Part XIII.2
THE TRIBULATION PEOPLE
Under the byline, “Before you assume you are not going through the Great Tribulation ... Read this book!” there was published in 1975 The Tribulation Book by Arthur D. Katterjohn, former chairman of the orchestral instruments department of the Conservatory of Music, Wheaton College. The son of a Baptist minister, he was taught “to respect the authority of the Word of God, and to love the words of Jesus.” Affirming his commitment to “honest debate,” he writes his book “for the Christian who wants to take another look at end-times doctrine.” Should the Church prepare to endure Antichrist and worldwide persecution, “or make ready for an unprecedented and unannounced return of Christ just before the tribulation period?” (10). His position, clearly declared from the very beginning, is enthusiastically posttribulational. For authority, he leans hard on the writings of Ladd and Gundry - even though these men differ on many essential issues.
Katterjohn writes his book with an easy-going popular style, occasionally unsuited for serious debate. For example, the biblical five foolish virgins who had no oil suddenly become “five flighty women” who “let their oil supply dwindle.” Elsewhere, the Christian life should not be “a flighty fixation on bubbly living” when actually it is a “tense and often painful struggle.” Perhaps such word pictures are calculated to catch the interest of young people in Sunday School discussion groups. Certainly his study questions at the end of each chapter are designed for that purpose, but unfortunately they are heavily charged with Posttrib innuendo, frequently assuming what he must clearly prove.
While erroneously declaring the millennial question to be a secondary issue, with “little practical difference” between amillennialism and Premillennialism, he holds that the time of the Rapture is “the most pressing question of the future” (77, 13). For Antichrist and the Great Tribulation are coming, and we may be the “Tribulation people” who must suffer and endure the ravages of the end-time.
Katterjohn gathers his evidence for a Posttrib Rapture under three main headings: (A) The Gospels and the teaching of Christ; (B) The Epistles and the teaching of Paul; and (C) the Book of Revelation and the teaching of John. This review shall give them a brief consideration in that order.
(A) In the Gospels, the primary focus is placed upon Christ’s Olivet Discourse. Katterjohn holds that it was delivered intimately to “the nucleus of the New Testament Church” and “makes no mention of Israel or the Jews.” Furthermore, he charges, those who do not agree with him make what Jesus had to say mean nothing for Christians today (17). This is a wild and unworthy charge, for carried to its logical end it would also remove from Christians any instruction and blessing from the Old Testament, which certainly was first given to Israel. “All Scripture is profitable,” and it is all for us even though it may not always be about us.
Most Bible students affirm that the Olivet Discourse, while giving instruction to all concerning the Tribulation yet to come, has at least “a Jewish character,” speaking as it does of Judaea, the Sabbath day, the holy place of the Temple, the tribes of the earth, the Jewish marriage custom, and the coming of the King and the Kingdom. This is Israel in the end time, and there is not a shadow of a hint that the Church, the “body of Christ,” will be present during that “time of Jacob’s trouble” being described by Christ (Jeremiah 30:7; cf. Daniel 12:1).
There is no legitimate proof for the Posttrib position which makes parousia a technical word for the Second Coming, the elect a technical word for the Church, or which declares that Pretribs make the “Gospel of the Kingdom” essentially different from the Gospel Christians know and preach today. In the words of the author, Pretribs teach “a different way of salvation for the hard-pressed believers under Antichrist’s reign,” even teaching “four different Gospels, as pretribulationalists do” (19). If Posttribs have to build their case upon such fabricated slander, perhaps it indicates that they have legitimate case. Nor is the Matthew 24:40-42 hew-42 hew-42 passage, which Katterjohn calls “the sudden snatch,” descriptive of a posttribulational Rapture as some suppose, but in context is evidently a removal of some in judgment while others are left on earth to welcome the return of their Lord and enter His Kingdom.
Katterjohn affirms that “the coming of John 14:1-31 and the return in Matthew 24:1-51 are the same event” (37). But the presence of certain similarities does not prove identity and it would be just as easy to provide a list of differences. He is not sure if the dramatic promise “Where I am, there you may be also” refers to the “thousand-year reign of Christ on earth or the inauguration of His heavenly kingdom.” Probably in this context it means neither. However, no matter how plain the promise (Which he labels “poetic”), a Rapture to heaven, “my Father’s house,” must be denied by a Posttrib, for it is entirely contrary to their notion of an immediate return of the Church to earth after her meeting with Christ in the air.
(B) Under Pauline theology, our author declares that the terms elect, brethren, saints and Church are all used interchangeably, for this “unity of all men of faith is one of the cornerstones of Christian doctrine and cannot be jettisoned for the sake of an end-times theory” (41). This contributes to his erroneous view that the term “Church” comprehends the redeemed of all ages, and that the Rapture of 1 Thessalonians 4:1-18 and the posttribulational return of Matthew 24:1-51 are one and the same event.
He observes that there is no mention of the Tribulation in the 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 passage, (nor should there be), “nor a secret, any-moment coming of the Lord, nor ... our return to heaven after the rapture” (42). Later, he admits the invalidity of this common “argument from silence” when he observes that even “the term ‘second coming’ although a helpful tool for us, does not appear in God’s Word” (68). The “trump of God” in verse 16, he declares, “is not a fickle kazoo beamed at church-age saints to alert them of a secret rapture ... but a blast, a fearful booming fanfare to the arrival of the King” (44). The reference to a “meeting” in the air changes the direction of the saints, but not of the King as they descend to earth together. Perhaps all of this is a trifle more than Paul intended to say. This and the other major Rapture passages simply do not teach posttribulationism. His exegesis of 1 Corinthians 15:51-52 is very thin. Twice he endeavors to define the term “mystery” (57, 91) and in the light of Colossians 1:26 is wrong on both counts. Like other posttribulationists, he identifies the “last trump” with “that final trumpet blast” of Revelation 11:15, implying that it sounds at the Second Coming of Christ. This is a well-worn argument, frequently answered in pretribulational literature. Such an assumption is entirely false because the context is radically different, band because the judgments of the seven vials of God’s wrath clearly intervene between the seventh trumpet and the Second Coming of Christ.
Even on the matter of “wrath” Katterjohn is in theological trouble, affirming: “The tribulation, it must be remembered, is not the wrath of God, but the persecution of the faithful, both Jews and Gentiles, by Antichrist” (41). God’s “wrath” is understood to be a final flash of divine indignation upon Antichrist’s regime. Moreover, “Christians, it must be remembered, will be removed before God’s final anger falls” (98). Thus, even an ardent posttribulationist must admit that the only way for the Church to avoid the outpouring of divine wrath is to be removed by a prior Rapture!
Katterjohn finds “no time or place element” for the Judgment Seat of Christ, even though 1 Corinthians 4:5 seems to locate it at the Rapture (cf. 2 Timothy 4:8; Revelation 22:12). Concerning the Marriage Supper of the Lamb he declares: “It is after His reign commences that the marriage supper is held” (79). This would place it upon the earth after the Second Coming, but perceptive readers of Scripture will find it in heaven before the return of the King (Revelation 19:7-9; Revelation 19:11-16). Indeed, two great events in heaven after the Rapture and before the Revelation give strong evidence that the Rapture is not simultaneous with the Second Coming of Christ. His view of the important Restrainer passage (2 Thessalonians 2:6-8) also finds itself in difficulty. He admits that “If their connection between ‘restrainer’ and Holy-Spirit-in-the-Church is correct, pretribulationism also is correct, for the Church certainly cannot live without the Holy Spirit” (49). However, he chooses to identify the Restrainer with “civil government.” As for the phrase “taken out of the way,” he prefers the meaning “to arise out of the midst.” Then without declaring a further opinion on this issue, he refers his readers to the views of George Ladd and Robert Gundry which, incidentally, contradict each other.
(C) Moving on to the Book of Revelation, Katterjohn states that “the Church is not explicitly mentioned in chapters 4-12, neither is the rapture,” but he adds “the Church is not mentioned as being in heaven either” (88). Thus he rejects the Pretrib identification of the twenty-four elders, suggesting that they are merely “representatives of the Old and New Covenants.” While such a view may be better than Reese’s “angelic lords,” the elders give small comfort to those who cannot find the Church in heaven during the Tribulation. The Church appears again under a different figure as the Bride of Christ, once more in heaven before the Revelation and reign of the Saviour.
Katterjohn declares that “Revelation 3:10 is a fundamental girder in the superstructure of the modern pretribulation theory” (86). It might be mentioned at this point that while Kept from the Hour draws its title from this verse, when Katterjohn lists it among “Books for Further Study,” he passes it off as “Arguments for pretribulationism based on Revelation 3:10.” This of course is outright fabrication, for a closer look would have revealed that the writer discusses Revelation 3:10 on four pages out of 320, and in the Scripture Index it has a mere two listings among 840. So while the verse is important, it hardly the sum total of Pretrib evidence as Katterjohn implies. Our author argues that Revelation 3:10 gives the Church a promise of protection in the Tribulation, but not a removal from that hour. “The promise of protection for God’s people is essential to the whole fabric of Scripture” (86). He claims that the verse “is a great promise of protection through tribulation, both historically ... and as the final persecution under Antichrist finds momentum” (87).
What kind of protection does he offer? Elsewhere he has written about “the besieged Church ... headed toward inevitable extinction” (99), when “Antichrist will drive Christians into caves and cloister shelters” (100). “Resistance to him will be fatal to the flesh” (101). It will be “a horrible persecution” (128) when Antichrist “shall extend his rule over the entire globe and ultimately tread it down and break it in pieces” (129), and when “many will suffer martyrdom” (43). In this the nature of our “blessed hope” and our promised protection in the Tribulation? Nothing more hopeless is implied in all of Christian eschatology. Death, and not a Posttrib Rapture, would become our hope! Rather than deep anguish and probable martyrdom in the Tribulation, it would be far better to die and to be immediately and forever with the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:8).
Katterjohn writes correctly that “the time of the rapture is a vital question, yet it should not be an issue that divides true believers” (115). Yet like many before him, it is not his doctrine but his attitude which divides. He declares that “certain pretribulational distinctives are founded on sandstone” and are “theories which find support only as shadowy inferences from the Biblical text” (101). Those who distinguish between redeemed Israel prior to Pentecost and the New Testament Church, he asserts, are guilty of promoting “caste systems (which) are the invention of selfish leaders who would avoid the humility of shared authority” (102). He states that according to Pretribs, the witness of the 144,000 is “a quasi-gospel preached by a Spirit-less tribulation remnant” (90). It is such inappropriate language, not the doctrine, which divides true believers. To Katterjohn, Pretribulationists are “theorists” and “early removal buffs.” Is this what he would have called the writer’s former professor, Dr. Henry C. Thiessen, for many years the head of the Bible Department and Chairman of the Faculty of the Graduate School of Wheaton College? Thiessen was a warm and gracious professor, a theological scholar, a recognized Biblical linguist, and also a convinced pretribulationist (Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, 475-86). For years he sounded out the Word of the Lord to the students of Wheaton College, far more harmoniously it seems than this discordant note later emerging from the music department. THE BLESSED HOPE AND THE TRIBULATION
Written with a far more commendable spirit than the two previously considered is a book published in 1976 by John F. Walvoord, The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation, with the subtitle “A Historical and Biblical Study of Posttribulationism.” Clearly stated, “It is the purpose of this study to examine the claims of posttribulationists, their exegesis of important passages, and their handling of pretribulational arguments” (8). In the midst of the “almost complete confusion” which reigns in the current interpretation of prophecy, in the mind of the reviewer this volume by Dr. Walvoord gives the most comprehensive response in print to the various positions and problems of the posttribulational school of thought. The Rapture debate is not merely a theological argument, for the hope of the Lord’s return is a very precious truth, and “it would be difficult to present a greater contrast between the blessed hope of the imminent return of Christ and the prospect of probably suffering and death in the great tribulation” (10). These are dramatically contrasting prospects of the future for the Church of Jesus Christ.
Within the past century, at least four different types of posttribulationism have emerged. Walvoord discusses firs the “Classic Posttribulational Interpretation” of J. Barton Payne, whose major contribution to the Posttrib argument is his belief in the imminency of Christ’s return. This has previously been discussed under the review of the Imminent Appearing of Christ. Relative to this issue, Walvoord concludes that “the early church fathers were obviously wrong in believing that they were already in the great tribulation” (29), and that “Payne stands virtually alone” when he spiritualizes much of the Tribulation and attempts to add the early concept of imminency to a posttribulational conclusion. A second view is the “Semiclassic Posttribulation Interpretation,” best illustrated by Alexander Reese in his book The Approaching Advent of Christ. Reese popularized the opinion that the Pretrib position arose about 150 years ago in the separatist movements of Edward Irving and J. N. Darby. He took as a key doctrine the idea that the Church is the true Israel and includes the saints of all ages. He offered evidence that “the resurrection of the Church occurs at the same time as the resurrection of Revelation 20:1-15,” from all of which he drew a strong Posttrib conclusion. In this third chapter, Walvoord makes the telling point that “Posttribulationists also have never resolved the pressing question as to why there is a rapture at the second coming.... Why would saints meet Christ in the air at the rapture if they are going to return immediately to the earth? Why would it not be preferable for the church to go into the millennium in their natural bodies ... and populate the millennial earth?” (38-39). The “Futurist Posttribulational Interpretation” as exemplified by George Ladd in The Blessed Hope, is the third Posttrib position considered. While accepting a literal, future Tribulation, Ladd makes historical background his major argument, and then “practically ignores the three principal Scriptures revealing the rapture” (50). In discussing dispensationalism, “Ladd departs from his usual scholarly approach and accuses dispensationalists of holding interpretations that no dispensationalist would support” (56). He finds it difficult to harmonize the “blessed hope” with the idea that “the church must go through the great tribulation and many, if not most, in the church are martyred.” Comments Walvoord, far better to live out “a normal life in a period prior to the rapture” and go “to heaven through death rather than living through the great tribulation” (57). Most posttribulational writers do not recognize the force of this problem in their own system.
Walvoord includes under this third Posttrib position the historical views of Dave MacPherson, and brings against him the five criticisms previously discussed in the review of MacPherson’s two books. The fourth distinct Posttrib position is the “Dispensational Posttribulational Interpretation” of Robert H. Gundry. Walvoord comments favorably on Gundry’s “maturity of scholarly studies and his skill as a debater” (61), but faults him for using “circular arguments assuming what they are trying to prove,” and for presenting “only the evidence that supports his position” (62).
Gundry’s pivotal issues include his attack on the doctrine of imminency; his characterization of the Tribulation as primarily a time of Satanic wrath; his beginning of the “day of the Lord” at the end of the Tribulation; his interpretation that the Olivet Discourse discusses the Church and not Israel; his merging of the various judgments of the righteous into one divine judgment at the Second Coming; some novel suggestions regarding who will enter the millennial Kingdom; and his placing of the Rapture just before Armageddon, preceding the Second Coming of Christ (62).
Walvoord concludes that Gundry’s approach is different from that of any posttribulationist in the past, and that he abandons literal interpretation whenever it would lead to a contradiction of posttribulationism (68). In the latter half of his book, Walvoord discusses the posttribulational denial of imminency and wrath; the contribution of the Gospels, especially of Matthew 24:1-51 and John 14:1-31; the comforting hope of 1 Thessalonians 4:1-18 and the Day of the Lord in chapter 5; the identification of the Restrainer; and the Rapture in its relationship to end-time events. He closes with two brief but excellent chapters: “Unresolved Problems of Posttribulationism” and “Pretribulationism as the Alternative to Posttribulationism.” From the Pretrib perspective, this book affords a comprehensive and most worth discussion of the divergent views and unsolved problems of posttribulationism. THE GREAT TRIBULATION DEBATE A considerably different presentation of the Posttrib view was published in 1976 and called The Great Tribulation Debate, by Norman F. Douty. Subtitled “Has Christ’s Return Two Stages?,” it is a revision of an earlier publication dated 1956. Douty claims herein that he was converted to posttribulationism by the “weight of evidence,” although he admits he much prefers his former belief, which was that of a pretribulational Rapture (10).
While pointing out some of the dangers of doctrinal controversy, the author affirms that the “Tribulation Debate” is minor rather than major in importance, “a question of detail” (Scofield), requiring “a cool head and a warm heart.” Then having affirmed his love and respect for men like I. M. Haldeman, William L. Pettingill and W. H. Griffith-Thomas, plus Scofield, Barnhouse, Chafer and Thiessen, all pretribulationists with whom he is about to disagree, he writes, “For convenience sake, I have chiefly selected Dr. C. I. Scofield to represent the teaching I herein oppose” (10). This is a very limited objective, for Scofield is not always a representative Pretrib and his notes give a comparatively brief treatment of the subject. Thus from the very beginning, there is introduced an immediate weakness in Douty’s evaluation. A more favorable feature is his constant appeal to the Scripture and to the Greek language in matters of exegesis. But it would take a prime Greek scholar (which Douty does not claim to be) to test the validity of his conclusions. The author is obviously widely read and to support his position quotes a host of other authors and scholars, mostly from a past generation. However, it does become rather tedious to find Dr. So-and-so pitted against Dr. So-and-so almost ad infinitum, rather than a warm-hearted and scholarly explanation of what each Scripture actually teaches. Those quoted are no longer with us to explain or defend their views. Nor is Douty always kind. Pretribs are considered his “opponents,” and it would take “divine grace” to bestow on them an open mind, especially when self-interest is involved. “A camel can more easily pass through the eye of a needle than a Pretribulationist, occupying a place of honor, can look into this subject without prejudice” (11). This reviewer found The Great Tribulation Debate a strangely perplexing and exasperating book. It ignores major pretribulational arguments and sometimes attacks non-representative viewpoints. The Pretrib position is frequently misrepresented and wrongly accused. For example, says Douty, “It is to be feared that Pre-tribulationism is producing a generation of soft Christians instead of one composed of those who can endure hardness as good soldiers of Jesus Christ” (130). The Pretrib view of the Gospel of the Kingdom is said to be “not the good news of salvation through the blood of Christ” (14). Pretribs are represented as believing that “what Christ taught during his public ministry was not intended for Christians but for Jews.... Thus, by one stroke, the Church of Christ is stripped of a large portion of her spiritual heritage. The Gospels no more belong to you, my brethren, than the Old Testament does” (17-18). Most of those of pretribulational persuasion will find such declarations completely untrue and offensive.
Three entire chapters are spent on the Greek words for Christ’s coming, endeavoring to prove that if these words are used of both stages of Christ’s advent there is really but one stage, and that posttribulational. As we have seen, a technical use of the Greek parousia is not an accepted pretribulational argument. The similarities between the Rapture and the Revelation passages are then catalogued, as though similarity of detail proves identity, making them one and the same event. The “restraining influence” of 2 Thessalonians 2:1-17 is identified as civil government, for “the Spirit was poured out after Christ’s return to the Father for other purposes than to restrain human lawlessness. He did not come to do what was assigned to human government to perform” (98). Furthermore, in Revelation 3:10, “this preservation does not refer to the body, but to the soul. Christ promises, not exemption from physical torture and death, but spiritual keeping, whatever the circumstances” (104-5). To say the last, these are all highly debatable conclusions on the part of our author.
Even worse is his exceedingly limited treatment of the three major Rapture passages. The triple clause of 1 Thessalonians 4:16 denotes “one and the same thing,” so that the “shout” and the “trump of God” are identical with the “voice of the archangel.” Then, says our author, if we are “caught up together” we must be “united here upon the earth,” so that “Christ is here depicted as escorted to the earth by his saints” (76). To the contrary, the reunion of the saints occurs when we meet together “in the clouds ... in the air,” and not at a posttribulational return to earth.
Douty ties all this together with John 14:1-3, closing with a rare conclusion: “Christ is on his way to the earth to deliver and convert the remnant of Israel, to judge Antichrist and his system, and to introduce his glorious reign - all of which he shall effect with speed. Then to the many mansions of his Father’s house will he conduct his glorified ones and from there carry on his millennial reign. It is not until the new earth appears after that reign that a glorified Head and Body shall reside below” (76, italics added).
Think of it, the Messianic Kingdom, with an absent King reigning from heaven rather than upon earth! Why so strained a view? Because a Posttrib must do something with John 14:3, for to take it literally leads directly to pretribulationism. As for the important 1 Corinthians 15:51-52 passage, it is brushed off with the comment that “the last trump” would not precede the seven trumpets of the Revelation. “If not identical with the seventh, it surely must succeed it in order to be the last” (39).
Douty gives major emphasis to the Olivet Discourse which, he declares, “is not essentially Jewish prophecy; it is Christian eschatology. Those addressed in the latter part of chapter 23 are Jews, but those addressed in chapters 24 and 25 are Christians” (36). Forgetting that the disciples did not yet understand either His imminent vicarious death or His subsequent resurrection (Matthew 16:21-23), or that they were primarily occupied with thoughts about the Messianic Kingdom (Matthew 18:1; Matthew 20:21; Acts 1:6), Douty holds that they were representatives of the Church and that through them Christ “addresses the prospective Church concerning things to come” (37). Since the coming of Christ in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory is “immediately after the tribulation of those days” (Matthew 25:29-30), Douty assumes this embraces the Rapture of the Church, which would make it clearly posttribulational. His argument forms an interesting syllogism: The Olivet Discourse sets forth Church eschatology. The return of Christ to earth is clearly “after the Tribulation of those days.” Therefore, the Rapture must be posttribulational! However, he should not forget the early warning of Alexander Reese concerning a syllogism: If an error is found in either the major or the minor premise, that error also attaches itself to the conclusion. Douty’s error is found in his major premise, and this is sufficient to destroy his conclusion.
Douty closes his book with “A Plea for Toleration,” the strongest and most extensive this writer has seen in print. “What injury have we done you? True, we have disturbed your complacency, but what sin is there in that?” and so on for four full pages (133-37). In the light of how much we have in common, he pleads for moderation and for understanding. At this point we find ourselves in substantial agreement. Nevertheless, the book itself appears badly outdated in its arguments, making its contribution of doubtful present value. This reviewer is not aware that even his fellow Posttribs acknowledge the book or its arguments as authoritative. THE LAST THINGS, AN ESCHATOLOGY FOR LAYMEN In 1978 yet another contribution to the Rapture debate was published by George E. Ladd, entitled The Last Things, An Eschatology for Laymen. Certainly, it is a worthy endeavor to put theological themes into more simplified concepts and language suitable for the average Christian layman. Better yet, to discuss relevant and encouraging topics such as the predicted course of the present age, the “signs of the times” and world conditions in the end-time, the Rapture as a purifying hope and an incentive for faithful service, the rewards and crowns to be distributed for victorious living at the Judgment Seat of Christ, our position as the Bride of Christ at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb, the power and glory of the coming King, and the prospect of reigning with Him in His millennial Kingdom. If this were the main thrust of Ladd’s book, we would all welcome it and applaud the author. But rather, we find before us a disappointing sequence of problems relating to the time of the Rapture, with a constant and withering attack upon dispensationalism. While we are grateful for certain conclusions we do hold in common with Dr. Ladd, who is a theologically conservative Premillennial scholar, this present volume is hardly an eschatology for laymen. It’s subtitle might better be worded: “My latest attack against dispensationalism”!
Actually, Ladd appears to be a modified dispensationalist, for in his own words he recognizes “the eras of promise after Abraham, the law under Moses, of grace under Christ, and of the Kingdom in the future” (9). Most probably he also recognizes the age of innocence before the fall of Adam and the very different situation following his expulsion from the garden. Recognizing six different economies is a fair beginning for an anti-dispensationalist. Years ago, in gracious personal conversation with this writer, Ladd affirmed that he was not a Jew, did not worship on the Sabbath, never prayed that his flight should not be on the Sabbath (Matthew 24:20), nor did he wear “a ribbon of blue” in the fringe of his garments (Numbers 15:38). Apparently he does distinguish between Biblical ages and economies and does not always equate Israel with the New Testament Church, clearly forbidden in Revelation 2:9; Revelation 3:9.
It is most unfortunate that such a storm has brewed over the concept of dispensationalism, when the Bible clearly indicates the presence of various ages (Ephesians 2:7; Ephesians 3:5; Ephesians 3:21), differing economies (Matthew 16:18; Luke 21:24; John 1:17; Hebrews 12:18-24), and even uses the term “dispensation” in the sense of a divinely planned economy (1 Corinthians 9:17; Ephesians 1:10; Ephesians 3:2; Colossians 1:25 AV). While it is true that some have carried the dispensational principle to erroneous and extreme conclusions, not all who use this principle are “speckled birds” as they have been called, nor do any hold to “seven ways of salvation” as others have affirmed. Nor do they downgrade the value of passages obviously addressed to Israel.
What we need to do is to sit down and talk together, discovering what we hold in common as well as areas of disagreement. Then no longer treat dispensationalism as a theological system to be attacked or defended, but rather to restore it to hermeneutics (Biblical interpretation) as an extension of the basic question: “To whom, or of whom does this passage speak?” Then most of the bitterness engendered would evaporate.
Erroneously, Ladd makes pretribulationism “the most characteristic doctrine of Dispensationalists” (50). Actually, the more basic disputes fall into the area of ecclesiology. Using a “spiritualizing hermeneutic,” he assumes that the Church is “spiritual Israel” because he “finds the New Testament applying to the spiritual church promises which in the Old Testament refer to literal Israel” (24). This is assuming too much, for while it is true that the redeemed of Israel and the redeemed Church do share certain privileges as members of the family of God, it is a fallacy of the first magnitude to equate Israel and the Church on this basis alone.
Israel cannot always be considered as a redeemed community. The Apostle Paul cries out with great agony of heart for the salvation of Israel, his kinsmen according to the flesh (Romans 9:1-3; Romans 10:1). He sets forth the Jews and the Church of God as two entirely separate entities (1 Corinthians 10:32), so that the time of the resurrection of Israel does not demonstrate or even imply that the resurrection of the Church will be simultaneous. And when we find “immediately after the tribulation” God gathering “his elect” from the “tribes of the earth,” the clear inference is that Israel has come through the Tribulation, not the Church.
There are other problems. Ladd is not sure that the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53:1-12 can be identified with Messiah, the anointed of God. He calls the Tribulation “a brief but terrible struggle between Satan and the Church ... a time of fearful martyrdom” (49), hardly a “blessed hope” or a theme so attractive that we can “comfort one another with these words.”
Contrary to Ladd, Pretribs do not teach “two Second Comings of Christ,” nor of necessity even two “phases of His coming,” although this is merely a matter of definition. Nor do Pretribs need to limit the term parousia to the Rapture and epiphaneia to the Revelation. While a few have done so, Walvoord and other Pretrib theologians have clearly indicated that the vocabulary of Christ’s coming is non-technical, and equally applicable to both Rapture and Revelation.
He finds 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7 “very difficult” and claims that the “classical interpretation” is quite satisfying, namely that “the hindering power is the principle of law and order embodied in the Roman Empire with the Emperor at its head” (68). To the contrary, rather than being a restraint against evil, it can be demonstrated that the Roman Empire fell under the sheer weight of its own massive iniquity. Nor can we agree when Ladd declares, “The 144,000 are the church on the threshold of the Great Tribulation,” explaining that these are “true spiritual Jews without being literal Jews: in other words, the church” (71). He forgets that in the Church we are no longer seen as Jew or Gentile, but all one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28; Ephesians 2:14). He will not recognize a redeemed body of Jews in the Tribulation, clearly identified as being from the tribes of Israel, for this would be tantamount to a confession that the Church is no longer on earth. In this book, Ladd demonstrates how the Posttrib pattern of thought leads perilously close to the Amillennial position. He departs from normal Premil literal interpretation when he declares: “The number 144,000, like other numbers in the Revelation, is a symbolic number, representing completeness” (71). The measurement of the New Jerusalem in Revelation 21:16 “is obviously a symbolic measurement” (113) and “the Kingdom of God is also a present reality.” Christ “is already seated at the right hand of God and reigning as King” (116). In defining Amillennialism, he says, “It must be admitted that there is some Scriptural support for such a view” (111).
He parallels Amillennial theology when he equates Israel and the Church, calling the latter “spiritual Israel.” He identifies the judgment of the Gentile nations in Matthew 25:1-46 with the Great White Throne of Revelation 20:1-15, admitting that if this would be followed literally, it would make no room for a millennium and would make him an Amillennialist. He avoids this by claiming the Matthew 25:1-46 account to be “a dramatic parable” of welcoming and receiving Christ. In a previous volume he declares: “Many millenarians will not insist that the earthly reign of Christ is to be of exactly 1000 years duration. The 1000 years may well be a symbol for a long period of time, the exact extent of which is unknown” (1952, 147). This type of Premillennialism would make an Amillennialist very happy! The reviewer refrains from speaking of further problems associated with Ladd’s book. It contributes little that is new to the Rapture debate and is hardly “an eschatology for the laymen.”
CHRISTIANS WILL GO THROUGH THE TRIBULATION
There appeared in 1978 a distinctly different Posttrib book by James M. McKeever entitled Christians Will Go Through The Tribulation: And how to prepare for it. This is not a serious discussion of Biblical or theological evidence concerning the time and implications of the Rapture. The Posttrib position is strongly assumed, with some Scripture and a few scattered quotations from posttribulational authorities to back up the author’s conviction. Rather, its purpose is to give “very practical suggestions on how to prepare for the catastrophes that Christians will be experiencing during the Tribulation,” dealing with “physical preparation and the even more important spiritual preparation” (19).
Because of the promises which exempt the Church from divine wrath, Posttrib writers normally picture the Church as thoroughly protected by the sovereign hand of God, passing safely through the Tribulation much like Noah and his family sealed in the ark, placidly riding through the storm and judgment of the mighty Genesis flood. McKeever turns that picture upside down as he portrays the Christian fighting for his life and the welfare of his family in the midst of nuclear tragedy, human brutality and the threat of imminent starvation in a day when no many can buy or sell, save those who capitulate to the Devil’s Antichrist and wear the “mark of the beast.” Our author is an ordained minister and Bible teacher, with a background of ten years with IBM and twenty years in the computer business. He gives evidence of being a fine-spirited man, sincere and dedicated. However, the reader will have to judge for himself the validity of certain stated convictions.
McKeever’s book is in three main parts, with Part 1 dealing with the “Crucial Questions” of the time of the Rapture and the many Scriptures, which, in his opinion, teach that the Church must pass through and endure the entire Tribulation. Ladd and Gundry are his primary authorities on this issue, with a little additional help from Katterjohn.
He discusses evidence that we may be living at the end of the age, and if so, some of the “Catastrophes We Will Face.” He reviews the extreme severity of the Tribulation judgments, the seals which are broken, the trumpets of judgment which sound, and the bowls of divine wrath which must be poured out. Plaintively he declares: “I wish that the Rapture were going to occur at the beginning of the Tribulation, and that my fellow believers and I would not have to experience the terrible things that are coming.” However, he concludes, “since I believe, as do growing scores of Christians, that the believers will go through the Tribulation, my family and I are making both physical and spiritual preparation for it” (56).
Skipping Part 2 for the moment, the third and final part of the book deals with Spiritual Preparation. This includes a “Call to Righteousness” with a challenge from Revelation 2:1-29; Revelation 3:1-22, plus 12:10-11, to be overcomers of evil and the power of Satan. There follows a presentation of our personal relationship to the Holy Spirit, and the filling of the Spirit which is His control over our lives. Most of this teaching is essential and good, but on the “gifts of the Spirit” many of the Lord’s people will decline to follow.
McKeever believes that all the Apostolic gifts are available today and will be increasingly exercised in the coming Tribulation. He recognizes the dissension caused by “speaking in unknown tongues,” but affirms the validity of the gift, including the worship of God with an “angelic language.” He also affirms supernatural healing and in Indonesia, supernatural multiplication of good to feed the Christians and “even the dogs.” He writes about supernatural control over snakes, scorpions and wild animals, and of Christians having dominion over nature, commanding the rain to stop and a tornado to pass over. Even more, “In the body of believers with whom I fellowshipped in Pasadena, there is a man who was raised from the dead” (269)! Each reader will have to evaluate such unusual claims and read the rest of the book in the light of them. For the Scripture commands: “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21).
Part 2 is the natural conclusion of posttribulational theology. Christians must be prepared to survive nuclear war, social chaos, and the menace of Antichrist by constructing and stocking some kind of fallout shelter. “In a home without a basement, you could go in a crawl space beneath the floor and dig a hole ...” (123). You must be prepared to survive famine. “I would suggest that a family have a three-month supply of wet pack food, and at least a twelve-month supply of air-dried and freeze-dried dehydrated foods” (140). Storage is a problem: “A year’s supply of wet pack food for a family of five would take up 60 percent of a two-car garage.... You can increase the storage life of canned foods ... by turning them upside down periodically” (141-42).
You must prepare to survive earthquakes. “Most of the hazards are man-made.” Wire your tall pieces of furniture to the wall so they will not topple over, etc. In coastal areas, prepare for tidal waves (167-70). With no ability to buy or sell or even provide electrical or sewer service, you will need to develop a “self-supporting home,” with tanks to collect rainwater, a septic tank or other plan to dispose of waste, and a wind-powered generator for electricity. If you cannot move to a farm you must have a garden with small animals and birds for food. A large fish tank for catfish is highly recommended. Plus a food dehydrator, a water purifier, and possibly a composting toilet. Develop a root cellar and a springhouse for large storage; put in a system to collect solar heat, and preferably have most of the house underground to conserve energy. Etc., etc., etc. This is what a consistent posttribulationist must be doing, and how many of their number would qualify? This is Posttrib theology in shoe leather. Wherefore, comfort one another with these words!
WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THE RAPTURE A brief but scholarly review of the main issues involved in the Rapture debate was published in 1981 by Charles C. Ryrie, under the title What You Should Know About The Rapture. Beginners in this subject will appreciate his clear introduction and simple charts of the four main positions, while more mature students will acknowledge that “prophecy is being discussed more than ever on an academic level,” as Ryrie debates with Gundry, whom he considers the primary spokesman of the modern Posttrib movement.
Concerning the historic background of pretribulationism, Ryrie deals with the various attempts which have been made to discredit the teaching of Darby by claiming he did not get his views from the Bible, but from a heretic and a mystic. The heretic was Edward Irving, who was deposed in 1833 by the Church of Scotland on the charge that he held the sinfulness of Christ’s humanity. The mystic was 15 year old Margaret Macdonald who, as we have seen, has been promoted by MacPherson and others as the first to proclaim a pretribulational Rapture.
Ryrie claims that the Irvingite eschatology was unclear, that there was no connection between Darby’s pretribulationism and the Irvingite teaching, and the claim that Pretrib doctrine began in an outburst of tongues in Irving’s church is, in the words of E. R. Sandeen, “a groundless and pernicious charge.” Furthermore, “As for the very young and chronically ill Margaret Macdonald, we can only truthfully label her as a ‘confused rapturist,’ with elements of partial rapturism, posttribulationism, perhaps midtribulationism, but never pretribulationism” (72).
Ryrie claims that most Posttribs have concentrated on countering pretribulational arguments rather than putting together an adequate chronology of the future. The Pretrib position is not an “escape mechanism,” but an attempt “to proclaim the whole plan of God accurately.” While granting that the Greek vocabulary used to describe Christ’s coming does not prove either a Pre- or a Posttrib Rapture, he affirms that a careful exegesis of the cardinal Scripture passages does sustain a pretribulational conclusion. For example, 2 Thessalonians 1:5-10 emphasizes God’s judgment of His enemies, using words such as “righteous judgment,” “affliction,” “flaming fire” and “retribution,” a vocabulary strangely absent from the Rapture passages. This is because the subject of the passage is “vindication,” and not as posttribulationists say, a “release of Christians from persecution” (54). Moreover, throughout the most extensive Tribulation passage, Revelation 4:1-11; Revelation 5:1-14; Revelation 6:1-17; Revelation 7:1-17; Revelation 8:1-13; Revelation 9:1-21; Revelation 10:1-11; Revelation 11:1-19; Revelation 12:1-17; Revelation 13:1-18; Revelation 14:1-20; Revelation 15:1-8; Revelation 16:1-21; Revelation 17:1-18; Revelation 18:1-24, the Church is not mentioned nor seen on earth, but is found in heaven symbolized by the 24 elders.
While there will be “saints” in the Tribulation, the term applies equally to the “godly ones” of the Old Testament, the present age, and the Tribulation years yet to come. This term, together with phrases such as those who “die in the Lord,” and “those who keep the commandments of God,” as well as the word “elect,” describe those who shall trust in Christ during the Tribulation. “The chosen ones of the Tribulation days do not have to be the same as the elect of the church simply because the same term is used of both groups” (62).
Ryrie develops the question of populating the Millennial Kingdom. “When the Millennium begins, some people have to be alive in unresurrected bodies, who can beget children and populate that kingdom” (75). The Scriptures seem to teach that all the wicked will be judged prior to the Kingdom, and that all who are raptured will put on immortality. This is a major problem for those who believe in a posttribulational Rapture, for according this view none would be left in normal human bodies to enter and to populate the Kingdom. For the Posttribs, Robert Gundry presents a twofold answer to this problem: (1) The 144,000 will not be saved during the Tribulation, but shall be “physically preserved” and “converted immediately after the rapture as they see their Messiah descending onto the earth.” (2) The Gentile parents will come from the wicked who will somehow escape death and judgment at the end of the Tribulation (Gundry, 83, 137).
Both answers are faulty, for the 144,000 are presented in Revelation 7:1-17; Revelation 14:1-20 as redeemed witnesses, winning an innumerable multitude to Christ during the Tribulation, evidently dying for their faith and caught up with songs of rejoicing into the presence of the Lamb (Revelation 14:3-5). And Gundry’s “partial destruction” of the Gentiles which “would leave the remaining unsaved to populate the millennial earth,” plays havoc with the “sheep and the goats judgment” of Matthew 25:31-46, which is both final and soteriological.
Scripture clearly places this judgment at the Second Coming of Christ (Matthew 25:31-32), but Gundry is forced to locate it after the Millennium. Far more simple and Biblical to have a period after the Rapture but before the Revelation, during which many shall be redeemed, some of whom will enter and populate the Millennial Kingdom. This is the view that pretribulationism espouses. In brief summary, Ryrie counters the Posttrib view that God somehow throws a “mantle of safety” over the Church in the Tribulation. He shows also that the “Day of the Lord” cannot begin with a time of “peace and safety” (1 Thessalonians 5:3) if, as Posttribs proclaim, “it begins with the wrath of God poured out at Armageddon.”
Further, “Posttribulationism has a veritable logjam (of endtime events) at the second coming of Christ” (100). It fails to show how the righteous can be protected from the various wraths of the Tribulation period, surviving the wrath of God but subject to the wrath of Satan. Since many shall die, this would be a very “selective protection.”
Revelation 3:10 gives a better solution. It is not a selective safe conduct through that hour, but removal from the hour itself. As Ryrie puts it, “The only way to escape worldwide trouble is not to be on the earth” (117). The Rapture is not a threat of near extermination, but a bright and blessed hope which causes us to “love His appearing” (2 Timothy 4:8). THE RAPTURE: TRUTH OR CONSEQUENCES
Widely read and acclaimed are the prophetic books of Hal Lindsey, beginning with the popular The Late Great Planet Earth (1970) and leading up to The Rapture: Truth or Consequences, published simultaneously in the United States and Canada in 1983. The language of these books is generally contemporary rather than theological because he is aiming at another age group and a different culture from the average student of Bible prophecy. Nevertheless, Lindsey deals with some profound Biblical themes as he exercises his “gift of simplicity.” His book about the Rapture especially is a serious discussion of the Biblical passages and doctrinal themes which indicate the relationship of the Rapture to the Tribulation, giving us “a blueprint of tomorrow’s history.”
Readers will appreciate Lindsey’s charts of the various Tribulation and Millennial views, and in the Bible exposition passages they will be impressed with his evident scholarship and continual use of the New Testament Greek. Those who enjoy comparing theological systems will find a helpful analysis of midtribulationist Mary Stewart Reife, When Your Money Fails, and posttribulationist Robert Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation.
Lindsey begins his discussion by clarifying the main issues at stake and stressing the areas of common agreement between the exponents of pre-, mid- and posttribulationism, many of whom are careful scholars and greatly used of the Lord. He clarifies the true nature of the Church and the importance of dispensational distinctions. He discusses the chronology and judgments found in the Book of Revelation, the important promise of Revelation 3:10, and the “search for the missing Church,” by which he means the Rapture. In summary, “the promise of being kept from the hour; the identity of those who dwell in heaven; the Church’s absence from earth in chapters 4 through 19; the bride’s presence in heaven before the second coming, all fit into the pattern of a pre-Tribulation Rapture scenario” (111). In discussing the “Restrainer” of 2 Thessalonians 2:1-17, Lindsey presents strong evidence that “he who restrains” is undoubtedly the Holy Spirit. He concludes that “His unique ministries in, through and for the believer will be removed with the Church” (138). In the light of the permanent indwelling of the Spirit within the Church (John 14:16; Romans 8:9), an even stronger statement might be that the removal of the Spirit before the revelation of Antichrist sets the time of the Rapture as pretribulational.
He argues effectively for various stages in the “first resurrection,” showing that the “dead in Christ” rise before the translation of living saints at the Rapture while the resurrection of Tribulation martyrs occurs after the coming of Christ at His Revelation (Revelation 20:4-6). Lindsey then closes his book with a listing of world events “moving toward a catastrophic end.”
Throughout The Rapture there is displayed a warm personal and spiritual note, so often lost in the midst of theological argument. Lindsey closes his discussion as follows: “The hope of the Rapture is a very practical force in my life at this point in history. It motivates me to obtain combat knowledge of the Bible in order to be able to face the perilous times that precede the Tribulation.” Even more, “It motivates me to win as many to Christ before it’s too late.... Although I grieve over the lost world that is headed toward catastrophe, the hope of the Rapture keeps me from despair in the midst of ever-worsening world conditions” (176). To which this reviewer adds a hearty “Amen!” - for this is the main thrust of the Blessed Hope! THE RAPTURE: PRE-, MID-, OR POST-TRIBULATIONAL?
Bridging the considerable gap between the three primary Rapture viewpoints is a “head-to-head” debate entitled The Rapture: Pre-, Mid-, or Post-Tribulational? This 1984 publication is written by four personal friends, three of whom are colleagues on the faculty of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. Mutually respectful in tone and highly academic in content, their essays provide an important addition to the Rapture literature, especially for those who desire to give careful attention to the use and meaning of the Greek words involved in the exposition of primary New Testament passages. While they are friends, these men do debate vigorously, and each has opportunity to bring his response to the two alternate positions.
Introducing the debate is an excellent essay by Richard R. Reiter, “A History of the Development of the Rapture Positions.” He traces the history of the Rapture-Tribulation dispute from the Niagara Bible Conference era, 1878-1909, through the period of pretribulation predominance from 1909-1952, to what he calls the “resurgence of posttribulationism” from 1952 to the present. Many will find it fascinating to read the view of great spiritual leaders of the past, such as John N. Darby, D. L. Moody, A. J. Gordon, James H. Brookes, C. I. Scofield, Arthur T. Pierson and Arno C. Gaebelein - all of them staunch pretribulationists - together with the rising challenge of Robert Cameron, Nathaniel West, William G. Moorhead and W. J. Erdman, all of whom espoused a posttribulational eschatology. The growing harshness of the debate is revealed by “the bitterness of West’s tirade” through the “derogatory tone” of Alexander Reese to the abusive comments of Robert Cameron, who speaks of “opposing this Secret Rapture fly-away-from-tribulation theory” which is “only a trick of the Devil to fool God’s people so that they will not be on the firing line for God.” Such was the vitriolic tirade which began to emerge, primarily from the posttribulational camp.
Refreshingly, the following three authors rise high above such bitter denunciation, calling for “greater humility in regard to detail” and a “unity which allows for diversity and promotes toleration.” This is a welcome and timely appeal.
“The Case for the Pretribulational Rapture Position” is presented by Paul D. Feinberg, Associate Professor of Biblical and Systematic Theology. He admits that a surrender of the widely held Pretrib position is not, as some have suggested, “the first step on the proverbial slippery step that leads one to the rocks of liberalism.” Nevertheless, the Rapture question is of the greatest importance because it “touches the extremely important issues of biblical interpretation, the relationship between the Church and Israel, and the course of human history” (47).
Feinberg argues for pretribulationism from three main positions: (1) The entire Tribulation period is characterized as the “outpouring of penal, retributive, divine wrath,” from which the Church of Jesus Christ is promised exemption - both from the experience of wrath and the time of wrath. He rightly distinguishes between divine wrath and the normal trials and sufferings of the present life, including persecution from evil men. The Christian life is pictured in the Scripture as a battle to be fought and an athletic contest demanding discipline and endurance. However, 1 Thessalonians 1:10; 1 Thessalonians 5:9 clearly promise exemption from the coming wrath of God.
He debates the view of Gundry that “divine wrath does not blanket the entire seventieth week, probably not even the latter half of it, but concentrates at the close” by observing that “wrath” occurs in the Revelation as early as the sixth seal, and that it is difficult to see how famine, war and death would fail to touch believers as well as unbelievers. Even Revelation 3:10 indicates that this period of trial falls upon “the whole world,” and promises exemption not only from divine wrath but also from the very time of wrath. He argues from classical literature, the Septuagint and the New Testament that the Greek preposition ek indicates “a position outside its object,” and that the combination tareo ek promises “a preservation outside of a time period,” which demands the removal of the Church prior to the time period called Tribulation (68).
(2) Feinberg then argues for the necessity of an interval between the Rapture of the Church and the Second Coming of Christ, so that some can be saved to go into the coming Kingdom in nonglorified bodies and thus populate the earth during the millennial reign of Christ. There shall be Gentiles as well as Jews in the coming Kingdom, although Ezekiel 20:37-38 declares that “rebel Jews” shall not enter therein, while Matthew 25:31-46 similarly describes the destruction of wicked Gentiles. Since no wicked shall enter Christ’s Kingdom, “there must be a separation of the Rapture from the Second Advent so that people with natural, physical bodies can be saved and populate the millennial Kingdom” (79).
(3) There is a marked difference between Scripture passages describing the Rapture and those which describe the Second Coming of Christ to judge the wicked and to establish His Kingdom of righteousness. While there are no signs to alert the believer that the Rapture is near, very definite signs and events lead up to and signal the return of Christ from glory.
Every passage dealing with the Second Coming is set in the context of Tribulation and judgment, while the Rapture passages make no mention of such distress. The Second Advent texts do not teach the translation of living saints nor the resurrection of those who have died in Christ, but give promise only to martyred Tribulation saints. Also, when the Rapture passages are compared with Second Coming passages, there is a clear inconsistency concerning the time of the Rapture and the destination of those who shall be caught up.
Feinberg closes his section with the plea: “May our differences never becloud the joy and expectation of seeing our Lord at His visible and personal return,” and may our disagreements only “serve as a greater impetus to the study and clarity” of the prophetic Scriptures (86). In the third chapter, Gleason L. Archer argues “The Case for the Mid-Seventieth-Week Rapture Position.” He prefers this title to “Midtribulationism” because he views the first three and one half years as a “lesser tribulation, not nearly as terrifying or destructive of life as those fearsome plagues that will dominate the last three and one half years” (139). Thus he claims that his view “is really a form of pretribulation Rapture.” However, his identification of the “last trump” of the Rapture with the “seventh trumpet” of the Tribulation, and his identification of the raptured Church with the 144,000 of Revelation 14:1-20 are much more reminiscent of the Posttrib position. The final chapter of the book is written by Douglas J. Moo, assistant professor of New Testament at Trinity. He is to be commended for writing graciously, for expounding all the primary Scriptures, and for recognizing that “no true believer will experience the wrath of God.” However, he harmonizes this statement with the Posttrib position by declaring that “wrath appears to be concentrated in the last part of the Tribulation period.” He also uses a theory of selectivity, saying “God’s people can escape divine wrath through present during its outpouring” (174).
Moo counters the obvious fact that many Tribulation judgments fall upon the entire inhabited earth by departing from normal, literal interpretation. He affirms, “No description of the Tribulation indicates that it will involve greater suffering than many believers have already experienced” (176). This weak response is in direct contradiction of Daniel 12:1 and Matthew 24:21, which declare that “the Tribulation, the great one” will be an unprecedented period in the history of suffering humanity.
Unlike many Posttribs, Moo does face up to the implication of John 14:1-3, which strongly implies that those raptured go directly to the Father’s house, which is heaven. He responds: “The fact that believers at a posttribulational Rapture would rise to meet the Lord in the air only to return immediately to earth with Him creates no difficulty, for the text does not state that believers will go directly to heaven ... only that they will always be with the Lord” (178). Responding to Moo, Archer calls this “a yo-yo procedure of popping up and down,” rightfully declaring that if anything, “these upward-bobbing saints will only impede the momentum of His earthward charges as He rushes down to crush the rebellious hosts of the Beast and all his minions. The most that can be said of such a ‘Rapture’ is that it is a rather secondary sideshow of minimal importance” (215). To make the Rapture posttribulational, Moo identifies the “last trump” of 1 Corinthians 15:52 with the trump which gathers the elect of Israel in Matthew 24:31 into the Millennial Kingdom, “an event that is always posttribulational” (179). In discussing the coming “wrath,” Moo makes escape from wrath a reward, saying: “Paul exhorts the Thessalonians to live godly lives in order that they might avoid the judgmental aspects of the Day” (186). Here, he sounds more like a Partial Rapturist. However, since his treatment of the main Rapture passages is quite lengthy and involved, it may be best at this point to encourage a careful reading of these pages and then to consider the adequate response of Paul Feinberg found on pages 223-31 of the same book.
Concerning the similarities Moo indicates between the primary Rapture and the primary Second Advent passages, Archer observes that between the two “the differences in atmosphere, mood, and setting are so obvious as to discourage all hope of identifying the two as pointing to the one and same transaction” (217).
We are indebted to these men for bringing us a fair, friendly, and scholarly presentation of the three primary views relative to the time of the Rapture. As already indicated, they have made an excellent contribution to the growing literature of the Rapture question.