Having a Southern Baptist background, a pre-trib rapture has been tatooed into my head, yet scouting around this board has honestly caused me to want to look into the topic a bit more. Someone commented that most pre-trib writers write from a pre-trib presupposition. Pre-trib is assumed, so everything proceeds from that. As I checked out various authors and speakers, I got that same impression. Matthew 24 does seem to indicate the rapture after the tribulation, and nothing seems to really contradict that.
Can anyone elaborate (Biblically) as to how a pre-trib rapture is not Biblically possible at all, and can you suggest book or study on the issue?
Thanks.

__________________
Ralph
Pastor
Valera Baptist Church
Valera, Texas

Matthew 24 doesn't indicate any kind of rapture at all, there simply is not a rapture in Matthew or any of the other books of the Bible. That's the first myth that has to go.

__________________
Bob Vigneault C.O.L, L.E., G.E, Dr.O.P., O.U.T.
The Heartbeat of Heaven (blog)
Deacon/Christ Presbyterian Church, Janesville, WI OPC www.christ-opc.org

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

All of the events of Matthew 24 have to take place before many of the people who heard Jesus speak those things die. There is about a 40 year shelf life to the prophecies listed. The rapture doesn't come up in Matt 24. The rapture is a concocted sentiment based on a faulty interpretation of other scriptures.

Thanks for your opinion.
The gathering of the elect I can refer to as the "rapture."
I'm not talking about an issue of linguistics or words.
Your response was similar to those who endorse a pre-trib rapture. No Biblically explanatory discussion was provided, just a presupposition statement expressing an opinion or interpretation. I appreciate your response, but it was a bit vague.

The claim that premillennialism draws upon pre-trib premises is an odd way of phrasing it.

If you are talking about the view of people like my old prof, George Ladd, he was building upon the incohate notions of a millennium popular from the very beginning of the post apostolic era.

Bob Gundry's post-trib view is built on a solidly (but somewhat modified) dispensational framework. Ladd dismissed Gundry's book as dispi foolishness.

My preference for a non-premillennial book would be Riddlebarger's A Case for Amillennialism.

If you want arguments against the premill view, check out . . .

Critiques of Premillennialism
■Why the Early Church Finally Rejected Premillennialism -- Charles Hill
■Historical Contingencies and Biblical Predictions -- Richard Pratt
■Rapture and Resurrection -- Greg Bahnsen
■What's A Thousand Years Among Friends (Kim Riddlebarger)
■Problems With Premillennialism by Sam Storms

__________________
Dennis E. McFadden, Ex Mainline Baptist (in Remission)
Atherton Baptist Homes, CEO
First Baptist Church of Alhambra, Member, Transformation Ministries (CA)

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

IMHO, Pre-trib rapture is based on the dispensational premise of "two peoples of God," Israel (earthly) and the church (heavenly). In this scheme, the tribulation is viewed as Daniel's 70th week for Israel and the gentile church is not to be a part of it. So, the church must be removed -- and J. N. Darby accomplished this by a Pre-tribulation rapture as mis-interpreted from 1 Thess. 4.

__________________
Jim
1689 LBCF
Independent Bible Church
North Texas, USA

I'm sorry Pastor Ralph, I wasn't trying to be vague but only brief. I was speaking to only a very small part of the argument and the premise that there is no rapture in Matthew 24. Now you have given a scriptural reference and I'll be happy to speak to that. You said that you can refer to 'the gathering of the elect' as the rapture' but in doing that is to ignore the use of those words in other portions of scripture.

What tempts dispys to see a rapture here is not so much the word 'gather' but the word 'angels'. I don't think it's necessary to translate 'angelos' as the heavenly beings but as it's other meaning 'messengers'. The trumpet is the 'gospel message' calling God's scattered chosen.

The 'gathering' is just that, not a 'rapture' but a calling together of God's chosen who have been scattered to the four winds. Here are a bunch more verses speaking of this same gathering.

The fulfillment of these verses can be seen in these New Testament passages:

Dear Ralph,

Generally speaking, most Christians believe in a rapture of sorts, according to

1 Thessalonians 4:15-18
15For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. 16For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. 18Therefore comfort one another with these words.

It's the reaction against dispensationalism that denies this, rather than scriptural proof. The rapture, however, does not necessitate the seven year tribulation period. But to deny the rapture is to deny the hope that Paul confirms in this passage.
If one subscribes to a seven year tribulation period, then the answer will probably need to be found in Revelation, for that's where most of the credible evidence for a seven year tribulation period is found (not Daniel, but Rev. 11:3, 12:6). I can't help much beyond that because I really am still wondering if the seven year scenario is biblical, let alone the timing of the rapture. You're on solid footing with premillennialism though.

__________________
For the Glory of our King,
Joe Johnson
Slave of Christ, husband, father, Preacherboy at Cornerstone Community Church, Escanaba, MI. and TMS graduate. Personal website - SoundLife.org

I do not know, and I do not say, that a person cannot believe in Revelation and in evolution, too, for a man may believe that which is infinitely wise and also that which is only asinine. ~ CHS

There is no 'rapture' in the text 1 Thessalonians 4:15-18 and you are correct in noting that there is no 7 year period, before or after, in the context.

This is not the resurrected believers going up to heaven with Christ, this is the final coming of our Lord, the Victor, the Conqueror and just as the ancient hearers would have understood, His chosen are coming up to meet the King on his way to the earth. We aren't going, we're coming, in full procession, with the Victorious King.

Regardless of how you want to word it, it's still a rapture.

It doesn't necessitate a rapture in the dispensational sense. But it's been understood as a "rapture" since the early church. The Vulgate translated this rapiemur, which I understand is the the first person, plural, future, indicative, passive of the verb (rapturo, rapio, rapere, rapui, raptus). My Latin is in a rust bucket though.

"...dead in Christ will rise..." I think is pretty plain reference to a resurrection.
"...caught up....in the clouds....in the air..." Again, plain reading of the text indicates there is a catching up/away. It doesn't say "into heaven" though. It does refer to a meeting place not on the earth itself, and we do return with Him. It's not inappropriate to use the word "rapture" to describe it.
You can keep saying there is no "rapture" in the text, and that is true as far as the literal text, but you will not find the word "trinity" or "incarnate" in any text either. This does not stop me from referring to the Trinity or the incarnation of Christ.

I think I see what you're saying. The gathering of the elect does not specifically mean that the elect are literally picked up and carried into the air or clouds to meet the Lord, but that they could be gathered to an earthly location. And as a "dispy," no....I was focusing not on "angels" but on the word "gather" as well as the means...angels. The word "gather" is very generic in meaning.

I had not heard that one before.

Thanks for the info!

It might be helpful understanding that reformed theology, very generally, understands Christ to be ruling from Heaven, right now.

The invisible reign of Christ (He is in Heaven now) is being made visible on earth, mainly through His Body (the Church). This is a real rule, a "millennial" one in that it is "for the ages" and it is physically going on right now. It's not 1,000 years on man's (Julian?) calendar, but describes the complete period of time UNTIL Christ returns as judge.

At His second coming, all men will be raised, believers and unbelievers. This might be called a "rapture" of sorts because it is an incredible worldwide miracle of raising the dead to judgment, Christ coming in the air, etc.

So, when we use the word "rapture" as meaning a "catching away" something like that does occur at the second coming.

But, this is not to say what is often meant by the term "The rapture" by modern dispensational premillennialism. In that context, as you know from your background, it means a separate event, removing only Christians from the earth before the Lord's return with 7years (again according to man's calendar) of tribulation.

Reformed theology looks at the tribulations as over the history of His people on the earth, and not limited to 7 of man's years but from God's perfected view of history. Since God is eternal, it is hard for us as His creatures to really understand this.

I don't have all the details worked out, even in interpreting some of the apocalyptic passages. Some of the cataclysmic events represented happen either figuratively over time or in connection with the Second Coming.

Remember, "amillennialism" is a term assigned to it fairly recently in church history as a term created by modern dispensational premillenialism. Historically, what is now called amillennialism always believed in "millennium" but a realized, or present one.

Huge topic, but hope that is a helpful start.

__________________
Scott
PCA
North Carolina


"Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised)"
Hebrews 10:23

Now THAT is as plainspoken as it gets!

__________________
Todd K. Pedlar
member, First Congregational Church, (CCCC) Cresco, IA
http://inprincipiodeus.solideogloria.com
http://puritanwisdom.blogspot.com

"As God did not at first choose you because you were high, He will not now forsake you because you are low."
John Flavel in Keeping the Heart



Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

"caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air."

Pretty straightforward/plainspoken. The definition of the verb "caught up" is pretty plain too, according to the TDNT article above. I don't know why it has to be so difficult to simply see it as a rapture/catching up/snatching away. Sounds like an overreactive dispensationalismphobia of some sorts...

Joe, it's not that we are being dispy phobic, it's just that the dispys have OWNED that word and they have defined that word since Mr. Scoffield wrote his notes. Using the word now is like using the word 'gay'. As much as I miss the word that meant 'happy and carefree' I just can't get the same mileage out of the word anymore.

Rapture may mean 'caught up' or 'transport' and the Vulgate contained the word but the dispys have turned it into a word that either precedes, follows or cuts midway into a seven year period of tribulation. You may stubbornly use the word but it's just not efficient in meaning unless you are dispensational.

Stubbornly? Actually, I've heard many amils use the term without concern. I've heard them defend the rapture, the very word, as an eschatological event. And, I submit, it fits well in historical chiliasm, which is well within the realm of reformed theology.

That was helpful, Scott. Thank you!


Man, y'all have given me some new words to try out on folks.

Christ currently rules on earth, and it is a real rule? Interesting.
I can see that He rules within the body of Christ, but the body of Christ does not rule the earth, thus the earth is not under His rule (through the church) in an effective, practical sense. If it is a "reign" it can only be in a very loose sense of the word. I'll have to think on that one.
I'm not sure how Daniel's "weeks" should be divided up, but a PM I received got me to thinking about "tribulation" in general.
In Matt 24, it does seem logical that Christ was speaking of the generation contemporary with Him at that time. The time of tribulation would come before that generation passed away. It has happened, and that generation has passed away. But I can't help but notice the things Christ said which identifies the "end times," "signs of the times" or the "tribulation."
- False Christs & False Prophets (false religions....etc)
- War & international strife
- Famine & other type disasters
- Persecution (hated for His name's sake)
I also can't help but notice that these things began back then and still continue even today.
Then I noticed that the text doesn't say that "these things" will pass away, end or stop. The signs or indicators began, and have not stopped even to this day. If the tribulation has began, it is still going. Perhaps "the" is not a good way to refer to this tribulation. Perhaps Christ was simply saying that tribulation was to come and would continue until His return. Or perhaps "the" tribulation is "great" not only due to the events, but the length of time.
It is ended at the return of Christ for the sake of the elect who are then gathered. Maybe?

That is a very real rule. When He was raised He was confirmed as Lord, King, Ruler, Sovereign over all things heavenly and earthly. All things are under his feet, subject to him. Nothing happens outside of his sphere of rule, power and authority. He has been building his church. We used to hide in catacombs, now we freely preach the Gospel to the world.

Yes, I agree with that. That's not exactly what I meant.
If you believe Christ has always existed (in the beginning with God) then He has always reigned in that sense....He has always been soverign over all things heavenly and earthly since the beginning. All things were created through Him, for Him, and he upholds all things by the word of His power. I wasn't speaking in that sense, but I do agree.
Yes, we did used to hide in catacombs. In some places we freely preach the gospel....but in some places we do not. We DO preach, but not freely and without restraint. There is still persecution of Christians around the world...if all of it was reported we would be shocked. There are also many areas of the world where to share the gospel is to risk one's life.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,536238,00.html
Even here in the U.S.A. there is growing resistance to the public sharing of the gospel and expression of our faith.
Thanks for your input.
I appreciate y'alls patience and courtesy.