Pretribulational Rapture

[Siberian]

Why is the pre-tribunal rapture viewpoint so vehemently defended among many Baptists with so thin biblical support?

Also, should this be a test of orthodoxy, and, if so, to what extent? I recently heard a pastor tell a friend in another city to leave his church because the pastor of that church held to a post-trip (but pre-mil) return of the Lord.

 

[Zenas]

Jesus will return to usher in the end of the age and judge the living and the dead. Beyond that, eschatology should not be a test of orthodoxy.

Has anyone noticed that only those who believe in a pretribulation rapture use this belief as a test of orthodoxy?

 

[revmwc]

Why is the pre-tribunal rapture viewpoint so vehemently defended among many Baptists with so thin biblical support?

Also, should this be a test of orthodoxy, and, if so, to what extent? I recently heard a pastor tell a friend in another city to leave his church because the pastor of that church held to a post-trip (but pre-mil) return of the Lord.

First define thin bilical support. I see a geat deal of Biblical support for it.

Starting of course with Revelation 4: 1After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.

2And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.

3And he that sat was to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone: and there was a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an emerald.

4And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold.

This seems to mirror what Paul says will happen in 1st Thessalonians 4:13But 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.

John says He heard the sound of trumpet and when He was in the spirit he saw 24 elders in heaven with crowns upon their heads.

We see Paul teach that the believers being in heaven will receive thier rewards. 1 Corthians 3: 11For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

12Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

13Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

14If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

They have their rewards when they face Chrsit at the judgement seat.

2 Corinthians 5:8We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

9Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.

10For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Every believer will face Christ for reward. While the unbeliever will face the Great White Throne judgement.

Revelation 20:10And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

11And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.

12And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

These face judgement by the book of life, not to receive rewards but judgement for what was written in the books.

Matthew 24: 4And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.

5For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

6And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.

7For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.

8All these are the beginning of sorrows

All takes place prior to the tribulation,

Then Matthew 24: 9Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

10And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.

11And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.

12And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

13But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

14And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

15When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand

16Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

17Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

18Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

19And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

20But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

21For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

22And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

shows the tribulation.

So the pre-tribulational and pre-mill view has a great deal of scripture to back it up.

 

[humblethinker]

Revmwc, I share your thoughts and I agree with Siberian that pretrib should not be a test of orthodoxy.

 

[Tom Butler]

Revmwc, I share your thoughts and I agree with Siberian that pretrib should not be a test of orthodoxy.

I'll join you in your view.

I think pre-trib folks are reasonably charitable toward us post-tribbers these days, but back in the 70s, if you were't a pre--tribber, you might not be saved. It was definitely a test of fellowship for some dispies.

That was my view until my pastor at the time asked me to give him one clear, unmistakable, not-subject-to any-other-interpretation verse which taught it.

Ooops.

 

[Logos1]

Dispies are the most fun of all the eschatology views

When the rapture story first made its appearance in 1800s England Spurgeon remarked about it:

"there is a certain troublesome sect abroad nowadays, to whom the one thing needful is a perpetual speculation upon prophecy…They plume themselves upon an expected secret rapture , and I know not what vain imaginings beside”

Most respectable Christians found it to be fruit cake territory. Amazing how Christian views can change over time.

While I must confess I find it nonbiblical to say the least. It is the most fun of all the prophecy views. Glad I got to live while it was on the scene just for the entertainment value of it.

 

[Iconoclast]

First define thin bilical support. I see a geat deal of Biblical support for it.

Starting of course with Revelation 4: 1After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.

2And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.

3And he that sat was to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone: and there was a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an emerald.

4And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold.

This seems to mirror what Paul says will happen in 1st Thessalonians 4:13But 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.

John says He heard the sound of trumpet and when He was in the spirit he saw 24 elders in heaven with crowns upon their heads.

We see Paul teach that the believers being in heaven will receive thier rewards. 1 Corthians 3: 11For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

12Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

13Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

14If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

15If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

They have their rewards when they face Chrsit at the judgement seat.

2 Corinthians 5:8We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

9Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.

10For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

Every believer will face Christ for reward. While the unbeliever will face the Great White Throne judgement.

Revelation 20:10And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

11And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.

12And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

These face judgement by the book of life, not to receive rewards but judgement for what was written in the books.

Matthew 24: 4And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.

5For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

6And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.

7For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.

8All these are the beginning of sorrows

All takes place prior to the tribulation,

Then Matthew 24: 9Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.

10And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.

11And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.

12And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

13But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

14And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

15When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand

16Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

17Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

18Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

19And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

20But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

21For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

22And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

shows the tribulation.

So the pre-tribulational and pre-mill view has a great deal of scripture to back it up.

rev 4:1 does not support this at all

 

[Allan]

Why is the pre-tribunal rapture viewpoint so vehemently defended among many Baptists with so thin biblical support?

Also, should this be a test of orthodoxy, and, if so, to what extent? I recently heard a pastor tell a friend in another city to leave his church because the pastor of that church held to a post-trip (but pre-mil) return of the Lord.

Perhaps it is defended because there ISN'T such a 'thin' biblical support for it.

However, it is silly at best to make it a test of orthodoxy.
If we did that, then you must exclude the Amils and preterists as well since the historic doctrine of the early church held to a rapture viewpoint, albeit a post-rapture/pre-mil view. If we did make such a test of orthodoxy, it will leave very few people for that church to associate with

 

[Allan]

When the rapture story first made its appearance in 1800s England Spurgeon remarked about it:

"there is a certain troublesome sect abroad nowadays, to whom the one thing needful is a perpetual speculation upon prophecy…They plume themselves upon an expected secret rapture , and I know not what vain imaginings beside”

Most respectable Christians found it to be fruit cake territory. Amazing how Christian views can change over time.

While I must confess I find it nonbiblical to say the least. It is the most fun of all the prophecy views. Glad I got to live while it was on the scene just for the entertainment value of it.

The 'rapture story' has been around LONG before the 1800's. The post-trib view was the original orthodox view of the churchv for the first 450'ish years, and the pre-trib view actually can be found even earlier than the 1800's. It just became a 'popular' view at that time

 

[Siberian]

Perhaps it is defended because there ISN'T such a 'thin' biblical support for it.

However, it is silly at best to make it a test of orthodoxy.
If we did that, then you must exclude the Amils and preterists as well since the historic doctrine of the early church held to a rapture viewpoint, albeit a post-rapture/pre-mil view. If we did make such a test of orthodoxy, it will leave very few people for that church to associate with

I say it is 'thin' because it cannot be proven by the Scriptures. It is a possibility, but not absolutely necessary from an exegetical standpoint. And most people who "see" it in the Scriptures simply use the same arguments (indirect implications, exegetical assumptions, etc.) as Darby, et. al. I doubt many of today's proponents would come to that conclusion had they not been taught that - and it was just them the HS and the Bible. At least, they would not be so strong on it - how could they?

 

[Allan]

I say it is 'thin' because it cannot be proven by the Scriptures. It is a possibility, but not absolutely necessary from an exegetical standpoint. And most people who "see" it in the Scriptures simply use the same arguments (indirect implications, exegetical assumptions, etc.) as Darby, et. al. I doubt many of today's proponents would come to that conclusion had they not been taught that - and it was just them the HS and the Bible. At least, they would not be so strong on it - how could they?

Hmm.. funny, I did. At least in going back over my views to determine if they stood in line with scripture.
Almost no one comes to their views in a vacuum.

And while I agree a pre-trib view is not 'necessary' from an exegetical standpoint, it is found in scripture.. and not just via 'indirect implication, and exegetical assumptions'. While I agree many of the passages can be seen this way, not all. Therefore, it can and is continued to be held quite strongly. Me personally, I hold to Pre-trib but I am not opposed to the Post-trib view either. I can see both in scripture. The whole Amil and Pret positions are another story. And lest we forget, Darby was NOT the first person to hold this view as it can be seen nearly 300 years earlier, though like Augustine and Calvin and Aminius, Darby was the one who popularized it.

I have posted this a time or two before so I'll do so again:
Long before Darby or Scofield.
Here are some examples of those who held and proclaimed a pre-trib view BEFORE 1830 (other than John Darby 1800-1882)

Joseph Mede (1586-1638);
Edward Bickersteth (1786-1850);
James H. Frere (1779-1866);
William Cuninghame (1775-1849); amoung various others.

Remember that the pre-trib is only slightly younger than the also new-on-scene, Covenant theology.

 

[revmwc]

rev 4:1 does not support this at all

Revelation 4:1 when John sees heaven the 24 elders are enthroned and rewarded, then the great tribulation events are shown. Along with the voice and sound of the trumpet calling John and saying come up hither. Supports it quite well actually.

 

[Siberian]

Hmm.. funny, I did. At least in going back over my views to determine if they stood in line with scripture.
Almost no one comes to their views in a vacuum.

That is actually what I mean; most folks who hold the view do so after being taught them, yourself included (as per your comments above). You went back to Scripture to see if the view stood, you did not come out of the Scriptures with the view emerging. And I see your point, that is how it usually works. However, the Scriptural support for this doctrine (especially the very refined versions of the dispy schools) is not at all comprehensive. And I disagree with one point in your next paragraph... from what I see in the arguments of pre-tribbers this is a case made mostly with indirect implication and exegetical assumptions , not exegesis. If you limited your discussion to what is clearly written, the case is most thin indeed.

And while I agree a pre-trib view is not 'necessary' from an exegetical standpoint, it is found in scripture.. and not just via 'indirect implication, and exegetical assumptions'. While I agree many of the passages can be seen this way, not all. Therefore, it can and is continued to be held quite strongly. Me personally, I hold to Pre-trib but I am not opposed to the Post-trib view either. I can see both in scripture. The whole Amil and Pret positions are another story.

You and I basically agree then. I agree that the pre-trib view is a possible conclusion that one can make from Scripture (i.e., that it is not comprehensively 'ruled out') and I don't have a hard time with folks who hold strongly to the view, so long as it is not a test of orthodoxy. I guess I run in circles with several old-time dispy-seminary or Bible college grads who make too much of it, in my opinion. One of them recently told me it was arrogant not to believe it, since great learned men who have studied it out have thus concluded.

And lest we forget, Darby was NOT the first person to hold this view as it can be seen nearly 300 years earlier, though like Augustine and Calvin and Aminius, Darby was the one who popularized it.

I have posted this a time or two before so I'll do so again:
Long before Darby or Scofield.
Here are some examples of those who held and proclaimed a pre-trib view BEFORE 1830 (other than John Darby 1800-1882)

Joseph Mede (1586-1638);
Edward Bickersteth (1786-1850);
James H. Frere (1779-1866);
William Cuninghame (1775-1849); amoung various others.

Remember that the pre-trib is only slightly younger than the also new-on-scene, Covenant theology.

We cannot forget; those who hold the view remind us of this at nearly every turn. However, it is a fact that, when considering the history of interpretation, it is an extremely minor view until Darby's time. This was never the historic position of any significant portion of the church until the 19th century.

In discussing this point, a pastor friend was quick to point out my error. "It was the majority view of the 1st century church, that is why it is in the Bible." Right, my bad. I must have forgotten that.

 

[JesusFan]

Hmm.. funny, I did. At least in going back over my views to determine if they stood in line with scripture.
Almost no one comes to their views in a vacuum.

And while I agree a pre-trib view is not 'necessary' from an exegetical standpoint, it is found in scripture.. and not just via 'indirect implication, and exegetical assumptions'. While I agree many of the passages can be seen this way, not all. Therefore, it can and is continued to be held quite strongly. Me personally, I hold to Pre-trib but I am not opposed to the Post-trib view either. I can see both in scripture. The whole Amil and Pret positions are another story. And lest we forget, Darby was NOT the first person to hold this view as it can be seen nearly 300 years earlier, though like Augustine and Calvin and Aminius, Darby was the one who popularized it.

I have posted this a time or two before so I'll do so again:
Long before Darby or Scofield.
Here are some examples of those who held and proclaimed a pre-trib view BEFORE 1830 (other than John Darby 1800-1882)

Joseph Mede (1586-1638);
Edward Bickersteth (1786-1850);
James H. Frere (1779-1866);
William Cuninghame (1775-1849); amoung various others.

Remember that the pre-trib is only slightly younger than the also new-on-scene, Covenant theology.

this is a good posting on this subject...
believe that we are commanded by the Lord to maintain the unity of the body, and that We need to make sure that we divide/break the unity of the Body, its on "essentials" of the Christian Faith...

For example, I DO believe in pre trib pre mill as to return of the Lord, BUT would never hold that unless one espoused same, would somehow be a heretic/in error etc.. DO have problems with those who hold full preteierism that deny a Second Coming in a literal physical sense though.. Amil Post Mil pre Mill partial Pret do think they have "worse" understanding in some ways, but all are in "veil of orthodoxy"...

I hold to TULIP, as friends who do not, but this will not cause us to break fellowship...
have friends who deny Gifts today, I hold they still are in some degree, still not breaking fellowship...

those areas where I would see aneed to break the unity/say was an essential Christian doctrine would be:
Deny the Bible as being inpired word of God
Deny Cross of Christ, jesus only way to God, saved by grace/faith alone
Deny second Coming

Notice did NOT list dispy/covenant/cal/arm etc in their, believe one is "more" biblical than other view, but NOT cause to disassociate, break bond etc

we really need to know and make sure dividing over "Just essentials" of the faith, not preferences/convictions/etc

calvinism may be a "better way" to approach/view scriptures, but NOT "the Gospel" or means other views not valid to a degree also...

 

[thomas15]

Why is the pre-tribunal rapture viewpoint so vehemently defended among many Baptists with so thin biblical support?

A better question to ask is why are the covenants of works, grace and redemption viewpoint so much defended by any Baptist when there is no Biblical support for those particular covenants? Why would Jehovah God, who made numerous covenants with men such as Abraham and Moses that specifically spelled out the terms, do not do so with the above mentioned covenants? Who are the two parties of those covenants? Can someone show me a passage of scripture where Jehovah God cuts a works, grace or redemption covenant with man? Can someone show me a place in the Bible where if one of those parties breaks one of the above mentioned covenants, God will act in some decisive way, good or bad?

And yes I'm fully onboard with Eph 2:8-9