There are, and always have been, different ways of interpreting and understanding scripture, which we refer to as their “Theology”. Men have developed systematic approaches to some of these various Theologies, which are referred to as “Systematic Theology”.

            Inasmuch as God’s revealed truth about reality or absolute truth, is one fully integrated whole with many parts, or elements, or aspects of that whole truth, our understanding of those revelations in His word must be systematic, such that all the parts are working together without inconsistencies or contradictions. If one’s beliefs in one area or aspect of their theology conflicts with their beliefs in another, such a belief system cannot be based on reality or absolute truth, and cannot accurately reflect the revealed truth of God’s word. However, men have developed different approaches and thus different understandings of God’s revelations in scripture resulting in various schools of Systematic Theology.

            With respect to this whole area of prophecy, and end time prophecy in particular, there are significant differences just between those who claim to believe the whole Bible is inspired by God (which many would-be theologians do not), including many of those who would claim to interpret the Bible literally, to varying degrees. Within those categories the majority are primarily divided between two schools of Systematic Theology. One is known as “Covenant Theology”, the other is “Dispensational Theology” or just “Dispensationalism”. These two schools are largely the product of different methods of interpretation of scripture, Dispensationalism being more literal than Covenant Theology, especially with respect to prophetic passages. Covenant Theology is closely associated with what is known as “Reformed Theology” (also known as Calvinism), which applies the allegorical approach to much of scripture. This is especially the case when it comes to the understanding of Israel vs. the Church, and prophecy about the end times. These schools of Theology are defined and discussed further in another article, “Dispensationalism vs. Covenant Theology”, but the focus here is on the eschatological distinctions mostly of Dispensationalism.

            By the 3rd- 4th century, in an age after AD 70 (when the Roman General Vespasian completely destroyed Jerusalem), and AD 132 (when Hadrian finished eliminating Israel) there was no nation Israel, and no sign of her return to significant status as a national entity. Thus, prophecy that was about the nation Israel and her restoration in the land seemed quite unbelievable.  Hence, even though the premillennial interpretations (Christ’s return before the Millennium) were predominant in the early church before Augustine, it is understandable that brilliant scholars, such as Philo, Clement and Origen (all of Alexandria) and Augustine would find a way to interpret scripture such that it would make more sense to them, and be more believable.  Hence the allegorical school of interpretation was developed.  Augustine applied it to apocalyptic prophecy, and it became the mainstream view for centuries. 

            This method of interpretation was applied to the interpretations of the biblical covenants by some of the very prominent reformers during the 16^th century Protestant Reformation (such as Calvin and Zwingli), in particular with respect to the New Covenant of the New Testament, versus the Old Covenant of the Mosaic Law of the Old Testament. These non-literal interpretations of course, applied to the definitions of “the Church” versus “Israel” in this present Church age, give a very different understanding of the what scripture teaches about them, and in particular how God is going to deal with them in the future. To the Covenant Theologian, and the Reformed Theologian, there is no “Israel” as distinct from the Church, inasmuch as the references to Israel in the New Testament are taken allegorically rather than literally – even with respect to her restoration as God’s people.  This was the mainstream view even up to and beyond the Reformation, as it is today in the Reformed Church community.

            In light of these trends in the church down through the centuries to move away from the literal interpretation of scripture toward more allegorical approaches, perhaps we owe a debt of gratitude to such men as Pierre Poiret (1646-1719) and John Edwards (1639-1716), and Isaac Watts (1674-1748), and John Darby and the Plymouth Brethren (mid 1800s), for returning to a more literal approach to understanding Bible prophecy.  These early Dispensationalists (with the help of the very popular Scofield Reference Bible) brought at least the mainline conservative evangelical element of Christianity back to the understanding that what God promised to the nation Israel is still applicable to the nation Israel – literal Israel in the ethnic sense (Reformed Theologians call this being “woodenly literal”). They revived the belief of the early church that Christ will return to earth and will reign on this earth for a literal thousand-year period – as opposed to the belief of Covenant and Reformed Theologians that interpret the Millennium allegorically as figurative, many believing it is the age we are in now.  Based on their more literal Dispensational approach, we now have many teachers and preachers and theologians who believe that these end-times prophecies are about future events, which will be literally fulfilled, and therefore have real significance and meaning to us today.

            Dispensationalists have kept up with developments of the 19th and much of the 20th century because of their more literal approach – such as recognizing ethnic Israel among other developments as fulfillment of prophecy.. However, their failure to be consistent in applying that literal approach, and to keep up with evolving developments, has resulted in significant errors both logically and scripturally.  Again, as is typically the case, scripturally unsupportable presuppositions of the Dispensational System of Theology have led them to engage in eisegesis and forced interpretations of a number of key prophetic passages and certain critical aspects of Revelation.  The result is a false scenario that is deceptively optimistic and escapist in nature, which may well account for much of its popularity with modern Evangelicals.  Unfortunately, such mistakes may have serious consequences for those actually living in those last few years when the most intense developments are happening rapidly, and they fail to recognize them for what they are because they have been led to believe that they will be raptured out before such events are to occur.

            Briefly, what we are referring to by this name, “Dispensationalism” is defined as follows:

“A dispensation is a way of ordering things—an administration, a system, or a management. In theology, a dispensation is the divine administration of a period of time; each dispensation is a divinely appointed age…
Dispensationalists hold to a literal interpretation of the Bible as the best hermeneutic. The literal interpretation gives each word the meaning it would commonly have in everyday usage. …
Dispensational theology teaches that there are two distinct peoples of God: Israel and the Church. Dispensationalists believe that salvation has always been by grace through faith alone—in God in the Old Testament and specifically in God the Son in the New Testament. Dispensationalists hold that the Church has not replaced Israel in God’s program and that the Old Testament promises to Israel have not been transferred to the Church. Dispensationalism teaches that the promises God made to Israel in the Old Testament (for land, many descendants, and blessings) will be ultimately fulfilled in the 1000-year period spoken of in Revelation 20. Dispensationalists believe that, just as God is in this age focusing His attention on the Church, He will again in the future focus His attention on Israel (see Romans 9–11 and Daniel 9:24).
Dispensationalists understand the Bible to be organized into seven dispensations: Innocence (Genesis 1:1—3:7), Conscience (Genesis 3:8—8:22), Human Government (Genesis 9:1—11:32), Promise (Genesis 12:1—Exodus 19:25), Law (Exodus 20:1—Acts 2:4), Grace (Acts 2:4—Revelation 20:3), and the Millennial Kingdom (Revelation 20:4–6). Again, these dispensations are not paths to salvation, but manners in which God relates to man. Each dispensation includes a recognizable pattern of how God worked with people living in the dispensation. That pattern is 1) a responsibility, 2) a failure, 3) a judgment, and 4) grace to move on.
Dispensationalism, as a system, results in a premillennial interpretation of Christ’s second coming and usually a pretribulational interpretation of the rapture. To summarize, dispensationalism is a theological system that emphasizes the literal interpretation of Bible prophecy, recognizes a distinction between Israel and the Church, and organizes the Bible into different dispensations or administrations.”

(Got Questions: https://www.gotquestions.org/dispensationalism.html)

            Again, the critical difference giving rise to this system of Theology is the method of interpretation – a more literal approach. When we see all the promises made to the people group known in the Bible as Israel, it becomes obvious that the Covenant Theologians are not interpreting them as literal in any sense of the word – but they interpret them according to their presupposed system of theology (such as the “decrees of God” of Calvinism, and the two or three overarching covenants of Covenant Theology, which are nowhere literally articulated as such in scripture). Similarly, when we see literally interpreted scripture being fulfilled with the restoration of Israel as a national people group, and Jerusalem the center of attention globally, the whole rationale for the allegorical approach to interpreting prophetic scripture becomes untenable.

            However, as men are prone to do, Dispensational Theologians have fallen into some of the same traps as their predecessors and theological opponents. In developing their somewhat reactionary and reformative new system of Theology they have succumbed to the human tendency to be a little creative in making their own contributions to what could be called a strictly literal approach to understanding what is actually written in God’s inspired word. In their zeal for coming up with a better more scriptural Systematic Theology, they have come up with very non literal principles, or assumptions, which then underly their own system – not unlike those of the other schools of Theology. While their claim is that they are taking a literal approach, in fact they also take liberties with respect to the interpretations of many, if not most of the passages of scripture dealing with such issues as the second coming of Christ and the rapture of the church. A very prominent highly regarded (by many) spokesman for their Dispensational school, and what has become its stepchild, the Pretribulation Rapture (PTR) view, Dr. Dwight D. Pentecost, actually makes a rather bold statement, which is in reality an admission of this fact:  

“Pretribulation rapturism rests essentially on one major premise – the literal method of interpretation of the Scriptures.  As a necessary adjunct to this, the pretribulationist believes in a dispensational interpretation of the Word of God.” (Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come, XIII, I., p. 193. Emphasis added).

           First, it should be noted that he recognizes the distinction between a “literal method of interpretation of the Scriptures”, and “a dispensational interpretation”. While as discussed above, the dispensational approach is certainly for more literal in its interpretation of scripture than the other alternatives (Covenant or Reformed Theology), it does include several prominent principles, or presuppositions, which are not derived from literal scripture. It is those very presuppositions which give rise to their controversial Pretribulation Rapture theory. Briefly, as related to this subject of end times prophecy, and in particular the Rapture of the church, they are as follows:

1. God has a separate program for His chosen people Israel, as per the Old Testament covenants, and His church, as per the New Covenant of the New Testament.
2. The prophetic time table laid out in the 70 weeks of Daniel, are about God’s program for Israel, not the church – which features 69 weeks (69×7=483 years) up to Christ’s first advent, the 70^th being the final week (7 years) to be fulfilled in the future 7-year Tribulation Period, before Christ’s return (called “the second coming”).
3. The church age interrupts God’s program for Israel, being the prolonged present age between the 69^th week and 70^th week of Daniel, in which God’s program for the church is carried out – there is no distinction made between saved Israel and the church during that time.
4. The 70^th week of Daniel, the Tribulation Period, is when God resumes His program with ethnic national Israel only, not the church, thus the church cannot be present on earth during that period as it is the day of His wrath, a time of His judgment on unsaved Israel.
5. Thus, the church must be raptured out before that 70^th week, or Tribulation Period begins.
6. Thus, there are two future comings of Christ, one to the air to rapture the church before the Tribulation Period, another to earth 7 years later at the end of that Tribulation Period which is called the second coming.
7. There will be those saved during the Tribulation Period but they will not be included in the church (which has been raptured) but are “Tribulation Period Saints”.
8. There will be a second rapture and resurrection of Tribulation Period Saints, at the second coming of Christ.

            Sound arguments based on literal interpretations of scripture can be and have been made for the first 3 tenets above. The same cannot be said for the last five. They are based on the logic of the men who have come up with them, but not on any literally interpreted scripture. It is a purely human line of reasoning that the 70^th week of Daniel, the Tribulation Period, is only for Israel and not the church (#4 above). Pentecost explains this as follows:

“Since it [the church] had no part in the first sixty-nine weeks, which are related only to God’s program for Israel, it can have no part in the seventieth week, which is again related to God’s program for Israel after the mystery program for the church has been concluded.” (Pentecost, p. 297)

            That logic sounds reasonable, and is obviously very convincing to many, but the same can be said for the other views, including those of the Covenant Theology school leading to their Amillennialism (no literal Millennium) or Postmillennialism (Christ’s return after the Millennium), or for the several views on the rapture of the church. The biggest problem is that the conclusions derived from such doctrinal presuppositions do then conflict with actual explicit scripture interpreted literally, requiring considerable manipulation and misinterpretation of literal scripture to support those conclusions.

            In fact, the distinction between Israel and the Church may not be that clear after Christ’s first advent, up until after His second coming, and the establishment of His kingdom on earth. Daniel’s prophecy in Daniel 9 does not indicate that the 70^th week is only about ethnic Israel at the exclusion of the church – that is a piece of eisegesis introduced by the Dispensationalists. While scripture does clearly teach that Israel as God’s chosen people were “broken off” so that the Gentiles could be “grafted in”, it also tells us that those Gentiles became “partakers with them”, and that “if [they] were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree?” Paul goes on to explain it further: “that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; and so all Israel will be saved” (Romans 11:17-26a). This is clearly descriptive of the present church age and continues until “the fullness of the Gentiles has come in”. But even the Dispensationalists, Pretrib. Rapturists recognize that the time of the Gentiles continues up to the second coming of Christ at the end of the Tribulation Period – not seven years before. Thus, it is not until after that pivotal event that the so-called program for Israel resumes, the church being raptured and the Millennial age begins.

            In this church age then there is no distinction between Jews and Gentiles as far as the church goes, only believers vs. unbelievers. There is also no literal scripture which tells us this changes, until the second coming of Christ. But then, neither is there any literally interpreted scripture which even implies that there will be two raptures, one before the Tribulation Period and another at the end. The only indication we actually have in scripture about when this Tribulation Period, the 70^th week of Daniel commences, is the 7-year covenant the Antichrist will make with Israel, according to Daniel 9:27. The notion that the church won’t be present on the earth when that all happens is entirely an artifact of man-made theological presuppositions, unless we accept their very non-literal interpretations of numerous passages of scripture, by applying what Pentecost admits is the “necessary adjunct” to literal interpretation, “a dispensational interpretation”. Why the need for the “adjunct”? If the presuppositions he refers to as the “adjunct” were based on literal interpretations of scripture, they would not be “adjuncts”.

            Without these “dispensational interpretations” (as invoked by Pentecost) applied to literal scripture, what we have clearly described and explained in primary passages on this subject (such as the Olivet Discourse recorded in the Synoptic Gospels, especially Matthew 24), is a future return of Christ to rapture His church, the “elect”, and then pour out His “day of the Lord” judgment on the unsaved world, the ones “left behind”.

            There are numerous passages which indicate or refer to the return of Christ, and several that are about the rapture of the church and the day of judgment of the earth and those left in it after the rapture. None of those tell us that these are separate events separated by a 7-year Tribulation Period – though many are made to say that by the insertions, additions, and inaccurate exegesis of the literal texts, based on those dispensational distinctives, or their doctrinal presuppositions. There are however only a few which actually address the question of the timing of this rapture of the church in relation to the Tribulation Period and the second coming of Christ in judgment. They include the accounts of the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24:29-31, Mark 13:24-27, and Luke 21:25-28. These concur with the other few passages which actually do address this specific subject: 1 Thessalonians 4:16 – 5:11, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12, 1 Corinthians 15:51-51, Revelation 11:15-19 and 2 Peter 3:10-13. There is no need for any doctrinal presuppositions or “adjuncts”, either Dispensational, Covenant, or any other additions to or subtractions from, or forced interpretations of words or phrases, to get the clear and unambiguous answer to the question at hand. It is necessary however, to let scripture define such key expressions as “the day of the Lord”, “the wrath of God” or “the day of the Lord’s wrath”, or “the last trumpet”, or “the thief in the night”. That is exactly what men do not do, but instead develop their own definitions of these terms, and on that basis make all these passages conform to their doctrinal presuppositions. The Pretribulation Rapture theory is demonstrably a product of such a non-literal approach, contrary to their claims.  

            One of the many rather apparent logical contradictions of this Dispensational PTR view, which is also a contradiction of clear scripture, is as follows:

• The whole 7-year Tribulation Period is what is meant by the “day of the Lord” which is also “the day of the Lord’s wrath” or just “the wrath of God”.
• There will be many “Tribulation Saints” – saved believers, on earth during that 7-year period.
• There will be many martyrs among those “Tribulation Saints” who will be persecuted by the Antichrist and his followers – many will be beheaded as per Rev. 20:4.
• According to their definitions, God will be pouring out His wrath on those saved followers of Christ, not the Antichrist and his followers, until the very end at the second coming.

            This is one of the artifacts of their extra-biblical definitions of those key phrases, and the invention of a separate body of believers known by them as the “Tribulation Period saints”, to distinguish them from the normal use of that key word “saints” throughout the rest of the New Testament always referring to the church. Other than the fact that the generation of the church still alive on earth during that Tribulation Period will indeed be “Tribulation Saints”, no such distinction is coming from literal scripture. It is entirely a force interpretation, along with the definitions of the day of the Lord and the wrath of God, to accommodate their doctrinal presuppositions and PTR theory. Ironically one of the arguments put forth by many of these PTR advocates, such as Tim LaHaye, is that God would not allow His people, the church, to go through all the terrible things that will happen during that Tribulation Period (an absurdity in itself in light of the persecution and suffering of martyrs all through church history including many today). Yet, according to them, He will be allowing saved believers, His faithful followers, to go through it all during that Tribulation Period, even what they themselves are calling the wrath of God.

            If we are to be consistent in sticking with the literal method of interpretation of scripture, it makes a whole lot more sense, without such glaring contradictions. First, as per all the Old Testament prophecies, there is a future day of judgment referred to by Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Zephaniah, Zechariah and Malachai, as well as several New Testament references in Acts, 1 Corinthians, 1^st and 2^nd Thessalonians, and 2 Peter. as “the day of the Lord”. None of these depict or describe it as a prolonged period of time involving natural disasters, Satan’s working persecuting God’s people (as per the Antichrist), let alone a 1000 year perfect blissful reign of Christ on earth – as per the PTR definitions. Thus, no absurd contradictions about the wrath of God being poured out on His own people, but completely consistent with every description of the future second coming (only one second coming) of Christ, and the outpouring of God’s wrath on the Antichrist and the unsaved world. Also completely consistent with explicit descriptions of the rapture – one rapture – of the church before God pours out His wrath on that unsaved world, the kingdom of the Antichrist, such as is clearly articulated in the accounts of the Olivet Discourse in the Gospels (Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21), as well as 1 Thessalonians 4:13 – 5:12, and 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12.

            For those who truly love the truth, who are diligently seeking the truth from God’s word, as opposed to the more palatable teachings of men (“tickling the ears”), one key passage is enough to discern what is going on here – that is the following:

“¹ Now we ask you, brothers and sisters, regarding the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, ² that 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. ³ No 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, ⁴ 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. ⁵ Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things? ⁶ And you know what restrains him now, so that he will be revealed in his time. ⁷ For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is removed. ⁸ Then that lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will eliminate with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming; ⁹ that is, the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and false signs and wonders, ¹⁰ and with all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not accept the love of the truth so as to be saved. ¹¹ For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, ¹² in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness.” (2 Thessalonians 2:1-12)

            Here the clear reference to the rapture of the church of verse 1 (even per the PTR advocates) is also referred to as “the day of the Lord” in verse 2, unless we obscure or just ignore this obvious fact – which is what PTR advocates do. Then it goes on to warn us against exactly what is going on today, don’t let anyone deceive you, which is then followed by the clearest possible explanation about this critical, controversial question, as to when will it happen. The very literal and explicit answer: it (the rapture of the church) won’t happen until the great apostasy which is associated with the appearance of the Antichrist setting himself up in the temple of God claiming to be God. This is a clear reference to what even the PTR advocates recognize as the “abomination of desolation” event prophesied by Daniel (9:2 and 11:31) referred to by Jesus in Matthew 24:15. Again, even per the PTR interpretations, this salient prophetic event is to happen at the midpoint of the Tribulation Period (based on the 42 months and 1260 days of Revelation 11). Then, if we let scripture interpret scripture, Revelation 11:15-19, verse 18 in particular, we see this rapture/resurrection event happening at the end of that 7-year period (i.e. Posttribulational), at the second coming of Christ (the one and only “second coming” of Christ). It couldn’t be made much clearer.

            However, here is a perfect example of how those doctrinal presuppositions, such as what is called “a dispensational adjunct” or “dispensational distinctives”, alter the interpretation of this key passage on this controversial subject. First, the verses following that 1^st verse can’t be about the rapture of the church of that introductory verse – the subject of those following verses must change beginning with the second verse. Why? Because of the a priori supposition of a pre-tribulation rapture of the church, which must be read into this passage, as well as every other passage on the subject. Second, contrary to what one would think just reading the passage, the “day of the Lord” of the second verse is not about the rapture of the church of the first verse – actually it is entirely different. According to their contrived definition it is about the whole 7-year period that, according to them, follows that rapture of the church (of the first verse). But furthermore, that “day of the Lord” is also not about the second coming of Christ (as per all the other references to it in prophetic scripture) which is obviously at the end of the Tribulation Period. Instead, it is the whole Tribulation Period, according to their definition. Thus, it is not a “day of wrath” but actually 1007 years, according to most PTR advocates, which will also include the 1000 years of a perfect reign of Christ on this earth. A very strange definition of the day of the Lord’s wrath.

            This means that if one can follow what they are saying, Paul is supposedly telling us here in 2 Thessalonians 2 that the Tribulation Period – their definition of “the day of the Lord” of verse 2, can’t happen until after this “abomination of desolation” event, which happens at the midpoint of that same Tribulation Period. So then, the whole tribulation Period happens after the midpoint of the Tribulation Period – what could be wrong with that? It should be obvious that such an interpretation is not what God is telling us through the Apostle Paul. However, what he is telling us is quite clear – no need for help from the likes of Dispensational distinctives.

            Of course, this gives rise to another distortion of not only this passage, but all the other related passages, if taken literally as they are written. While this verse tells us about a great “apostasy” which will happen before that “day of the Lord” rapture of the church, PTR advocates tell us there will be a great revival, or that throngs will be coming to Christ during that Tribulation Period. Again, this is eisegesis, reading into scripture something that is nowhere stated, or even necessarily implied. Certainly, there is nothing even suggesting that those left behind at the rapture of the church will be coming to Christ in droves, or that there will even be such an opportunity for them. This is entirely an invented artifact of their PTR theory.

            Some, such as Tim LaHaye, even go so far as to tell us that this “apostasy” is actually the rapture of the church – with which many disagree, especially the Greek scholars. Others posit other theories, including the Catholic and very liberal Protestant churches of our time, but such are not at all unique to this end time Tribulation Period. It may be best again to let scripture interpret scripture as Jesus, describing these end time events, said that “…at that time many will fall away and will deliver up one another and hate one another. And many false prophets will arise, and will mislead many.” (Matthew 24:10-11). Thus we are told that there will be a great turning away from the faith, which is what the word “apostasy” necessarily means.

            However, while scripture is clear that there will be many saved followers of Christ when He returns, as in those raptured and resurrected at that time, nothing literally predicts this last days world-wide evangelism with many coming to Christ during that Tribulation Period (although some passages are being interpreted to mean even many Jews will be repenting and coming to faith in Christ when they see Him returning). Again, we have the doctrinal presuppositions driving interpretations of what is actually written. We are explicitly told is that there will be the 144,000 obedient followers of Christ (Revelation 7 and 14), but we are told they will be sealed by God with a seal of protection. If they are to be associated with the “Woman” of Revelation 12, they will be sequestered away and protected supernaturally by God, such the enemy (Satan) can’t get to them. There is not a word about them being “Jehovah’s witnesses” or doing any preaching or evangelizing, which if they were they would surely incur the persecution of the Antichrist, as will the other believers in that age (such as “the rest of her children, who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus” of Revelation 12:17), or the two resurrected “witnesses” of 11:3-13. We are told by the PTR advocates that many will be coming to Christ because of the preaching of those two witnesses, but while that could be true there is nothing telling us that in the inspired Word of God. Rather we are told that when the “beast” overcomes them and kills them, “those who live on the earth will rejoice over them and celebrate; and they will send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who live on the earth” (Revelation 11:10). Although it does say that there were those in Jerusalem who survive the massive earthquake at that time, who come to fear God and give Him glory, this doesn’t sound much like a massive world-wide day of revival and repentance, as is being claimed.

            Finally, the angel that appears in Revelation 12:6-8 is appearing after Christ has appeared at the second coming with the 144,000 on Mount Zion (also after the second coming of chapter 11). While that angel is said to have an eternal gospel to preach, the aspect of that gospel, and thus the message it proclaims is that “the hour of His judgment has come” (14:7) – not is coming soon, but “has come”. By this time it is a little late for a massive evangelistic revival, but more of a pronouncement of condemnation on those who refused to repent and thus worship God – like those actually mentioned in the previous chapter, 11:10 (cited above), or those addressed in the rest of this 14^th chapter (Babylon, and those who take the mark of the beast). Again, there is nothing there telling us, or even necessarily implying, that there will be any kind of massive conversion of unbelievers at that time. Thus, such creative, or even possibly logical explanations are purely speculative, and unnecessary – except to accommodate the Dispensational presuppositions and PTR theory.

            However, even if such speculations and additions to scripture were true, it would do nothing to support the pre-tribulation rapture theory as opposed to the post-tribulation pre-wrath interpretation. In fact, it makes much more sense, without so many contradictions and forced manipulations of scripture, to see such a time of evangelism and mass conversions occurring in the last days of this present church age, just before that “day of the Lord” second coming of Christ. And, most significantly, according to literal scripture, just taken at face value letting it speak for itself (without the help of doctrinal presuppositions), that is exactly how it is portrayed in scripture – except for the part about a second-chance conversion of masses of unbelievers left behind at a Pretribulation Rapture. It indeed could be that all these witnesses and angels will lead many to Christ before He comes again, though we are not told such in explicit scripture that I can find. Such would be very consistent with the view that “the day of the Lord” will be a day of salvation, or “redemption” for all of God’s people (Luke 21:28), Jew and Gentile, the “elect”, also referred to as “the church”. It will be that much anticipated hope of all believers, the “redemption” or rescuing us from that judgment which is also part of that same “day of the Lord” event, the second coming of Christ. PTR adherents refer to these two aspects as “phases” of that future second coming of Christ, which is not itself inaccurate, except that they insert between the two phases the 7-year Tribulation Period, based entirely on their doctrinal, Dispensational presuppositions – which they call “adjuncts” or “distinctives”.

            Based on such extra-biblical distinctives they have to come up with the following list of additions to or modifications of the literal approach or literal interpretation of scripture:

• The church cannot be present on earth during the 7-year Tribulation Period.
• The church is not in the Olivet Discourse of Matthew 24, Mark 13, or Luke 21.
• The church is not in Revelation 4-18, because the Greek word for “church”, “ekklesia” does not appear there – though the church is in chapters 19-22, even though the same word does not appear there either (nor in Mark, Luke, John, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, or Jude), and despite what appears to be the raptured/resurrected church at the judgment Seat of Christ, in Revelation 11:18.
• The “elect” in Matthew 24:31 and Mark 13:27 is not the church, as it is in all the other New Testament passages where the same Greek word appears.
• The “second coming” of Christ is actually not one but two future comings of Christ, one only to the air to rapture the church, the second to the earth (Moun Zion, or Mount of Olives) to judge the earth.
• There will actually be not a rapture, but two raptures, one before the 7-year Tribulation Period (Pretribulational), another at the end of that period (Posttribulational) at the second coming of Christ in judgment.
• The rapture of the church is not even mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels, or in the book of Revelation, unless we accept LaHaye’s unique and very forced interpretation of Revelation 4:1.

            These then are the Dispensational distinctives, or doctrinal presuppositions, which give rise to, or are necessary to accommodate the Pretribulation Rapture view. They are designed to make that view appear to fit what we are actually told in scripture. It should be noted that the Posttribulation Prewrath Rapture view does not require or accept any of these very extrabiblical presuppositions. According to that view there is one second return of Christ at the “day of Lord”. At that time the church consisting of saved Jews and Gentiles of both before and during that Tribulation Period (they are all still the church) will be rapture/resurrected. This happens just before He pours out His judgment (the “wrath of God”) on the Beast, the Antichrist, and his followers, all those left behind at the rapture. All this happens, exactly as literally portrayed in scripture, at the last trumpet (of Revelation 11:15-19), the end of that 7-year Tribulation Period, the rapture happening just before the judgment on the unsaved world. Such an interpretation requires no presuppositions which are not explicitly supported by literal scripture. It requires no forced and unnatural interpretations or translations of the words used in scripture, other than the interpretations which come from letting scripture interpret scripture. It is not dependent upon the questionable logic of men, other than that which is articulated in the inspired text. The question is, will we let God’s word speak – or as He puts it several times, will we have ears to hear what the Spirit is saying? Or, will we rather be like those we are warned about in 2 Timothy:

“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires; and will turn away their ears from the truth, and will turn aside to myths.” (2 Timothy 4:3-4)