A number of PTR advocates have boldly claimed many proofs for why there must be a rapture before the beginning of the 7-year Tribulation Period. This ranges anywhere from 10 to 99, which would lead the unsuspecting to believe that there must be some real proofs somewhere for them to make such grand claims. Such claims can be made with equal validity for almost any view about the rapture, including the view that there really is no rapture of the church, if one uses the same techniques of interpreting scripture, and the commits the same logic fallacies as these men employ. An example of this is a recent book by a dedicated disciple of the PTR school of thought in a book entitled 21 Proofs of a Pre-Tribulation Rapture, by Rev. Danny L. Formhals. One would think that if he comes up with 21 proofs there must be at last one that would prove his point. But a look at what he presents as those truth might actually better support the demonstrable fact that no such proof exists, without heavy doses of misinterpretation of mostly rather clear scripture, and faulty logic, including the centerpiece of such methods of argumentation (on any subject), “circular reasoning”.
The following is a list of those 21 proofs:
#1 – Jesus made a promise to the church in Philadelphia – Jesus said, “Because you have kept my word about patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial that is coming on the whole world, to try those who dwell on the earth” (Rev. 3:10)
#2 – We are not appointed to wrath (Romans 5:9; 1 Thessalonians 1:10; Rev. 3:10; Zephaniah 1:15).
#3 – We are covered by the blood (Romans 8:1; 1 Corinthians 11:25; Leviticus 17:11).
#4 – We are hindering Satan from ultimate power (Daniel 9:27; 2 Thessalonians 2:7).
#5 – Revelation 19:11-21 doesn’t mention a resurrection (1 Thess. 4:13-18).
#6 – Zechariah 14:1-15 doesn’t mention a resurrection.
#7 – Two unique pictures are painted – (Isaiah 53:2-10, Psalm 22:6-8, 11-18; Psalm 2:6-12, Zech. 14:9, 16).
#8 – The known day and the unknown day (Matthew 25:13; 24:15-21, 2 Thess. 2:4; Dan 9:27; Rev. 13:4; 19:20, 2 Thess. 2:8).
#9 – Two doors in Heaven – (Rev. 4:1; 19:11).
#10 – Revelation 4:1 John is called into Heaven – Revelation 4:1; 11:12, Revelation 1-3 to Revelation 22:17.
#11 – The 24 Elders in heaven have their crowns ((Rev. 4:4-10; 2 Timothy 4:8; 1 Peter 5:4; Luke 14:14).
#12 – The Holy Ones are already in Heaven – Zechariah 14:5; Rev. 19:14; Col. 3:4).
#13 – We are kept from the hour of testing (Revelation 3:10)
#14 – Angel’s aren’t responsible to for (sic) gathering people for judgment – In Matthew 24:29-31. 22:30; 13:39-41, 49).
#15 – Both the wicked and the righteous cannot be taken first – (1 Thessalonians 4:13-17; Matthew 13:30, 49, ; Luke 12:36; John 14:2-3.
#16 – Jesus and the wedding – (Luke 12:36).
#17 – Jesus comes to receive us to Himself, not us to receive Him to ourselves – (John 14:2-3.
#18 – The restrainer is taken away – (2 Thessalonians)
#19 – The separation of the sheep and goats – Matthew 25:31-46
#20 – Who will populate the Millennium? – (Matt. 22:30).
#21 – Types and patterns from the Old Testament – (Heb. 13:8).
There are several very common techniques used by men to argue their case, which may appear to be very convincing but are in fact very deceptive, and involve glaring fallacies in logic, and in interpretation of scripture. One that is often used is to make statements about what scripture tells us, then citing a number of references to support their claims. This impresses the unsuspecting gullible reader who isn’t about to go to all the trouble of actually looking up and analyzing those texts being cited, to see if they actually say what they are being represented as saying, and if they actually support the point of argumentation being made by the one citing them. This author cites many such references, which are stating biblical truths to be sure, but in no case when accurately interpreted support the arguments he makes.
Another common technique is to make points that are unquestionably true and valid, and to cite authoritative sources and logic which support those points, which gains credibility with the reader (see he is telling the truth), but has virtually nothing to do with the point of argumentation being made – the real issue. In this case this author makes many strong points about many issues, such as the question about whether or not there will even be a rapture of the church, proving that point from scripture, but do not address the question at stake, the timing of that resurrection relative to the other end time events, such as the Tribulation Period, and the “day of the Lord” return of Christ in judgment. However, those passages which he does cite, when kept in context and accurately interpreted, in fact do not support his premise, but rather clearly support a view which he is arguing against. Such is the substance of proofs #3. #8, #10, #11, #12, #14.
This brings us to another technique almost always used to argue in favor of a very debatable point of view, which is actually well knowns as the logic fallacy of the “straw man fallacy”. That is when an opposing view or argument is misrepresented and then disproven, in support of one’s preferred view. In this case, all Posttribulation rapture views are represented as teaching that God’s own people, the church, are going to go through the outpouring of God’s wrath and judgment on Satan and the unsaved world. This is completely ignoring the Pre-Wrath Rapture views, and the critical distinction to be made between the whole 7-year Tribulation Period and the final “day of the Lord” and the “day of the Lord’s Wrath” at the end and consummation of that period, featuring the sixth Seal, the seventh Trumpet and seventh Bowls, and the Battle of HarMagedon. Such is the essence of proofs #2 and #3 and #21.
Of course, when it comes to scripture there is the issue of exegesis and interpretation of the words and wording of those key relevant passages of scripture. Several of the 21 proofs cited above are guilty of what is known as eisegesis, which means reading into the passage cited something which isn’t actually there, not coming from the words in the text itself.
A good example of this is the use of Revelation 3:10 which is the substance of several of the 21 proofs, especially #1 and #13, which are redundant restatements of the same point. Furthermore, proof #10 is a good example of reading into the text something that clearly is not there, based on presuppositions. To suggest that Revelation 4:1 is about the pretribulation rapture of the church is an obvious case of eisegesis. It is also the problem with #4, #7, #10, and #18. The “restrainer” of 2 Thessalonians is never identified in scripture as “the church”, nor is the removal of that restrainer identified as being the rapture of the church – this is a classic case of eisegesis, reading into the passage something that isn’t being stated there, but fits the PTR presuppositions. Furthermore, accurate exegesis of the Greek in that key proof text eliminates such an interpretation from valid considerations, as the restrainer is referred to in the masculine as “He”, whereas the church is always referred to in scripture as “she”, the bride of Christ.
Ironically this misinterpretation involves another very common fallacy, perhaps the most common, and a primary hermeneutic (rule of interpretation) principle – taking out of context. All of the scripture passages cited as proof for the rapture of the church are being taken out of context, to support the contention which is the premise of several of the these 21 proofs. First, the most obvious passages about the rapture appearing in the Gospels, Matthew 24:29-31, Mark 13:24-27, are misinterpreted as not about the rapture of the church, but only about the second coming of Christ at a time 7 years after that rapture of the church. This in itself is nothing more than a case of eisegesis, as nothing in either of these two key passages even suggest that there will be two raptures, one before the tribulation period and one after, and the one mentioned here is only the latter. Such a reading into the text means that in Jesus whole explanation of what will happen in the end times He didn’t even mention a rapture of the church – which would be very strange, since that is the most important and interesting anticipated event for the audience to which these Gospel were written – including us today. It is, however, an artifact of some of the extrabiblical presuppositions of the Dispensationalism, such as the Tribulation Period is only for Israel, thus the church must be raptured out first, thus “the church is not in the Olivet Discourse”, of Matthew 24, Mark 13 or Luke 21. There are many problems with such presuppositions, not the least of which is that the same men point to what follows this description of the rapture, such as the thief in the night metaphor of Matthew 24:43, as being about the imminence of Christ’s return to rapture the church, not the second coming, which they say won’t be a surprise since according to their theory it will happen exactly 7 years after the pre-tribulation rapture happens. So according to their logic, verses 29-31 of Matthew 24 are only about the second coming of Christ, but the following connected verses including v. 43 is about the rapture of the church before that whole Tribulation Period begins – go figure.
However, they then point to 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 as the key passage which is about the rapture of the church, and thus not the same rapture as that of the Gospels. The premise is that while the rapture in Matthew and Mark is only about the second coming of Christ 7 years after the rapture of the church, the rapture in 1 Thessalonians 4 is not about the second coming (by their forced definition) when Christ returns in judgment, but about the pretribulation rapture of the church. However, such an illusion can only be maintained by taking those verses out of the context of the rest of the passage – a violation of the most basic rule of interpretation. Paul did not end his explanation of this most salient event with the 18th verse of chapter 4, but continues through verse 10 of the fifth chapter. Beginning in the second verse of chapter 5 he makes the connection between the rapture and resurrection of the 4th chapter and the fiery judgment of the second coming of Christ, which he refers to as “the day of the Lord”, where he also invokes again the “thief in the night” metaphor (similar to Matthew). Only by ignoring or misinterpreting the 3rd verse where we are told “While they are saying, ‘Peace and safety!’ then destruction will come upon them suddenly like labor pains upon a woman with child, and they will not escape” (1 Thessalonian 5:3), could one maintain that this passage is about the rapture, but not about the second coming of Christ, as in Matthew 24.
Or, take another passage which so clearly tells us about the rapture of the church, 2Thessalonians 2. There again Paul refers to it as “the day of the Lord” describing it as “the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering unto Him” (v. 1) – a clear proof text for the rapture of the church. But in the immediate context he goes on to state clearly and explicitly as it can be stated that this day can’t happen until after the great “apostasy” and the “the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who 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 Thess. 2:3-4). No futurists, including the PTR advocates, fail to recognize this as being about the Antichrist appearing and claiming to be God, most identifying it as the “abomination of desolation” event prophesied by Daniel and Jesus. They also recognize that this won’t happen before the Tribulation Period begins but will happen at the midpoint of that 7 year period.
Finally, the other remaining passage which is very explicit about the resurrection of the church is found in 1 Corinthians 15:51-56, which again tells us exactly when this resurrection, which we know from 1 Thess. 4:15-17 precedes but essentially coincides with rapture of the church. There we are told very clearly that it will happen “at the last trumpet”. This leads us to another essential rule of interpretation – let scripture interpret scripture. First, this trumpet is associated with the most explicit accounts of the rapture cited above: Matthew 24:31 and 1Thessalonians 4:16. If we go to scripture to interpret scripture we find that the last trumpet is identified in Revelation (where we would expect it to be) as the last of seven trumpets, Revelation 11:15-19. This passage is the description of the day of the Lord second coming of Christ. However, men such as this author, Rev. Formhals, and his source, Perry Stone (author of Unleashing the Beast), prefer to let other sources, such as Jewish tradition, interpret this passage, than the clear connection to the primary source of information about the end times. According to him the fourth Shofar blast of the Jewish Feast of Trumpets is a better explanation (which he assures us we all would know and recognize if we were Jews in Paul’s day). Of course, nothing in inspired scripture would lead us to that interpretation, but it does fit better with Rev. Formhals Dispensational and PTR presuppositions, whereas the scripture passages are very problematic for them.
Of course, this is also the really big problem for the whole view or theory he is trying to defend – there is not one literal passage of scripture which tells us that there are two raptures and two resurrections, or that the rapture of the church precedes the whole Tribulation Period and is to happen 7 years before the second coming. But among the proofs cited here is the declaration of such unproven assumptions – #7 Two Unique Pictures are Painted, #8 The Known Days and the Unknown Days, and #9 Two Doors in Heaven. This is a classic case of the logic fallacy known as “circular reasoning”. It is arguing from one’s premise, using a point that one is trying to prove to prove their point. The only way one can interpret the relevant passages as being about two separate future coming of Christ, with two separate raptures and two separate resurrections, is by first accepting the Pre-Tribulation Rapture theory which assumes them to be true, a priori. In other words, arguing that what you are trying to prove to be true is itself your proof that such is true. The argument is used that the rapture of the church is when Christ comes to the air, to meet His bride the church in the clouds, which is different from coming all the way to the earth, as to the Mount of Olives, when He comes to judge the earth. But, when we actually go to scripture, the first mention of Christ’s coming to the clouds is in Matthew 24:30, which is the passage they say is only about the second coming, not the rapture of the church (“OOPS”). Then the next major proof text, 1Thessalonians 4:17, which they argue is about the rapture of the church, as we have seen when kept in context is also about that second coming which includes the “day of the Lord” and “the day of the Lord’s wrath”, when “destruction will come upon them suddenly like labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape” (1 Thessalonians 5:3).
If, or when we take all the relevant passages into consideration we either have some glaring contradictions in scripture itself, or there is only one possible explanation to accommodate them all, which is also the only one that actually makes perfect sense. It is true that Matthew 24:20-31 is about the second coming of Christ, the “day of the Lord”. It is also true that 1 Thessalonians 4-5, and for that matter 2 Thessalonians 2, are about the second coming of Christ as well. But they are also both about Christ coming in the clouds to rapture the church. That is because, as indicated by the very significant phrase, “the day of the Lord” (as well as the “thief in the night”), it is clearly about Christ’s one and only return to judge the world and begin His earthly reign, before which He rescues His church, rapturing her up to meet Him in the clouds in the air. Also at that time, which according to Revelation 11:15-19, the dead are resurrected, “the Prophets and Saints and all those fear God’s name, the small and the great” are rewarded (the “judgment seat of Christ”), and the unsaved are judged by being destroyed (just read it).
This brings us to another major point of confusion introduced by the PTR presuppositions and interpretations – their very obtuse definition of this very pivotal phrase the day of the Lord, designed to accommodate forced PTR interpretations of key passages of scripture. This phrase appears 24-25 times in scripture (depending on which version one is using), which gives us plenty of opportunity to determine what it is meant to indicate. In no instance does it indicate the meaning ascribed to it by the PTR advocates. It is always describing a day of judgment, never a prolonged period of drawn-out trial and tribulation, and definitely not inclusive of a millennium of a perfect period of peace and righteousness, which is how they often define it. It is not about the whole 7-year Tribulation Period, and as many argue, the whole Millennial Kingdom of God on earth. It is about that day also referred to as “the day of wrath”, or “the day of the Lord’s wrath”, also referred to by theologians as the second coming of Christ. In Revelation we see it described first as the sixth Seal, then as the seventh Trumpet, the seventh Bowl, and the Battle of HarMagedon. In chapter 19 it is described as Christ coming with His armies of heaven when He “judges and makes war”, and “He strike[s] down the nations” and “He treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty” (Rev. 19:11-15). This is the biblical “day of the Lord”, not the first 5 Seals, or the first six Trumpets or Bowls.
Then we have the rather intellectually dishonest argument cited as part of Proof #10, that the church is not mentioned in Revelation after the third chapter until 22:17. The fact that the Greek word “ekklesia“, translated “church” does not appear there (an argument from silence) is not any indication that the church isn’t there. In fact, that same word doesn’t appear in 8 of the New Testament books, including the Gospels of Mark, Luke and John, the 1st and 2nd epistles of John and Peter, as well as Jude. Clearly no one would suggest that the church isn’t in those other books because the word for church doesn’t appear there. The fact is that John only uses that word here in Revelation. However, they all use the other words that designate “the church”, such as “saints”, and the “bride” of Christ, which do appear throughout Revelation 6-18, as in 7:9-17, 12:17 (“the rest of her offspring“), 13:7, 14:12, 19:1-9 and 20:4-5 (see my book The Pretribulation Rapture Theory and Dispensationalism Revisited, 2.2.1.3, pp. 77-80). The rather apparent truth is that the church is referred to in Revelation 21 as “those who overcome” (21:7), “the bride, the wife of the Lamb” (21:9), and “those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life” (21:27). But even before that, it is the raptured church which is referred to as the “bondservants” in 19:5, the “bride” at the marriage supper of the Lamb who had clothed herself in “fine linen, bright and clean … the righteous acts of the Saints” of 19:7-8, which is how even the PTR advocates interpret the passage – even though the Greek word for church doesn’t appear there at all.
This whole argument is driven, not by actual scripture, but by the extrabiblical Dispensationalists’ presupposition, that the 7-year Tribulation Period is only for Israel, part of God’s program for Israel, not for the church. While the distinction between Israel and the church is a biblically valid one, this takes it to an unwarranted extreme. In fact, under the New Covenant, the New Testament dispensation of Grace vs. the Law, saved Israel is as much the church as saved Gentiles, and according to Galatian 4:28 there is no distinction to be made between us, we are all one in Christ. Nothing in scripture tells us this changes when the Tribulation Period (the 70th week of Daniel), begins. In fact, throughout the New Testament, all the information about that period, the warnings and exhortations to be prepared for it, are given to the church. Even Revelation itself is addressed to the church, specifically the seven types of churches of the 2nd and 3rd chapters of the book. Furthermore, nothing in the book of Revelation tells us it is only about Israel. Israel is mentioned once in chapter 7 and again in 14 as the 144,000 (which are nowhere called witnesses). However, the appearance in chapter 7 distinguishes it, the 144,000 from the 12 tribes of Israel, from another group which is said to be coming out of that tribulation period: “a great multitude which no one could count, from every nation and all the tribes, peoples, and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes” (12:9). That saved and sanctified multitude is inarguably the raptured and resurrected church, not Israel. We are told there that these “are the ones who come out of the great tribulation”. This alone tells us that said Tribulation Period is not just about Israel, but is just as much about the testing and purifying of the church, and certainly indicates that she will not be raptured out before, but after she has gone through that great tribulation.
Israel is then again identified in chapter 12 where it is referred to symbolically as “the woman”, which is sequestered away to be protected from the dragons persecution for the 1260 days of Great Tribulation – not the objects of judgment, nor the evangelical witnesses, as per the Dispensationalists presuppositions. There we see that it is “the rest of her offspring” which becomes the object of that dragon’s wrath, which would have to be the church of that time (though they would not call the Tribulation saints “the church” of that time), since the woman is Israel (at least that 144,000 of chapter 7). Based on the description of that 144,000 in chapter 14 it can probably be safely assumed that they will be saved Israel, what we now refer to as Messianic Jews, “who follow the Lamb” (14:4). Whether or not this is all of Israel that will become Christ followers (the saved remnant) is not clear (in light of Romans 11:26), but that they are chosen by God and “sealed on their foreheads” indicating divine protection and preservation through that Tribulation period is clear.
This in turn gets us to another supposed proof for the PTR view, #20, which is actually just a another misinterpretation based on a false premise, not in any sense a proof. That is in reference to the answer to the question, “who will populate the Millennium?” The answer is again given in Revelation as in those passages discussed above. We are told that the 144,000 Jews are the only ones sealed and thus protected from all that is going to happen during that Tribulation Period, as well as the “woman” of chapter 12. However, unlike the “great multitude” of chapter 7 which is distinguished from that 144,000, we are not told that they (the 144,000) will be raptured out at the end, before that “day of the Lord’s wrath”. Rather, we are told that they will be sealed and protected, that “two wings of the great eagle were given to the woman, so that she could fly into the wilderness to her place, where she was nourished for a time, times, and half a time, away from the presence of the serpent.” This will be the seed generation which will still be in their natural bodies, the “land … born in a day … a nation … given birth all at once” of Isaiah 66:8. Indeed, it will be those who are not raptured out, but who survive that Tribulation Period including the “day of the Lord” judgment, by being supernaturally protected and preserved by God, which will be the initial inhabitants of that new heaven and earth of the Millennial kingdom, in which Christ reigns for 1000 years.
However, this will be true whether or not the church will be raptured out before that Tribulation Period. Advocates of this PTR view seem to forget or overlook the fact that there has to be a rapture of those who are, or become Christ followers during that period (many they tell us), as well as a resurrection of those Christ followers who are martyred or die during that period – unless they would have His own followers going through the judgment, the outpouring of His wrath on Satan and his followers – which they do not admit to. In fact, it is their argument that Matthew 24:29-31 is only about the rapture of those saved during that Tribulation Period. This blatant inconsistency shows up in proof #14 where, after telling us that the “elect” raptured out there are the Tribulation Period saints, now argue that Matthew 24:29-31 will not include a resurrection of saved Saints, as in the rapture of the church. According to this argument those who died during the Tribulation Period will not be resurrected when Christ returns. This apparently features other extrabiblical assumptions as well about those who die in Christ. Thus, this so-called proof is itself nonsensical, or self-contradictory given their own view.
This also raises another issue which is related with respect to their argument, which sounds so logical, that a rapture just before the return of Christ in judgment (the “second coming”) doesn’t make sense as the saved would be taken up just to come back down with Christ in His return to judge the earth and its unsaved inhabitants (what Tim LaHaye sarcastically calls “the YoYo effect”). However, this is just as much a part of their explanation with respect to the rapture of the Tribulation Period Saints, which they don’t seem to have a problem with – another big OOPs. That God will rescue His people, be they the church at that time or just called “Tribulation Period saints”, having them first come to meet Him in the air, then join Him in His triumphant procession to destroy His and their enemies, is actually not a problem logically, no matter what you call those being raptured out at that time. But it is what we are literally and explicitly told in scripture is going to happen when Christ returns – the one and only “second coming”.
Several of the other proofs cited in this work are simply matters of incorrect interpretations of the texts cited, and the failure to correctly identify those that are about the rapture of the church versus other end times developments and events. Matthew 25:31-46 is about the final judgment, the Great White Throne judgment, which Revelation 20 tells us happens after the Millennial age, as well as a Postmillennial period is over, not at the second coming of Christ. It is not until that final Great White Throne judgment that anyone is sentenced to eternal punishment in hell, other than the Beast and his False Prophet as per Revelation 19:20. In fact there is a resurrection of all the unsaved dead after the Millennial age, according to Revelation 20:5, when Satan is released from his 1000 year imprisonment (indicating even Satan is not sentenced to his eternal destiny in hell at the second coming). According to that 20th chapter of Revelation there is a huge rebellion led by Satan and a personage called Gog, during that period between the end of the Millennium and the Great White Throne judgment. That is when the sheep are finally separated from the Goats, but that happens when “all the nations” will be gathered to appear before God in the final judgment – which is manifestly not at the second coming of Christ.
We see that the judgment at that time is about works, which matches what we are told about the final judgment of the unsaved at the Great White Throne: “…the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds. And the sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them; and they were judged, each one of them according to their deeds.” (Rev. 20:12-13) The sheep are those who are faithful obedient followers of Christ, as per John 10:26-28, and 10:16, and as such are the ones whose names are written in the book of life, as per Revelation 20:12 and 15.
However, again Rev. Formhals point on this proof #19 makes no sense, and certainly doesn’t support his PTR position. Whether there is a rapture before the Tribulation Period or not, there will still have to be a judgment to separate the saved from the unsaved, beginning with the rapture resurrection of Tribulation Period saints vs. the judgment of those left behind at the second coming of Christ. At that point it is called the first resurrection (Rev. 20:5-6), and the judgment Seat of Christ, when those who are living at that time, as well as those saved who are resurrected at that time, will be judge according to their works, not for their eternal destiny in heaven or hell (as that has already been determined), but for their reward (as per Rev. 11:18).
As is always the case, the claims for proofs for a Pre-tribulation Rapture never actually materialize when examined in the light of actual scripture and logical thought processes. The primary proof texts which are most often cited, which are mentioned or alluded to in these proofs discussed above, are Revelation 3:10 and 2 Thessalonian 2:7, discussed in detail in the following.
As is always the case with these many claims of proofs for the PTR view, they are in actuality just restatements of their ill-conceived misinterpretations of scripture and their misguided conclusions based on their scripturally unsupportable presuppositions – which they then call proofs – again, classic circular reasoning[1]. Any and every scripture is manipulated and interpreted to support or agree with their Pre-Tribulation Rapture theory, no matter what the texts actually say – which in actually not one actual passage of scripture states or even implies their premises. Conversely, the antithesis of their PTR conclusions is actually clearly and explicitly stated repeatedly in several passages when allowed to just speak for themselves. What can be clearer than Matthew 24:29-31 or Mark 13:24-25, combined with 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4, 1 Corinthians 15:51-52 and Revelation 6:12-17 and 11:15-19, without the need for any doctrinal presuppositions or manipulations of the wording:
- Matthew and Mark: after the Tribulation period
- 2 Thessalonians: not until the Antichrist appears setting himself up in the temple of God claiming to be God (the “abomination of desolation”)
- At the opening of the sixth seal – the day of the Lord’s wrath, the second coming of Christ;
- At the last trumpet, the 7th trumpet, when Christ returns to resurrect and reward his followers and to judge the unsaved world.
Without the help of human wisdom it is not a complicated or confusing subject, as God has made it abundantly clear, though as is often the case the truth does not tickle the ears of many hearers. No one wants to hear, or believe, that their faith could be so tested and tried as it will be in that horrible Tribulation Period (as it was for the early church, under Nero and Domitian, or for many around the world since then). They much prefer the escapist version, which does little or nothing to actually motivate them to live differently in preparedness for what we are warned about will eventually happen. Then the few preachers who actually take it seriously, but proclaim such an escapist message (which essentially says, “don’t worry, be happy, we won’t even be here when all this bad stuff happens”), wonder about and bemoan the fact that their followers don’t seem to be very interested or concerned about all this end times prophecy stuff – DUH! How is this going to work out for them? Or putting it another way, what could go wrong? The reality is, they are all without excuse – the message is clear enough, but they did not have ears to hear what the Spirit is saying to them.
Revelation 3:10
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 in 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[2];
““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)[3]
Here we find the exact same word, 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 (Dispensationalism and Pretribulation Rapture Theory).
2 Thessalonians 2:7
Another proof texts for this theory that the rapture precedes the whole Tribulation Period is 2Thessalonians 2:7:
“For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way.”
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).
The 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 it is 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.
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.
There are of course several other passages cited as proof texts for this Pre-tribulation Rapture view, which are addressed in the article “Proof Texts for the Pre-tribulation Rapture View Examined”. They include John 14:1, 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, and Revelation 4:1, none of which tell us that there is a rapture of the church before the 7-year Tribulation Period (the 70th week of Daniel) . The 1 Thessalonians passage actually tells us that rapture will occur at the second coming of Christ, when kept in the immediate context of the first 3 verses of the 5th chapter. When kept in the context of the other passages that reveal the timing of the resurrection associated with the rapture, such as 1 Corinthians 15:51-52, and Revelation 11:15-19, this resurrection/rapture is again located at the seventh Trumpet, the second coming of Christ at the end of that Tribulation Period.
See video for more: 7 Pretrib Problems and the Prewrath Rapture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwXoMNpOhos
[1] Circular Reasoning is when, “when the evidence offered to support a claim is just a repetition of the claim itself” or when “the same proposition occurs as both a premise and a conclusion—the argument validates itself. However, self-validation is poor reasoning: an argument’s claim needs to be supported by actual evidence.” An example is “A is true because B is true, and B is true because A is true” (from: https://www.scribbr.com/fallacies/circular-reasoning-fallacy/) . Another example would be: “The universe began with the Big Bang because astronomers detected residual radiation from the primordial explosion. How do you know that radiation is evidence of the Big Bang? Because the Big Bang theory correctly explains the origins of the universe.” (from https://practicalpie.com/circular-reasoning/).
[2] . 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.
[3] 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 