Thursday, May 16, 2013

Preterism vs. Futurism: Disarming the Rapture


Lately, I have been writing articles for the Preterism vs. Futurism series. Truthfully, any article I write in support of Preterism (i.e., all of them) can technically fall in this category, but this series is designed to target select beliefs popular to Futurism. Thus, what better topic to tackle than the rapture?

In fact, I was recently sharing my thoughts with a friend of mine. She was curious about a comment I made pertaining to the rapture and asked for elaboration. Not too long after that, I was engaged in a debate with someone in regards to the pre-tribulation rapture. So, given the topic's current relevance in my life, why not go ahead and write about it?

I had considered giving you a history lesson on the origin of the rapture, but as I try to keep these articles relatively short I thought it best to leave such research up to you (just ask if you'd like some sources and I will be more than happy to help). Instead, I would like to focus on the doctrine itself, specifically the pre-tribulation rapture since it is the most popular.


Pre-tribulation Rapture Defined

According to the Dispensational view, Daniel's 70th week (Daniel 9:24-27) is separated from the rest of the weeks by a gap of nearly 2,000 years and counting. This final week is the tribulation period, they claim. This gap is not supported by any verse in any book of the Bible, however. Personally, I believe Daniel 9:24-27 find completion through Christ. Dispensationalists, however, turn this into a prophecy about the Antichrist. If you'd like to read my refutation of their gap theory, I encourage you to check out my article on the abomination of desolation.

With this 70th week supposedly yet future to us living today, Dispensationalists await the day in which the bodies of believers are teleported out of here to literally meet Christ in the air. The fact that this supposedly happens before the tribulation means it's a pre-tribulation rapture. Pretty simple, right? However, the doctrine isn't actually in the Bible. And I don't mean the fact that the word “rapture” isn't in the Bible; the concept itself isn't there, either.


Disarming the Rapture

1 Thessalonians 4 is perhaps the most commonly used chapter for rapture defense. By observing verses 13 through 17, we will be able to see if the pre-tribulation rapture view fits with the text.

13But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. 14For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 15For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. (1 Thessalonians 4:13-17)

Things to observe from this passage: 1) This “hope” concerns them which sleep; 2) Those who “sleep in Jesus” will be raised; 3) Those who are alive will not precede the dead; 4) Christ will come with a shout, the voice of the archangel, and the trump of God; 5) They would be caught up in the clouds.

First, we need to understand what Paul meant when he used the word “hope” in verse 13. For this, we move to the book of Acts:

6But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question. (Acts 23:6)

15And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust. (Acts 24:15)

Could it be that this hope is the same hope of Israel, promised to their fathers?

6And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God, unto our fathers: 7Unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come. For which hope's sake, king Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews. 8Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead? (Acts 26:6-8)

If Paul is writing of the hope of Israel (Israel had a number of hopes, I might add), and that hope is the resurrection of the dead, how can one place this event before the time of tribulation? Revelation 20 places this resurrection at Christ's parousia, not seven years prior. In fact, so does Paul (1 Thessalonians 4:16). This covers points one through three in our list, for we know the resurrection to be when the dead are raised, and if the dead are not raised until Christ's coming in judgment, then truly there can be no pre-tribulation rapture!

This brings us to our fourth point, in which we noted that Christ will “descend from heaven with a shout, the voice of the archangel, and the trump of God. Rapture doctrine revolves around this idea of a “secret,” or “silent” rapture, yet Christ's descent sounds awful noisy! This idea of a “secret” rapture comes from some verses claiming Christ will come like a “thief in the night” (1 Thessalonians 5:2; 2 Peter 3:10; Revelation 3:3). We will identify the details of 1 Thessalonians 4:16 in just a moment, but first it is important to know if the so-called “rapture” is silent, or secret. Turning to 1 Thessalonians 5, we can accurately answer this question, starting with the second verse:

2For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh a thief in the night. 3For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as a travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape. (1 Thessalonians 5:2-3)

The trick is to catch why the day of the Lord will come upon them as a thief in the night. Notice that these people have let their guard down, assuming there is peace and safety. This is when the day of the Lord strikes, and because they would be unaware, it would be as though they were robbed while sleeping. This is reinforced as we continue reading:

4But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. 5Ye are all the children of the light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. (1 Thessalonians 5:4-5).

Did you catch it? Those at the church in Thessalonica are described as not in darkness, which means the day of the Lord would not come as a thief in the night. Paul then tells them to remain sober and watchful (1 Thessalonians 5:6). It would seem as though the day of the Lord, when the resurrection would occur, would be a day that could be watched for. If this day came as a thief to all, why would Paul tell them to watch for it? He plainly tells them they are not in darkness, the very same darkness that would cause many to be caught off guard.

It seems clear that rapture advocates misidentify the resurrection, and in doing so neglect the manner in which it occurs. This can be further understood by properly identifying the Lord's shout and trump of God upon his coming. Why the voice of an Archangel? What about the trump of God?

The first verse that comes to my mind in regards to an archangel is Daniel 12:1. In this verse, we read of Michael the archangel standing up at the time of tribulation, when those written in the book of life are delivered. This deliverance, and the reference to the archangel, can both be found in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17. First, it is necessary to read the verse in the book of Daniel:

1And at that time Michael the great prince shall stand up, that stands over the children of thy people: and there shall a time of tribulation, such tribulation as has not been from the time that there was a nation on the earth until that time: at that time, thy people shall be delivered, even everyone that is written in the book. (Daniel 12:1)

For the Lord to come with the voice of the archangel may very well be seen as representative of deliverance. It seems likely to me that Paul was drawing from this imagery to make such a connection. As such, the day of the Lord, the resurrection, while certainly a time of judgment, is also a time of deliverance. To add to that, this deliverance occurs at the last trump:

51Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. (1 Corinthians 15:51-52)

If there is a last trump, then we can expect a first trump. After all, if something is going to be labeled quantitatively, we should expect there to be more than one. If there were just one trumpet, it would be first and last, the only one. Yet, Paul distinguishes this trump from others, labeling it as the last trump. He also calls this a “mystery.” Of course, we know this mystery to be the resurrection. Therefore, what is left is for us to discern the number of trumps there actually are. To do so, we need to dive into the book of Revelation.

2And I saw the seven angels which stood before God; and to them were given seven trumpets. (Revelation 8:2)

It seems there are seven angels with seven trumpets, which means the last trump must be the seventh. Simple enough. In relation to this, consider the following verse:

7But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets. (Revelation 10:7)

Both Paul and John record the seventh trump to reveal the “mystery.” I believe it is a mistake not to see this connection. Note what happens when the seventh trump is sounded:

15And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever. (Revelation 11:15)

18And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth. (Revelation 11:18)

When the seventh trump sounds, the dead are judged and the prophets and saints are rewarded. Failure to make the connection between the seventh trumpet and the seventh vial causes many of today's interpretative problems. Note the events of the seventh vial:

17And the seventh angel poured out his vial into the air; and there came a great voice out of the temple of heaven, from the throne, saying, It is done. 18And there were voices, and thunders, and lightnings; and there was a great earthquake, such as was not since men were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake, and so great. 19And the great city was divided into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell: and great Babylon came in remembrance before God, to give unto her the cup of the win of the fierceness of his wrath. (Revelation 16:17-19)

Now, compare this to the details of the seventh trumpet:

19And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail. (Revelation 11:19)
The details of the seventh trumpet are identical to the details of the seventh vial. However, when we read of the seventh vial we are given some more information, such as the destruction of Mystery Babylon. Yet, while Revelation 11 lacks these specifics, the identical imagery reveals that Revelation 11 is detailing the very same judgment. The last trumpet and last vial are one in the same.

After witnessing the certain details of the seventh vial, John is taken to witness the destruction of Mystery Babylon in fuller detail (Revelation 17-19). What occurs after Mystery Babylon's destruction is the most noteworthy detail of all:

2For true and righteous are his judgments: for he hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand. 3And again they said, Alleluia. And her smoke rose up for ever and ever. 4And the four and twenty elders and the four beasts fell down and worshipped God that sat on the throne, saying, Amen; Alleluia. 5And a voice came out of the throne, saying, Praise our God, all ye his servants, and ye that fear him, both small and great. 6And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth. 7Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. (Revelation 19:2-7)

When the last trump sounds, Christ reigns. Likewise, when the last vial is poured, Christ reigns. It is at this time, upon the marriage supper of the Lamb, that the resurrection occurs. This puts the rapture doctrine in the land of make-believe from which it came. The fact that the seventh trumpet and the seventh vial occur at the same time tells us that the visions in Revelation are not entirely consecutive. There is a lot of overlapping. Knowing this, it should be easier to see that there cannot be a pre-tribulation rapture, or resurrection, rather. This resurrection occurs at the end of the tribulation period at the coming of the Lord.


Rapture Arguments

My favorite rapture defense is the belief that the Bible contains actual examples of people being raptured. The Futurists will say, “Enoch was raptured, and so was Elijah! This is proof of a rapture!” Of course, one would have to be certain that Enoch and Elijah were actually raptured, which I argue they were not. Since the most popular example is Enoch, I will begin with him.

In the case of Enoch, he was a man pleasing to the Lord (Genesis 5:21,24). Little is known about him apart from a few verses in Genesis 5 and Hebrews 11, but we know he begat sons and daughters (Genesis 5:22), and lived to be three hundred sixty-five years old (Genesis 5:23). At this time, Enoch was “translated” (Genesis 5:24). This use of “translated” is what fuels the use of Enoch in rapture defense (cf. Hebrews 11:5).

According to rapture advocates, this is the first instance of a rapture, because Enoch apparently did not die. One claim is that Enoch was raptured before the Flood, which, since the last days were to be as the days of Noah (Matthew 24:37-38), Enoch's “rapture” was a shadow of the last days when all the believers are supposedly raptured. This is ridiculous. According to pre-tribulation rapture doctrine, believers are taken to heaven for the seven years of the tribulation. Since Enoch was “translated,” or taken by God (“for God took him” KJV), rapture advocates automatically assume he was taken to heaven. There's a slight problem with this.

The promise of heaven was not yet in reach of believers during the Old Testament times (John 3:13; Hebrews 11:13). Thus, Enoch was not taken to heaven, nor entered what is commonly called “paradise,” without first seeing death. Note the King James Version's rendering of the following texts:

24And Enoch walked with God: and he was not: for God took him. (Genesis 5:24 KJV)

13And they say, Thy servants are twelve brethren, the sons of one man in the land of Canaan: and behold, the youngest is this day with our father, and one is not. (Genesis 42:13 KJV)

Enoch “was not,” just as one of the brothers “is not.” Let's assume for a moment that “and one is not” simply means “and one is not with our father.” The youngest brother was with the father, while “one is not.” It might seem to make sense like this upon first glance. Consider the following verses:

14And Joseph said unto them, That is it that I spake unto you, saying, Ye are spies. 15Hereby ye shall be proved: by the life of Pharaoh ye shall not go forth hence, except your youngest brother come hither. 16Send one of you to fetch your brother, and ye shall be kept in prison, that your words may be proved, whether there be any truth in you: or else by the life of Pharaoh sure ye are spies. (Genesis 42:14-16 KJV)

The key here is recognizing that Joseph only called for the youngest brother to be found. Why not the one who “is not”? Could it perhaps be that this brother was deceased? This is exactly the reason! “Was not,” or “is not,” are ways of expressing one's absence from this world. The New Testament affirms this:

18In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, a great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not. (Matthew 2:18)

I can assure you Rachel was not weeping because they were alive. She was weeping because her children were dead, made clear to us when we read “...because they are not.” This is the same phrasing as found in the Old Testament. In the New Testament, its use expresses death. Why not in the Old Testament, too? If we're to be consistent, our first action should be to consider how this phrase is used in one place, then apply it to similar passages. If Enoch was raptured, and did not die, we'd have to apply this to the other passages we've observed. Was the brother who “is not” raptured? Were Rachel's children raptured? Similarly, if Rachel's children were deceased, was one of the twelve brothers deceased? Could Enoch have been deceased? Seems to make a lot more since than the idea of a rapture.

The Greek word for “translated” is “metatithemi,” which means to transfer, or to put in another place. Hebrews 11:5 says Enoch was “translated,” just as the Septuagint does in Genesis 5:24. Enoch lived to be three hundred sixty-five years old, died, and the Lord took him. He simply died! Hebrews 11:5 seemingly contradicts my argument I am often told. This analysis could not be complete without analyzing this verse:

5By faith Enoch was translated, that he should not see death, and was not found, because God had translated him: For before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. (Hebrews 11:5)

If Enoch “was not,” that is, died, then why was Enoch translated so that “he should not see death”? Consider that no verse declares Enoch to have been taken to heaven, or paradise, while in his physical body. The text only says this when one's preconceived ideas enter the text. In Genesis 5 and Hebrews 11 we read that Enoch pleased God. Because of this relationship with God, Enoch was taken and could not be found. If Hebrews 11:5 is referring to physical death, perhaps it is in the sense that Enoch would not literally “see” death, or would not be aware of death, in other words. Another way to word it might be to say that Enoch was laid to rest as not to suffer the typical human death caused by old age or sickness. At this point, all views rest on speculation to a certain degree. However, I believe the view in which Enoch had physically died is far more consistent than the rapture view. This consistency is made evident when we make our way a bit further into Hebrews 11, for the next verse we read actually contradicts the belief that Enoch never saw biological death:

13These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. (Hebrews 11:13)

Preceding this verse, the Hebrews author makes note of Enoch's, Noah's, Abraham's, and Sara's walks of faith (Hebrews 11:6-12). Then, he writes, “These all died in faith...” If these all died, how could Enoch have not seen physical death? We know Noah, Abraham, and Sara all physically died. Again, while it is not wise to be dogmatic when speculating, it does seem quite consistent to view Enoch as having tasted physical death. I believe all the points made so far suggest just that.

For the rapture advocates, the prophet Elijah is another example of rapture evidence. Honestly, it's no surprise such a conclusion is drawn, either. The points I am about to present are often missed. Though, when understood, these points provide an irrefutable rebuttal against Elijah's “rapture.” For this, we first refer to the fourth book of Kings (hereby referred to 2 Kings as in the KJV and all modern translations):

11And it came to pass as they were going, they went on talking; and, behold a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and it separated between them both; and Eliu was taken up in a whirlwind as it were into heaven. 12And Elisaie saw, and cried, Father, father, the chariot of Israel, and the horseman thereof! And he saw him no more: and he took hold of his garments, and rent them into two pieces. (2 Kings 2:1)

Elijah (Eliu) was “taken up in a whirlwind as it were into heaven.” Elisha (Elisaie) recognized this chariot as God. In essence, God had translated Elijah, literally moving him from his current position. Rapture advocates argue that Elijah was taken into heaven, the throne room of God. However, “heaven” (Heb. shamayim) is most commonly understood as the sky, while it can also mean the abode of the stars, or the throne of God. In the following verses, we find Elisha returning to the “sons of the prophets who were in Jericho" (2 Kings 2:15). These men were concerned with where Elijah was taken, worried that the Spirit of the Lord had dropped him into the Jordan, or on a mountain (2 Kings 2:16). Thus, they urged Elisha to send men to find him. Finally, Elisha agreed to the search (2 Kings 2:17). However, after searching for three days, the men could not find Elijah. One must wonder how they knew it was the Spirit of the Lord that took Elijah, yet had concerned themselves with Elijah's drop-off point. They clearly knew Elijah was to remain on Earth.

There remains further proof against Elijah having been taken into space or the throne of God, however. In fact, the very next chapter of 2 Kings helps begin the foundation of this next point:

1And Joram the son of Achaab began to reign in Israel in the eighteenth year of Josaphat king of Juda, and he reigned twelve years. (2 Kings 3:1)

So, sometime after Elijah's “rapture”, Joram, the son of Achaab, takes the throne in Israel. Josaphat, the king of Judah, was currently in his eighteenth year of reign. Josaphat also happened to have a son named Joram, who took over when Josaphat died, reigning as co-regent before Josaphat's death (2 Kings 8:16). Joram took full control of Judah upon his father's passing:

1And Josaphat slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David: and Joran his son reigned in his stead. (2 Chronicles 21:1)

Joran, or Joram (the spelling of names often changes slightly in older translations like the Septuagint and 1611 KJV), took the throne of Judah during the time Joram of Israel was reigning. Joram of Judah was “walking in the way of the kings of Israel” (2 Chronicles 21:6), just like the house of Achaab from which his wife came, doing deeds that were evil in the sight of the Lord for a number of years. Because of Joram's evil, he receives a message from a familiar character:

12And there came to him a message in writing from Eliu the prophet, saying, Thus saith the Lord God of thy father David, Because thou hast not walked in the way of thy father Josaphat, nor in the ways of Asa king of Juda, 13but has walked in the ways of the kings of Israel, and hast caused Juda and the dwellers of Jerusalem to go a-whoring, as the house of Achaab caused Israel to go a-whoring, and thou hast slain thy brethren, the sons of thy father, who were better than thyself; 14behold, the Lord shall smite thee with a great plague among thy people, and thy sons, and thy wives, and all thy store: 15and thou shalt be afflicted with a grievous disease, with a disease of the bowels, until thy bowels shall fall out day by day with the sickness. (2 Chronicles 21:12-15)

Amazing! Years after Elijah's “rapture” we find that Elijah had written to Joram of Judah for his wickedness. If Elijah were taken to the throne of God via the rapture, how was it Elijah could still write to Joram? He wouldn't have been able to lest he were on Earth! Thus, no such “rapture” into the throne of God occurred. Elijah remained on the Earth, very much aware of Joram's wickedness.

In the end, do Futurists have any reasonable arguments for their rapture doctrines? I wouldn't suggest so. I believe the Futurists' failure to recognize what passages such as 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 and 1 Corinthians 15:51-53 are actually regarding is causing them to place hope in an idea that was never promised, and will never occur. What effects this may have on one's faith in the end is anyone's guess. My only prayer is that people are willing to consider the only logical explanation: the resurrection of the dead.

I hope this brief analysis was beneficial. It is difficult to be persuaded of views that contradict something we hold dear. If you have questions, please ask.



In the Lord's service,

Jason Watt

No comments:

Post a Comment