Pretribulationism

It has always amazed me that the group of people, pretribulationists, who have been more enamored by what the Bible teaches about end-time events are the same group of people who are so dogmatic that the church will not be here to experience most of these events.
There are two other inconsistencies in their belief system that I would like to briefly discuss: How the concept of imminency contradicts 1) Date Setting and 2) Their omnipresent citing of Matthew 24:36 to refer to the rapture (this latter point will be picked up in Part 2 of the next article).

Imminency and Date Setting?
In the 1970s, just when Pretribulationism was beginning to fade, a spate of popular “Left Behind” style pretrib books appeared in bookstores galvanizing this position once again.
One of these was called The Late Great Planet Earth by Hal Lindsey. The book was written on a popular level and attempted to read current international events and world conditions into the prophetic Biblical texts. Needless to say this 1970 “Da Vinci Code” became a bestseller.
It is important to note that the author Hal Lindsey is a committed pretribulationist who affirms “imminency.” Imminency is defined as “that teaching which affirms that Christ’s return to rapture the church can occur at any moment; and that no prophesied events must occur before his return, though these events may happen, but not necessarily will.”
Here is Hal Lindsey’s (and pretribulationism as a whole) contradiction. The thesis of Lindsey’s book is predicated on the fact that particular world events have happened and certain world conditions now exist, therefore Christ can come back to rapture the church soon.
These events he listed were: The Jews now govern the state of Israel; Russia has fulfilled Biblical prophecies of the Old Testament; moral conditions of the world exist; etc. In other words, Lindsey suggests that Christ could not come back if these events have not taken place.
You will hear often from pretribulationists that since the Jews have reclaimed Israel in 1948, Christ can return soon. For example, Lindsey says,

Another important event that had to take place before the stage would be fully set for the “seven-year countdown” was the repossession of the ancient Jerusalem. (emphasis mine) p. 54

I ask, how could Christ have come back at “any moment” before the “repossession of Jerusalem”?
If this contradiction to their fundamental belief in imminency is not enough, Lindsey actually goes a step further and predicts (falsely) the very year that he believes Christ will come back. He writes,

When the Jewish people, after nearly 2,000 years of exile, under relentless persecution, became a nation again on 14 May 1948 the “fig tree” put forth its first leaves.

Jesus said that this would indicate that He was “at the door,” ready to return. Then He said, “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place” (Matthew 24:34 NASB).

What generation? Obviously, in context, the generation that would see the sign–chief among them the rebirth of Israel. A generation in the Bible is something like forty years. If this is a correct deduction then within forty years or so of 1948, all these things could take place. Many scholars who have studied Bible prophecy all their lives believe that this is so. pp. 53-54

In other words, Lindsey started with the assumption that Jesus’ use of the term “fig tree” was applied to the starting date of 1948. Then he assumed that a Biblical generation of 40 years should be added to 1948, which would take us to 1988. And in Lindsey’s pretrib system, Christ raptures the church 7 years earlier, which would be 1981.
How can Christ come back at “any moment” before 1981? How could Christ have came back before 1948 if in fact Israel as a nation must exist again first?
This prophetic statement by Hal Lindsey in itself made him a false prophet since it did not come to fruition; its ramifications sadly lead many believers astray in the 70’s and 80’s.
The sensationalism of his book and other works like it began a deluge of pretrib books in the 70’s and 80’s; and not surprisingly we would find new titles by Lindsey such as The 1980’s, Countdown to Armageddon.
Other pretrib teachers would join the pantheon of false prognosticators such as Harold Camping, Jack Van Impe, et al..
Even in recent days, I ran across a pretrib blog in which this person was stressing the “imminency” of Christ’s return, and in the same blog post he was advocating that Christ will return in 2007.
He says,

I believe the Lord has put us on notice. I believe the Lord is saying to my spirit that the rapture will occur sometime during this new year, the Jewish year which is between this past Rosh Hashanah and next one which is Jewish Year 5768 : sunset September 12, 2007 – nightfall September 14, 2007. We all know the Lord’s voice and how He speaks to us as individuals. The Lord has put me on alert for the year, not the day or the hour. [Mt 24:36-39]

I can tell you that the one word in my mind right now is IMMINENT. It’s so close we can almost touch it (emphasis his).

In reality, most pretribluationists will not go as far as Lindsey and others and set dates for the rapture. However, you will still find the contradiction in most pretrib beliefs that the reclamation of Israel in 1948 was an event that must have happened before Christ can come back. And on this point you can reveal their contradiction.
In part 2, which I will post next week, I will address the second major common contradiction in affirming imminency with citing Matthew 24:36 to refer to the rapture.

by Rev. Roger D. Best
Back a number of years ago there was a very popular Christian movie entitled, “A Thief In The Night.” The film was shown in many churches and depicted the events immediately following the rapture of the church. Suddenly there was a great number of people who simply vanished from the earth, and the characters in the film came to the conclusion that the rapture had taken place and that it was time that they turn to Christ. It made for a great story. However, there was a problem; there was no solid Scriptural basis for the story. Let’s take a closer look and see exactly what the Bible says about Jesus coming as a thief.
There are two key passages that address this subject. 1 Thessalonians 5:2 says, “For you yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night.” A second passage is Revelation 3:3, “Remember therefore what you have received and heard; and keep it, and repent. If therefore you will not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you.”
Pretribulationalists respond quite differently to these two passages of Scripture.
Concerning the Revelation passage, Walter Scott in his book “Exposition of the Revelation of Jesus Christ” states that the people in the church at Sardis “had been counseled to watch, and now unless they do so, they are threatened with judgment. The character in which Christ would come to them is as a ‘thief in the night.’ He shall come as a judge, unexpectedly, at an unknown and unlooked for hour . . . Christ comes to the church as the morning star, to Israel as the sun of righteousness, and to the world and religious profession in sudden surprise as a ‘thief in the night.'” John Walvoord differs with Scott when he says in his book, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ,” “the same symbolism is used at the second coming of our Lord, but here the figure is related to that event. The judgment upon the church at Sardis, however, it is going to be just as unexpected, sudden, and irrevocable as that which is related to the second coming.” While Walvoord may very well be correct in seeing a specific application to the church at Sardis, it is equally necessary to see the far application to the church of all ages regarding the second coming.
The pretribulationist says that the day of the Lord immediately follows the rapture, and as a result they see the entire seventieth week as the day of the Lord or the wrath of God. And yet they see the first half of the tribulation as a time of peace when a great revival takes place. In the Thessalonian passage it clearly states in verse 3 that “destruction will come upon them suddenly.” Another passage that confirms this is 2 Peter 3:10, “But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.” It is clear that the question to be answered is: who is Christ coming to as a thief? In 1 Thessalonians 5:4 Paul writes, “But you brethren, are not in darkness, that the day should overtake you like a thief.” It is clear in the Revelation passage that the warning is to those who are asleep. In both cases the picture is the same- for the one who is not awake the coming will be like a thief; however, for the one that is awake, the coming will not be like a thief.
There is an important passage that points out the fatal flaw of those who state that the pretribulation rapture begins the day of the Lord. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 says, “Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering together to Him, that you may not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.” In other words, it is impossible for the day of the Lord to begin until the apostasy takes place and the revelation of the man of lawlessness (Antichrist) occurs. If Scripture means what is says, then the day of the Lord begins immediately after the rapture, which takes place after the apostasy comes and the Antichrist is revealed.
Jesus, in the Olivet discourse, tells us to watch for the signs and uses the fig tree as an example. In Matthew 24:32-33 He says, “Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender, and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; even so you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door.” He goes on in verse 36 to tell us that we do not know the day or the hour, but as Paul says in 1 Thessalonians 5:1, we do know the times and the seasons.
We are exhorted in that same chapter to be alert and sober. Yes, Jesus is coming like a thief to unbelievers and even to believers that are not prepared. But to faithful obedient believers He is not coming as a thief but rather as the Lord of glory. The question is: are you expecting Him, and are you aware of what takes place just prior to His coming, or will He indeed come to you as a thief?

We continue our response to Dave Hunt’s “critique” of the Prewrath Rapture. After a couple more installments responding to his critique, we will begin to examine his other pretribulational material. We continue,

We have previously given numerous reasons why the church must be raptured at the beginning of the seven-year tribulation period.

“Numerous reasons”? No, they were simply assertions; further, he failed to cite one single Biblical text to support his assertion that the “church must be raptured at the beginning of the ‘seven-year tribulation period.’" I would like to challenge Hunt by asking him to provide just one Biblical text that teaches that the rapture will occur before the “seven-year” tribulation period. This is the nature of Tradition… repeat a particular assertion and over-time it becomes assumed, and consequently, a desire to give a Biblical defense is lessened. Surprisingly, it took half way into his article to even mention the Prewrath Rapture position. He says,

Once the dominant belief among evangelicals, the pretrib Rapture is falling increasingly into disfavor. The latest attack upon this belief is found in Marvin Rosenthal’s book The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church: A New Understanding of the Rapture, the Tribulation and the Second Coming. This book’s novel ideas cannot be supported by Scripture, and Rosenthal’s attempts to do so create numerous contradictions.

i) Hunt suggests here that many pretribers are becoming prewrathers. I must take the occasion here to highlight Tim LaHaye’s failed prediction about the Prewrath Rapture. Back in the early nineties in his book No Fear of the Storm he says on page page 113, "I predict it [Prewrath Rapture position] will prove to be an aberrant brainstorm that, despite its deep-pocketed two-year promotional campaign, will fade away before it becomes a fad."

I would council against anyone taking investment advice from LaHaye. Not only did the Prewrath Rapture view not "fade away," but over 15 years later it has become a popular and established view of the Rapture since then—not to mention that it is ironically the pretrib view that has lost popularity over the recent years. Interestingly, LaHaye gets personal by mentioning a "deep-pocketed two-year promotional campaign." This is rather hypocritical of LaHaye being that his own Left Behind series is an omnipresent promotional campaign with no end in site.

ii) Now, let me just stop a moment and say that in mature, responsible, and scholarly critiques of a position it is incumbent upon the person giving the critique to adequately explain the other person’s position so the readers can follow the argument. This entails citing texts and arguments that the other position uses to support their premises. Does Dave Hunt do this? Nope.

iii) He said, “that this position cannot be supported by Scripture.” So, I would expect Dave Hunt to interact with the position and Prewrath literature that he says lacks support. Where are these contradictions and Scriptural proofs? We are not told.

Rosenthal, long a confirmed pretribulationalist, has abandoned that position and "now believes that the Church will have to endure the persecution of the Antichrist." His basic thesis is that the church will "not escape all of the oppression of the ‘Tribulation’ period," but "will escape the wrath of God, which will be poured out…during the second half of the ‘Tribulation’ period."

Here is a perfect example in which Dave Hunt has all the facts in front of him to properly represent the Prewrath Rapture, yet he refuses to do so. Hunt fails to explain that the Prewrath Rapture does not believe that the “tribulation period” is all equally “oppression,” whatever that means.

Further, he says that this is the basic thesis. Again, he is in error. No mention that the Prewrath position holds that the Great Tribulation begins at the midpoint and which will continue for some unknown duration of time and then—we do not know the day or hour—it will be cut short with the Coming of Christ, which the righteous will be delivered and the subsequent Day of the Lord’s wrath will commence. Now how easy would it have been for Hunt to give that most basic description, let alone a fuller explanation of it? Hunt continues,

Numerous problems immediately arise. Since the Antichrist, according to Rosenthal, must appear first, the church is no longer watching and waiting for Christ but for Antichrist.

According to Rosenthal? No, according to the apostle Paul and our Lord,

Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, 2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come. 3 Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-3

Matthew 24:15 "So when you see standing in the holy place ‘the abomination that causes desolation,’ spoken of through the prophet Daniel– let the reader understand—

Both Jesus and Paul exhort us to look for the appearing of the Antichrist as a sign. Not because the Antichrist is our rescuer or deliverer, on the contrary, Antichrist is our persecutor. So it is not either/or for Jesus and Paul, as it is for Hunt. We keep alert for Antichrist so as to evade being deceived; we look for Christ to embrace his victory. These events can occur in any generation of the church, and therefore the revealing of the Antichrist will be a sign that our Lord’s return is ever so near.
 
In light of Hunt’ teaching, Paul’s words are fitting, "Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction." 2 Thessalonians 2:3 In our next installment responding to Hunt, we hope to see some of this "Scriptural support" that he says is out there, and hopefully some meaningful interaction with the Prewrath position, which we have not seen as of yet.

by Alan Kurschner
Dave Hunt of the Berean Call is a well-known Pretribulationist, which many of you know. With this article, I am beginning a series on the errors of Hunt’s Pretribulationism. Each article will be a short digestible piece, which you the reader can use for your own discussions with others.
Back a number of years ago, he wrote a “critique” against the Prewrath position. To my knowledge, no one has responded to it. I would like to respond point by point to his unsubstantiated–and misrepresented–remarks on the Prewrath Rapture. Let’s begin.
He says,

We could be caught up at any moment to meet Him in the air. That “blessed hope” causes this earth to lose its attraction, purifies our lives and motivates us to win the lost because we believe the time is short.

It should be noted that the Pretrib notion that Christ can come back at “any moment” is a relatively new idea that finds its origins in the 1830s. There is no documented evidence pre-1830 that anyone believed such an idea. Why? Because Christians for centuries have understood that certain prophesied events must occur first before Christ will come back and deliver his people and pour out his Day of the Lord’s wrath upon the ungodly.
Hunt identifies this novel idea with the “Blessed Hope.” The verse says, “while we wait for the blessed hope– the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,” Titus 2:13. No where in this text does it even hint that Christ’s return is at any moment—this promise is not teaching “imminency” but expectancy and eagerness.
The Blessed Hope is simply seeing the glorious appearing of Christ–it is not some “any momentness” that makes it blessed.
Moving on,

Our removal from earth to heaven in the Rapture will allow the Antichrist to be revealed to rule over the revived Roman Empire.

At this point we are not getting much interaction from Hunt on Prewrath Rapture literature. He makes the assertion that the rapture will allow the Antichrist to be revealed. Where is his scriptural support for this? What text even hints at such an idea.
What is Paul’s opinion on this matter? He says,

Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come. Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-3

In the clearest of words, Paul states that the “gathering to him” (i.e. rapture) and its corollary, the Day of the Lord, cannot occur “until” the man of lawlessness is revealed (a.k.a. Antichrist).
This one Pauline text has made more ex-pretribbers than any other text in Scripture. Paul is so emphatic that he says, “Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until.”
But what does Hunt do? He turns Paul’s teaching on his head and states the complete opposite meaning. I would like to challenge Hunt to examine the Pauline text above and explain where does he get the rapture occurring before Antichrist is revealed, in which Paul states just the contary with the gathering not occuring until the Antichrist revelation.
In pt.2 of responding to Hunt, we will continue critiquing his article.