine of the rapture of the church. But, what does it tell us about the timing of this salient event?
Acts 1:9-11: “9And after He had said these things, He was lifted up while they were watching, and a cloud took Him up, out of their sight. 10And as they were gazing intently into the sky while He was going, then behold, two men in white clothing stood beside them, 11and they said, ‘Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven.’”
Again, a great proof text for the doctrine of the rapture of the church, but, nothing about the timing of it?
1 Thessalonians 4:16-17: “16For 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. 17Then we who are alive, who remain, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.”
Proof text for a rapture and a resurrection of the saved dead – no indication that it is pre-tribulational. However, if it is kept in context the immediately following verses 5:1-3, the timing is clearly indicated, but it is post-tribulational, at the second coming of Christ: “1Now as to the periods and times, brothers and sisters, you have no need of anything to be written to you. 2For you yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord is coming just like a thief in the night. 3While they are saying, ‘Peace and safety!’ then sudden destruction will come upon them like labor pains upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.”
The fact that the next passage is cited, at least by LaHaye, is very telling about the intellectual integrity of these men. After ignoring the key passage 1 Thessalonians 5:1-4, just cited above, the context of the passage most often cited as a proof text, 4;16-17, they skip to the 9th verse of that same passage:
1 Thessalonians 5:9: “9For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,”
This is a great proof text for the Pre-wrath Rapture view, but does not support the contention that it will be Pre-tribulational. However, it is misconstrued to support that view by adopting an interpretation of the key phrase “the day of the Lord” and “the wrath of God” as being the whole 7-year Tribulation Period. If one allows scripture to interpret scripture it becomes clear that such is not the case, but that God’s wrath is poured out at the end of that Tribulation Period, the 7th Trumpet and the 7th Bowl and the Battle of HarMagedon. The truth is that most of the Pre-tribulation Rapturists also include the whole 1000 year Millennium in their definition of that “day of the Lord” – which is absurd on the face of it. However, they also use that definition to attempt to distort the obvious meaning of 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4, the most obvious refutation of their Pre-trib interpretation:
“1Now we ask you, brothers and sisters, regarding the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, 2that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit, or a message, or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3No one is to deceive you in any way! For it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.” (2 Thessalonians 2:1-4)
Again, it is telling about the integrity of their approach that they ignore this passage but take a verse out of this same context, the 7th verse, as one of their key proof texts:
2 Thessalonians 2:7: “7For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is removed.”
The PTR interpretation is stated briefly in the following:
“Second Thessalonians 2:7 can be literally rendered, ‘The secret of lawlessness is already working, only it cannot be revealed until he who now withholds disappears from the midst.’ We believe this ‘disappearing from the midst’ will happen at the time the church leaves the earth at the rapture. The Holy Spirit will still be present in the earth, of course, but He will be taken out of the way in the sense that His unique sin-restraining ministry—through God’s people—will be removed (see Genesis 6:3).” (Got Questions, https://www.gotquestions.org/restrainer.html)
“In 2 Thessalonians 2:7 the words are masculine ho katechin, the one who … holds it back. How does He do it? Through Christians, whom He indwells and through whom He works in society to hold back the swelling tide of lawless living. How will He be taken out of the way? When the church leaves the earth in the Rapture, the Holy Spirit will be taken out of the way in the sense that His unique lawlessness restraining ministry through God’s people will be removed (cf. Genesis 6:3). The removal of the Restrainer at the time of the rapture must obviously precede the day of the Lord. Paul’s reasoning is thus a strong argument for the pre-tribulation Rapture …” (Thomas Constable, “1 Thessalonians”, The Bible Knowledge Commentary – New Testament).
This is a prime example of the kind of exegesis employed in deriving and defending their PTR interpretations. This verse doesn’t even mention either the church, or the rapture – although the immediately preceding verses, which they overlook, explicitly address them.
The “He” which is the restrainer, is indeed the Holy Spirit, but nothing indicates it is the church, which is always feminine in gender in scripture. The church will not restrain the Antichrist and the unprecedented evil during those last days, but she will be the victims of their persecution. God Himself is the restrainer, and only He will be able to end the reign of terror of that evil one addressed in this passage. The restrainer being taken out of the way is not an encoded reference to the rapture – which actually is explicitly addressed in the preceding 1st verse of that same chapter. It is exactly what it appears to be, the one who is restraining the evil now will stop restraining it, or him. He will get out of the way to let the Satanically empowered Antichrist come to power, reign for several years, and persecute the church, until Christ returns to end it all.
This Thessalonian passage is first taken completely out of its context, which actually clearly refutes the whole notion of the rapture occurring before the Tribulation Period. Then that 7th verse which supposedly tells us the church will be raptured before the Tribulation Period begins, actually makes no mention of the church at all, nor does it make any mention of the rapture. Bible scholars and commentaries are all over the map on defining who or what “the restrainer” is in this passage, to include: the Roman government; the preaching of the gospel; the binding of Satan; the providence of God; the Jewish state; the Law; Michael the archangel; the Holy Spirit; more recently, the church. Probably one of the least viable interpretations of all of these is the one being argued for in the PTR explanations cited above – “the church”.
That “He” refers to the Holy Spirit is a given in that one must admit that the Holy Spirit is God and however He will do it He is the one who will be restraining the evil or lawlessness, or the evil one or Lawless One – the Antichrist. However, beyond that Paul gives us no further clues, which means that all the other theories are pure speculation – especially since none of them are supported by any other scripture, such as a verse which tells us that this Holy Spirit in the church will be taken out before the Tribulation Period begins.
The reality is that the Holy Spirit will still be there during that whole Tribulation Period, and so will Saints who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit (thus the church) – they are the ones being persecuted and martyred. They are the “rest of children” of the “woman” of Revelation 12:17. They are the ones who “come out of the great tribulation …[who] …have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb” of Revelation 7:14. So to try to insert into the inspired text of this passage the church being raptured is simply a case of eisegesis – a clear violation of the accepted rules of interpretation.
That alone, given they are the primary proof texts, tells the honest thinking truth seeker just about all we really need to know about such a view, or doctrinal position. It’s not coming from the word of God.
Revelation 3:10: “10Because you have kept My word of perseverance, I also will keep you from the hour of the testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who live on the earth.”
First, Revelation 3:10 is misinterpreted making false claims about the correct exegesis of the text, in particular the one word, “ek” (a preposition which has a variety of possible meanings depending on the context). As is always the case the correct translation hence interpretation of any Greek word depends on its context, especially the immediate context of the other words associated with it. One only needs to look up this word “ek” in a lexicon, or how it is used in the many different passages in which it occurs (as in the Englishman’s Greek Concordance) to see the wide variety of possible interpretations. For example, Thayer’s Lexicon gives several pages listing us five major categories, and Walter Bauer’s (Gingrich, Arndt, and Danker) Lexicon gives us six major categories, with numerous subcategories for each of the various combinations giving us different interpretations of this one word, and relating it to passages where it appears. In this case it is combined with the Greek verb “tēreō” (τηρέω) translated “to Keep”, which gives us “keep from”.
However, according to Dr. John Walvoord, in his commentary on this passage:
“This is an explicit promise that the Philadelphian church will not endure the hour of trial which is unfolded, beginning in Revelation 6. Christ was saying that the Philadelphia church would not enter the future time of trouble; He could not have stated it more explicitly. If Christ had meant to say that they would be preserved through a time of trouble, or would be taken out from within the Tribulation, a different verb and a different preposition would have been required.” (Walvoord, “Revelation”, The Bible Knowledge Commentary – New Testament, 1983)
This sounds very authoritative, especially considering the source. However, the following comes also from such an authoritative source[1];
““Other instances of the use of the same verb and preposition together, such as John 17:15 and James 1:27, would indicate that it is perhaps too much to press it to mean an absolute deliverance.” (Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ,1966, p. 87)
It would appear that Dr. Walvoord must have changed his mind, but what he admits in his earlier book is consistent with the consensus of recognized Greek scholars on the subject, (though kept in context he then goes on to argue that it must be understood as “absolute deliverance from” in light of everything else this book has to say about this “tribulation period.”) Unfortunately, what he wrote later in his first commentary cited above, is not in agreement with what the Greek scholars tell us is the case, letting scripture interpret scripture, as they tend to do.
Out of the number of pages of variations of meaning given by Thayer this is one addressed as follows:
“τηρεῖν τινα ἐκ etc. to keep one at a distance from etc. (cf. Buttmann, 327 (281)), John 17:15; Revelation 3:10” (Thayer’s Lexicon)
What is significant here is his other reference where the same verb and preposition are used, John 17:15 ,also alluded to by Dr. Walvoord, which reads as follows:
“I do not ask You to take them out of the world, but to keep them from the evil one.” (NASB)
Or as rendered in the NIV:
“My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one.” (NIV)[2]
Here we find the exact same words, and the same grammatical construction. Could anyone argue from this passage that the words “keep them from” means to take them out of or away from “the evil one”, such that they will not be exposed to, or be in any way tempted by, or attacked by him? Apparently not as He begins by saying that such is exactly not what He is praying for – “to take them out of the world” (as these men are trying to make it say in Revelation 3:10). If Jesus was praying for a “keeping from” in that sense, as men like Walvoord insist is the way it must be taken in our text in Revelation, then He was praying against what scripture tells us was, is, and will be the case. If this was what Jesus meant His prayer was very ineffectual in that His request has certainly not been granted. Jesus Himself told Peter that this same “evil one” was attacking him, and trying to sift him like wheat. Peter tells us that the devil is like a roaring lion seeking to devour us, whom we have to resist (1 Peter 5:8-9). Paul tells us that our warfare is against the spiritual forces of darkness, and specifically mentions the “flaming missile of the evil one” (Eph. 6:12-17). Thus, clearly the words “terero ek” do not necessarily mean to keep from as in the sense of “out of the midst of,” meaning that they will not be exposed to that from which they are being kept.
In fact, we know from that very verse (Rev. 3:10) itself that this is not what it means, as it begins by saying this is a promise to those who “… didst keep the word of the endurance of me” (Interlinear Bible), which in context is about overcoming in the face of such testing and trials. Furthermore, in the passage in John taken in context, Jesus was also saying that those for whom He is praying will be exposed to the very trials and temptations that He is asking God to protect them from – not keep them immune from, as in “out of”. Clearly, He is praying for their protection in the sense that they will be victorious, overcomers, when tried and tested and tempted by that same evil one (and indeed, that request by Jesus on their behalf was ultimately granted).
If Walvoord and many other PTR advocates are correct about the Greek preposition used there, then they must explain why another preposition such as “dia” was not used in John 17:15 instead of “tereo ek”, since in our text in Revelation the same words are being used in exactly the same way as they were in John. Even the issue is very similar, in that what God is promising here is that when this hour of trial comes upon the whole world, God is the one who will enable them to be the overcomers – which is the reoccurring theme throughout these two chapters of this book of Revelation. If the church was to be taken out of the world, overcoming and persevering would not even be an issue, much less the main theme of the text (another logical contradiction in their interpretation).
With respect to the other recognized Greek scholars, M.R. Vincent makes the following observation:
“From the hour (ek). The preposition implies, not a keeping from temptation, but a keeping in temptation, as the result of which they shall be delivered out of its power. Compare John xvii. 15.” (Vincent, Vincent’s Word Studies of the New Testament, “Revelation of John,” p. 466.)
Here, from the same Greek word we see Dr. Vincent drawing the exact opposite conclusion as that reached by the PTR advocates such as Walvoord, based on his examination of the other passage which he also cross-references, the John 17:15 passage discussed above.
Another renown Bible commentator and Greek scholar, Henry Alford, who is also sympathetic to the pre-tribulation rapture view, gives his honest evaluation of this Greek word as follows:
“from (from out of the midst of: but whether by immunity from, or by being brought safe through, the preposition does not clearly define)”. (Alford, New Testament for English Readers, “Revelation,” p. 1809).
Thus, as Alford points out, one cannot make a clear statement about what this passage in Revelation means, based solely on the preposition used. On the other hand, when we let scripture interpret scripture, as opposed to a presupposed system of theology (such as Dispensationalism) and a preferred eschatological view (such as Pretribulation Rapture theory), one would surely lean towards renown Greek scholars Dr. Vincent’s interpretation as opposed to Dr. Walvoord and the many other PTR advocates , who have no such reputation as authorities on the Greek – perhaps for obvious reasons.
However, even proponents of the PTR view are not all ignorant of the problems and issues discussed above, as we see from Dr. Walvoord’s admission, in his commentary on this passage as cited above. Nevertheless, he continues to argue that it must be understood as “absolute deliverance from” in light of everything else this book has to say about this “tribulation period.” Of course, what he means is that he believes we should interpret this verse in a way that fits in with his interpretation of the rest of the book.
However, that interpretation is entirely based on the very same doctrinal presuppositions which drive his forced interpretation of this verse, which is itself the primary proof text for those PTR presuppositions. This is what is known as the logic fallacy of “circular reasoning”, or “arguing from one’s premise”, or “begging the question”. What he fails to do here, unlike men like Vincent cited above, is give another passage of scripture to support his contention. One actual verse which states that there will be a rapture of the church before the Tribulation Period begins, would suffice. But the mere fact the appeal has to be made to such passages as this (and the one in 2 Thessalonians 2 discussed in the following) as proof texts, at best exposes the weakness of such arguments. As we study further in Walvoord’s books, we find other interpretations which involve very similar approaches to interpreting other passages – very lacking in literal scriptural support but clearly driven by their preconceived doctrinal position.
Revelation 4:1: “1After these things I looked, and behold, a door standing open in heaven, and the first voice which I had heard, like the sound of a trumpet speaking with me, said, ‘Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after these things.’”
According to Tim LaHaye this is symbolic of the rapture of the church. Some of the more well-known Pre-tribulation Rapturists don’t agree with this (for fairly obvious reasons), but his followers do and see it as a proof text. Again, similar to the 1Thessalonians 2:7 proof text, there is literally nothing in the text itself to indicate even a rapture of the church. It is not even about a rapture of John. It is only about the vision that He saw, in which He was invited to see things from a heavenly perspective, from God’s perspective, in particular things about the future. LaHaye’s presuppositions become very apparent in such a forced, albeit imaginative and creative interpretation. Instead of proving the point he is trying to make about a rapture before the Tribulation described in the rest of the book, he actually exposes the weakness of that position with an argument even his like-minded colleagues can’t accept. By resorting to such methods and unconvincing proof texts these men actually demonstrate the inadequacy of their arguments and unscriptural nature of their theory. They should only need one or two explicit passages to prove their point – which is actually the case for the correct view – the Pre-wrath Rapture view (see Matthew 24:29-31, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:9, and 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4).
[1] . Dr. Walvoord was former president of Dallas Theological Seminary, often cited as one of if not the leading expert on this subject of Eschatology, and an ardent advocate of the PTR view.
[2] Interestingly, while the NIV translates tēreō ek as “protect from” in John 15:17, they translate it “keep from” in Revelation 3:10. However, several other translations render it “protect you from” (LNT), “keep you safe from” (GNT), “keep you safe during” (GWT), or “keep you safe in” (New Jerusalem and NAB).
end times revisited 