All language subtitles for Problems and the Prewrath

it's a story that most of us in the west

know

or think we know if you've spent

any time in the christian faith you've

probably seen the movies

read the books or heard the sermons

about a forthcoming supernatural event

known as the rapture

a time when millions of people will

suddenly vanish from the earth

just prior to the greatest apocalyptic

event

imaginable for christians this has

become a message of hope and comfort

but it's also been the cause of major

disagreements

and even after years of debate the

church is still

equally divided on the major questions

about the rapture

can it really occur at any moment

or does the bible speak of certain

prophetic and celestial events that must

occur first

will the church have to face its

greatest enemy the antichrist

before the rapture or will the rapture

happen just before

he comes on the scene join us as we go

on a journey through the holy scriptures

to review and answer the most critical

aspects

of the rapture debate this is seven

pre-trib

problems and the pre-wrath rapture

[Music]

over the years many different views

about the timing of the rapture have

been proposed

but the rapture debate has been

especially active in the last decade or

so

and as a result there have been some

major shifts in the way that the

scholars have been teaching them

for example if you studied one of the

more popular views

pre-tribulationism 20 or 30 years ago

you probably wouldn't even recognize

what is being taught in the seminaries

today

part of the reason for these sometimes

drastic changes in pre-tribulational

theology

has been a direct result of criticisms

from scholars holding to the pre-wrath

position on the rapture

which has massively gained in popularity

in the last 30 years

overtaking the mid tribulation position

for example by a significant amount

but most of this debate has taken place

among scholars in theological journals

and in university lecture halls

so it's not something the average

christian engages with

and even most pastors aren't aware of

the intricate arguments that the

theologians have been wrestling with

the past few years in this documentary

we interviewed many scholars

theologians and pastors who hold the

pre-wrath position

on the rapture and ask them to help us

determine the most critical aspects

of the rapture debate we then distilled

these arguments down to the seven

pre-trib problems which we will present

one by one before we present the first

problem on our list

we need to understand the basics of the

main rapture timing positions

most rapture views teach that the end

times are played out over a period of

seven years

this seven year time frame is sometimes

called the seventieth week of daniel

because of daniel 9 verses 24 to 27

where the seven year period is first

introduced

the disagreements primarily concern when

the rapture happens

and when the wrath of god known as the

day of the lord begins

in relationship to that seven year

period

pre-tribulationists believe the rapture

can begin at any moment

but whenever it does happen it will

prove to be just before the seven year

period

begins and that the entire seven year

period

is the day of the lord

mid-tribulationists believe the rapture

occurs at the midpoint

of the seven year period and the last

half of the seventieth week

is the day of the lord

post-tribulationists believe the rapture

occurs at the very end

of the seven year period most

post-tribbers believe that the day of

the lord is a literal

24-hour day occurring at the very end of

the seven years

it should be said that some

post-tribbers believe the day of the

lord is longer

specifically that it will start at the

midpoint and continue to the end

but that the church will be

supernaturally protected through the

wrath of god

until the final day when the rapture

will take place

the pre-wrath view teaches that the

rapture occurs at some

unknown time after the midpoint

they say that no one knows exactly when

the rapture happens

it could be weeks or it could be years

after the midpoint

but that it will be after the midpoint

they teach that on whatever day the

rapture does occur the day of the lord's

wrath

will begin on that same day pre-rathers

therefore believe that the church

will face the persecution of the

antichrist that begins at the midpoint

of the seven year period but that

persecution

is said to be cut short with the rapture

basically the idea is that on the very

day that god's people are out of the way

the wrath of god known as the day of the

lord begins on the rest of the world

i'll explain all the details and the

reasonings behind most of these

positions as we progress

but there is one more term that really

needs defining before we go any further

recently it has become something of a

tradition to refer to the entire seven

year period

as the tribulation period this is

unnecessarily confusing

since there is a recognized theological

term called the great tribulation

and almost all biblical scholars

regardless of their view on the rapture

recognize that the great tribulation is

specifically the time of the antichrist

persecution

which begins after the midpoint in other

words

in order to avoid confusion with the

great tribulation

we will refer to the seven year period

as either the seven year period

or the 70th week of daniel in this film

[Music]

the first pre-trib problem on our list

is called the precursor problem

and in order to understand it we need to

first talk a little about the so-called

day of the lord the day of the lord is

an old testament concept for when god

shows up in history and finally

in the end to judge his enemies

and sometimes to vindicate or rescue his

people it really means the time of god's

wrath

in an ultimate sense when god will pour

out his judgment his

vengeance on a wicked world

scripture explicitly declares that

the saints will not experience

the eschatological wrath of god

the wrath of god that is typically

associated

with what we call the day of the lord

therefore

the question in my opinion the really

the only question

is when does the wrath of god begin

as mentioned earlier pre-tribulationists

teach that the entire seven year period

is the wrath of god and that the rapture

will occur

just before it begins importantly they

also believe that the rapture is

imminent meaning that it can happen at

any moment

and there are no prophetic events that

must come before the rapture

however there are at least four events

explicitly stated

to come before the day of the lord in

scripture

elijah will be sent before the day of

the lord

a rebellion or apostasy will occur

the man of lawlessness will be revealed

before the day of the lord

also a very specific series of cosmic

disturbances

will be given as a sign before the day

of the lord

now this is a very big problem for

pre-tribulational imminence because

as pre-tribulational imminence is

defined there are to be no

precursors no necessary precursors

before

the coming of the day of the lord or the

coming of the rapture

but we have explicit declarations in the

bible

that we have several precursors that

have to come

before the great and terrible table lord

pre-tribulational teachers

admit themselves that if you can find

one

event that will occur before the rapture

then it contradicts eminence theology

and hence it contradicts

pre-tribulational theology

well definitely the fact that the the

scriptures

uh uh tell us that there are going to be

precursors to the day of the lord

is an argument against

pre-tribulationism

to clarify based on where pre-trib

teachers have traditionally placed the

rapture

if these four biblically prophesied

events occur

before the day of the lord it means

there are in fact events that must come

before the rapture the very thing

pre-tribbers say

cannot occur we will discuss several of

the precursors in other sections

but i want to focus on one in particular

here

found in the book of joel the sun shall

be turned to darkness

and the moon to blood before the great

and

awesome day of the lord comes joel 2

verse 31 many of the old testament

prophets wrote about this time the day

of the lord the time of god's wrath

and almost every time you read about it

in the old testament you're going to

find it connected with something that i

term cosmic disturbance

something happens to the sun the moon

and the stars isaiah 13

other passages in the old testament

present these cosmic disturbances

that will be signs that the day of the

lord has arrived

joe explicitly states it's going to

happen before

not during before the day of the lord

this is so important because there are

two prophecies in the new testament

about when this particular celestial

sign takes place

the first in matthew makes it clear that

the sun

moon and star sign occurs immediately

after the tribulation of those days and

everyone agrees that those days in

context

is a reference to the persecution that

begins directly after the abomination of

desolation

which theologians call the great

tribulation

so if you compare joel 2 31

which says that this sign occurs before

the day of the lord

with the passage we just read in matthew

that says the cosmic sign

comes after the great tribulation which

begins at the midpoint

you have explicit evidence that the day

of the lord

is not seven years long but rather that

it begins at some

unknown point after the middle of the

seventieth week

we see this confirmed in revelation

chapter 6

where it says that the celestial

disturbance sign

occurs at the so-called sixth seal and

even most pre-tribulationists will agree

that the sixth seal in revelation takes

place

after the midpoint of the seven year

period we will talk more about

revelation 6

and the seals in another section but for

now

let's see how pre-tribbers try to

explain some of the things we have

brought up so far

surprisingly few pre-trib scholars have

addressed the precursor problem at all

but of the few that have they present

three possible solutions

dr richard mayhew a very accomplished

and well-respected pre-tribulational

scholar

chose to simply agree that there were

precursors to the day of the lord

connected to the midpoint and that the

day of the lord must

therefore start after those precursors

after the midpoint but i'm inclined to

follow more along the lines of dr

richard mayhew

who argued that the uh

typical uh long-term historical aspect

or thinking regarding uh the beginning

of the day of the lord probably needs to

be

rethought among pre-tribbers

as you may have noticed this timeline of

mayhews is pretty much

exactly what the pre-wrathers teach with

one

very important exception mayhew places

the rapture the same place that

pre-tribbers always have

just before the seven year period starts

whereas

pre-rathers place the rapture just

before the day of the lord starts

at some unknown point after the midpoint

mayhew does this because he is still a

pre-tribulationist

and so he can't compromise on the idea

of imminence

therefore he can't allow these events to

occur before the rapture

as it would destroy the idea of an any

moment rapture

so while he allows for these events to

occur before the day of the lord

he moves the rapture well before the day

of the lord

so there are still no events that occur

before it

pre-rathers have come to call this

method of dealing with the precursor

problem

the gap theory basically this theory

places a significant gap of time

between the rapture and the day of the

lord

in dr mehu's view the gap is over three

and a half years long

but there are slightly different takes

on the gap theory out there

for example pre-tribulationists like

arnold fruchtenbaum

who recognize various aspects of the

precursor problem

but still want to maintain the

traditional pre-trib view

that the day of the lord is seven years

long have to do something a little more

radical

they assert that the rapture happens at

some undefined but significant

amount of time before the seven year

period even begins

it has to be a fairly long gap to

accommodate

all four precursors though there has

been no attempt to define

exactly how long of a gap it will be

both manifestations of the gap theory

have the same fundamental problem

which is that jesus teaches that the

rapture and the beginning of the wrath

of god

are back-to-back events that occur on

the same day

and if that is true there can be no gap

between the rapture and the day of the

lord

one of the reasons people on all sides

of the debate have historically placed

the rapture

just prior to the day of the lord with

no gap

is because of jesus's teaching in the

olivet discourse

which says but concerning that day

and hour no one knows not even the

angels of heaven

nor the son but the father only

for as were the days of noah so will be

the coming of the son of man

for as in those days before the flood

they were eating and drinking

marrying and giving in marriage until

the day

when noah entered the ark and they were

unaware until the flood came and swept

them all away

so will be the coming of the son of man

and in luke's account the parable of lot

is added to this

likewise just as it was in the days of

lot

they were eating and drinking buying and

selling

planting and building but on the day

when lot went out from sodom

fire and sulfur rained from heaven and

destroyed them all

so will it be on the day when the son of

man is revealed

they are joined they are back to back

and we see that

pattern throughout scripture like with

uh noah it was on the same day when noah

entered the ark that the floods came

furthermore with lot it was on the same

day that he

uh exited that the wrath came

and fire came upon sodom really the

rapture

triggers the day of the lord because now

it is time for retribution

for vindication this idea that the

righteous would be rescued

on the same day that the day of the lord

began is probably why the new testament

writers consistently spoke of the day of

the lord

as good for believers but bad for

everyone else

it is the day we will receive our

rewards and be with christ

but it's also the day god's wrath will

be poured out

on the world this is why peter said we

should look for

and hasten the day of the lord it's why

jesus said

when we see the sign that the day of the

lord is about to occur

we should lift up our heads because our

redemption

draws nigh this idea that the rapture

happens

on the same day that the day of the

lord's wrath begins

is very conservative theology believed

from the earliest days of the church

it's actually still believed by the

majority of pre-tribbers

it is only those who have realized the

implications of the precursor problem

who have begun to seek out alternative

theologies about the timing of the day

of the lord

in relationship to the rapture

the third way pre-tribulationists have

attempted to deal with the precursor

problem

is to claim that there are two days of

the lord

one that is seven years long and another

24-hour day of the lord

associated with armageddon this theory

allows them to have

all the precursors take place before

their new

24-hour day of the lord and because they

place the rapture

immediately prior to the beginning of

the seven year long version of the day

of the lord

they can maintain pre-trib imminence

that no prophesied events

occur before the rapture there are a lot

of problems with this argument

but the main one is that as we have seen

the celestial disturbance precursor

which is said to occur before the day of

the lord

in joel 2 31 takes place at the sixth

seal

in revelation 6 verses 12 to 14.

this is significant because even though

there are some minor disagreements about

the timing of the first few seals

in relationship to the seven year period

the sixth seal

is almost universally believed to be

after the midpoint

so that means this theory would require

a third

day of the lord to be added to their

list because the sixth seal

is unquestionably after the beginning of

the seven year period

and at the very least five months before

armageddon we know this because the

fifth trumpet which is a part of the day

of the lord

is said to be five months long we will

learn much more about the sixth seal and

how it relates to the day of the lord in

another section of this film but

needless to say

this third option isn't a very popular

one among pre-tribbers

in their defense the precursor problem

doesn't leave pre-tribbers with many

good options

and so the most common way they deal

with it is to avoid explaining these

problems to their fellow pre-tribbers

in the first place

[Music]

the second pre-trib problem is related

to the olivet discourse

which is the name for the teaching about

the end times that jesus gave on the

mount of olives

recorded in matthew 24 mark 13

and luke 21 christians throughout the

ages have believed this passage to be

speaking of the signs leading up to the

rapture

in other words they believed that the

signs that jesus tells his disciples

about in the olivet discourse

are signs that will happen before the

rapture

and that the rapture itself is pictured

in matthew 24

verses 30-31 which says

then will appear in heaven the sign of

the son of man

and then all the tribes of the earth

will mourn and they will see the son of

man

coming on the clouds of heaven with

power and great glory

and he will send out his angels with a

loud trumpet call

and they will gather his elect from the

four winds from one end of heaven

to the other there are lots of reasons

to believe that the rapture is being

described in matthew 24

starting with the clear parallels

between the events described in matthew

24

and the events described in other

rapture passages

such as 1st thessalonians 4 16 and 17

which says for the lord himself will

descend from heaven with a cry of

command

with the voice of an archangel and with

the sound of the trumpet of god

and the dead in christ will rise first

then we who are alive

who are left will be caught up together

with them in the clouds

to meet the lord in the air and so we

will always

be with the lord jesus description of

his coming in matthew chapter

24 verses 29 through 31 parallels

ideally paul's description

of the rapture in first thessalonians

chapter 4 verses 13

through 17. and paul confirms this

through

many linguistic connections

in his first epistle to the

thessalonians there are tons of

parallels

everything from you know the angels and

the trumpet

and the gathering of god's elect but

also um you know the thief in the night

imagery

the drunkenness versus so sobriety

imagery the problem with this for the

pre-tribber is that if the rapture is in

view in verses 30 and 31

it leads to the conclusion that there

must be precursors or signs

before the rapture because in context

there are lots of signs that happen

before the events in verses 30 and 31

for example a straightforward reading of

this passage

means that before the rapture can take

place the following events will happen

first

a number of smaller signs jesus calls

birth pains

the abomination of desolation when the

antichrist declares himself to be god

in the temple at the midpoint a great

persecution

like none that has ever been seen in

history

a falling away or an apostasy from the

faith

and an ominous sign in the sun moon and

stars

followed immediately by the rapture

as we have seen the idea of precursors

before the rapture is unacceptable with

pre-tribbers

because it would mean that the rapture

is not imminent

in other words if the rapture is what is

being referred to in verses 30 and 31 of

matthew 24

it would mean that there are things that

will happen first

that the rapture can't occur at any

moment and most significantly

it would mean that the church will face

the antichrist persecution

before the rapture after the pre-trib

view was proposed in the mid-1800s

all these problems in the olivet

discourse were immediately recognized

and a new sort of anti-matthew 24

movement

began at first they essentially taught

people

not to pay attention to this section of

scripture at all they said it was

only meant for those left behind such as

jews or the so-called

tribulation saints arguments for this

would begin by saying things like

matthew is a particularly jewish gospel

and because of the jewish focus of the

book of matthew

this section was not meant for the

church

thankfully this particular line of

argumentation has been mostly rejected

in recent years even pre-tribulational

scholars have come to realize its flaws

for example they point out that matthew

might be the most

church-focused gospel of them all it's

the only one that mentions the great

commission

and the section on church discipline in

chapter 18.

in fact matthew is the only gospel that

uses the word church

at all if you're going to make the

argument

that matthew chapter 24 is not for

believers

are you going to make the same argument

two chapters later when jesus institutes

the ordinance of the communion

it's a real problem for

pre-tribulationists in that regard

pre-tribulationists did come up with one

interpretation of matthew 24 that seemed

to stick

in the mid-1800s they began to teach

that verse 31 was not the rapture at all

but some other event that occurred at

the end of the seven-year period

most often they said it referred to the

battle of armageddon in revelation 19

where jesus descends to battle with the

armies of the antichrist

historically classical pre-tribbers did

not

would not allow the the rapture to be

put in the proximity of matthew 24 and

25

they argued that the rapture is nowhere

to be seen there that any

mention of a coming of christ in that

passage uh

has it refers to armageddon there are

lots of problems with this view for

instance many of the parallels that we

see with the thessalonian letters and

matthew 24

just don't apply to armageddon the

events in matthew 24 verses 29 to 31

and the events at armageddon are

fundamentally different

in matthew there is a rescue of god's

people from the earth to heaven

but in armageddon jesus returns from

heaven to destroy the wicked people

on the earth but the biggest problem

with the armageddon view

and the one pre-trib scholars in the

last few years have been scrambling to

solve

comes from the obvious contradictions

this view creates with the second half

of the olivet discourse

so in the latter part of matthew 24 and

matthew 25 we are introduced to many

parables of jesus concerning

the day and hour and readiness for his

coming

and from a pre-tribulational perspective

this proves to be a problem in many

different ways

regardless of the way it's interpreted

which

are various to set the stage it's

important to remember

a basic outline of the olivet discourse

the disciples ask

jesus what the signs of his coming will

be then

jesus gives them a fairly large list of

signs ending with the coming itself

i.e the rapture in verses 30 and 31

from that point on after verse 31 and

going all the way through chapter 25

jesus tells his disciples various

parables about how important it is

for them to watch for the signs of his

return signs he just got done

telling them about it is in this last

section where pre-tribbers have so many

problems to solve because when they

changed the meaning of verses 30 and 31

from the rapture to armageddon

they changed the meaning of these

parables as well and these parables

just don't make sense in verses 30 and

31

are anything but the rapture for example

in one of these parables it says that no

one knows the day or the hour

of jesus coming and while many laymen

pre-tribbers will quote this verse in

reference to the rapture

they do this ignorantly the pre-trib

scholars know that if they have changed

verse 31 to be about armageddon

then they must make this not knowing the

day or the hour

to be about armageddon after all

according to them

jesus wasn't talking about the rapture

at any point in this chapter

and in context whatever verses 30-31 are

referring to

is what the parables that follow them

have to be about

so they're stuck having to defend the

idea that no one will know the day

or the hour of armageddon

the problem here is that we know from

several other verses in scripture

that the day armageddon occurs will be

exactly

7 years and 30 days after the covenant

is made by the antichrist

and exactly 1290 days after the

abomination of desolation

at the midpoint in other words since it

seems very likely people will at least

know when the abomination of desolation

at the midpoint occurs

since jesus says people should flee when

they see it

all anyone would have to do is calculate

the days from that event

to arrive at the day armageddon will

occur

commentaries from pre-tribbers either

don't mention this problem at all

or admit it's a problem but offer no

solutions

john mcarthur is a good example of the

latter

in his commentary he says nevertheless

even with all those indisputable signs

and precisely designated periods

the exact day and hour will not be known

by any human beings

not even tribulation believers in

advance

although the lord gives no reason for

their not knowing

david guzik says something similar in

his commentary

in this there is a dilemma how can the

day of jesus's coming be both completely

unknown

and at the same time be known to the day

according to daniel 12

11. another problem caused by

interpreting verse 31

as anything other than the rapture is

that twice in these parables

jesus says that one will be taken and

one will be left

if this is talking about the rapture

then it flows quite naturally from the

gathering in the clouds in verse 31

and it makes perfect sense in context

but because of the pre-tribulational

teaching that verses 30 and 31

are about armageddon pre-tribbers must

interpret this

one being taken here as either

armageddon

or the sheep and goat judgment basically

they must see this

being taken as a bad thing for unsaved

people

they must interpret it as a wicked

person being taken to be judged

instead of a righteous person being

taken to their eternal reward

it's a full reversal from historical

christianity

on this point in defense of this they

will point to the parable in the

previous verses about noah

in which jesus talked about how the

flood came and

took people away they say that since the

word sometimes translated took in that

passage

was about being taken for judgment the

flood came and took the unbelievers away

that is how the word taken in verses 40

and 41

should be understood that the one was

taken for judgment

not rescue the truth is the greek

actually

precludes this from being a possibility

two different words are actually being

used

and it the one taken is to receive to

oneself to receive

warmly in fact it's the same word jesus

uses in the departing

discourse in john which i will not leave

you but i will

as orphans but i will come again and i

will receive you

unto myself and if i go to make a place

ready for you i will come again

and take you pierre lovano

take you to be with me so that where i

am you may be also

and you know the way where i am going so

here

jesus uses the term peril novano and

guess what every pre-trib

interpreter believes that john 14 this

john 14 passage

when jesus says i will take you to be

with me

it's referring to the rapture

another argument for this one being

taken

being a reference to them being taken in

the rapture

and not being taken to judgment is that

in the ten

virgins parable a few verses later which

is on the exact

same subject which we know because it

ends with the exact

same warning watch because you do not

know the day or the hour

it is only the wise virgins that are

taken

not the foolish ones in other words the

purpose of jesus's warning to watch

because you don't know the day or the

hour is so that you can be a part of

those that are taken

not left interpreting verse 31 as

armageddon

is also logically incompatible with the

next parable

in which jesus says the wicked people of

the world will be carefree

and unaware before his coming he says

they will be marrying and being given in

marriage

and eating and drinking up until the

very day

of his coming this creates a huge

problem

since according to the pre-trib

interpretation this would mean that the

wicked are relatively carefree

right up until the day of the battle of

armageddon even though armageddon takes

place

at the very end of the seven year period

after the trumpet and bowl judgments

have been poured out

to put this in context at this time

every living thing in the sea

will be dead all the fresh water in the

world will be undrinkable

the sun will be so hot that no one can

bear it

everyone will have been plagued with

terrible sores

and there will have been five solid

months of torment

from demonic scorpion-like beings

directly from the pit of hell

i could go on but i think it's safe to

say people will have noticed

that the wrath of god has started and

that they would not be living carefree

lives

right up until the day the battle of

armageddon begins

there are precious few pre-trib

commentaries that even attempt to

justify this idea

again the most common tactic is to not

mention the problem

at all but pre-tribulational scholars

have recognized the various problems

that interpreting verses 30 and 31

as armageddon has caused and in the last

decade or so

there have been two competing theories

from them to answer their critics on

these issues

one from dr craig blazing of

southwestern baptist

theological seminary and one from dr

john hart

of moody bible institute while blazing's

theory gained popularity from being

featured in zondervan's

three views on the rapture book it's a

somewhat convoluted argument

and in many ways it represents an

entirely new way

to teach pre-tribulationism as a result

it seems to have had less acceptance

among pre-tribulationists

than heart's theory though it should be

noted that in both cases

these theories rely on the same

underlying proof text

but more on that later john hart wrote a

paper in 2007 that simply agreed with

the historical church

and the pre-wrath rapture proponents

that all of the parables after verse 36

are in fact talking about the rapture

and not armageddon

thus avoiding the various contradictions

we have been talking about

the unique thing about heart's view is

that he maintains that the first part of

the olivet discourse

including verse 30 and 31 is still a

reference to armageddon

as pre-tribbers have taught since the

1800s

so he is essentially saying the first

half of the olivet discourse

has nothing to do with the second half

that jesus was teaching his followers

about the signs leading up to armageddon

until verse 35

and then for some reason he reversed the

order of events

and began to teach parables about the

rapture in verse 36

both heart and blazing's theories rely

on the argument that in verse 36

the greek phrase peri dei which is often

translated

now concerning represents a transition

to an entirely new

topic in other words they argue that

this greek term

gives them an excuse to decouple the

first half of the olivet discourse

from the second heart argues and blazing

does the same

that the transitional phrase in greek in

verse 36

peride which means uh now

concerning or something along those

lines

uh is intended to distinguish or

to mark the the change from answering

one question to the other

however since parry day basically means

the

same thing that the english phrase now

concerning does

it can mean now concerning something

entirely different

but it can also mean now concerning

another aspect of the thing that was

just discussed

it's used both ways multiple times in

the new testament

in matthew it doesn't necessarily mean

that the author is going to a

new entirely different subject rather it

means that he may be discussing another

aspect of the central focus

at hand which is exactly what's

happening in matthew 24.

the parry day line in verse 36 starts

off

now concerning the day or the hour so

this is about the specific timing of

something

heart wants us to believe this is the

first line on a totally

new subject but the problem is that this

line

is obviously a continuation of the

question about the timing of the events

begun

in the parable of the fig tree just

before this

the parable of the fig tree teaches that

the followers of christ

should be able to determine the general

time of his coming

by the signs jesus just described in

matthew 24

verses 4 to 31 and that his disciples

could know his coming was near

by looking for the signs in the same way

that they could know

summer is near by observing the leaves

on a fig tree

so with the fig tree parable jesus says

that we will be able to know the general

time

but in the next line he says concerning

or peridae the day or the hour

i.e the specific time of my coming

no one will know it is a qualification

then because we do not know the exact

day or hour so we know the season

but we do not know the day or hour so

these two things

complement one another and they must be

taken together

another criticism of heart's view

revolves around the term

parusia which is translated as coming

since these new views of heart and

blazing separate

matthew 24 beginning at verse 36

from the previous section it would mean

the question the disciples asked about

the parousia in verse 3

is different from the answers about the

perusia given by

jesus in verses 37 and 39 they have to

say that

what jesus refers to as the coming of

the son of man

is different from the coming of the son

of man in matthew 36 to 41.

that's very difficult to maintain

exegetically

there's no uh

evidence within the text not even the

transitional phrase peri-debt that

suggests he's shifting from

one coming to some other coming

this is clear because when the disciples

ask the question

they say what is the sign of your coming

and jesus

just uses that same language his parusia

in both parts of the text he doesn't

give any indication that he's switching

topics the bottom line is that the old

pre-trib view which has the parables at

the end of the olivet discourse

talking about armageddon instead of the

rapture is a brand new argument with

multiple contradictions and pre-tribbers

who know

know it but the supposed fixes for this

major problem

proposed in the last decade or so which

revolve around the idea that the first

and second halves of the olivet

discourse have nothing to do with one

another

is an even worse argument and now

hopefully some of you

know it

[Music]

now concerning the coming of our lord

jesus christ

and are being gathered together to him

we ask you brothers

not to be quickly shaken in mind or

alarmed

either by a spirit or a spoken word or a

letter seeming to be from us

to the effect that the day of the lord

has come let no one deceive you in

any way for that day will not come

unless the rebellion comes first

and the man of lawlessness is revealed

the son of destruction

who opposes and exalts himself against

every so-called

god or object of worship so that he

takes his seat in the temple of god

proclaiming himself to be god

second thessalonians 2 verses 1 to 4.

the most problematic passage for

pre-tribulationists

is 2nd thessalonian chapter 2. 2

thessalonians was written by the apostle

paul

in part to refute a false teaching

circulating at the time

that the thessalonians had missed the

rapture and were in the day of the lord

paul's message to the thessalonians was

very simple

he told them not to worry they had not

missed the rapture

and were therefore not in the day of the

lord

and so the way he disabuses the

thessalonians from that notion

is he says certain things have to happen

first uh and those things

were the apostasy and the revelation of

the man of lawlessness

that is the antichrist what we would

call the antichrist there are two main

reasons why this is a problem for the

pre-tribulationists

the first is that as we have seen

pre-tribbers maintain that there are no

events that must occur before the

rapture

and here paul blatantly says there are

two events that must occur first

the rebellion sometimes translated as

apostasy and the revealing of the man of

lawlessness

if paul had taught pre-tribulationism

his simplest answer would be

no the rapture hasn't occurred yet

instead of no there are certain things

that have to happen

first and as soon as you say there are

certain things that have to happen first

you've undermined pre-tribulationism so

pre-tribulationists have a very

difficult time

in my opinion uh making

2 thessalonians 2 fit with their their

thinking 2nd thessalonians 2 poses the

greatest problem for the pre-trip

position or certainly is one

of the greatest problem passages

for the pre-trip position because

paul does exactly

what the majority of pre-tribbers

say um does not occur

and that is he gives us a list

a chronology of events specifically

connected to the rapture we know that

paul was teaching that these two events

would occur

before the day of the lord in part

because he uses the specific greek word

proton or protoss which is often

translated

first and is specifically used here to

describe when these two events would

take place

in relationship to the day of the lord

in the greek the greek is very specific

it uses the term a protos and it means

before or

first so paul here is teaching

explicitly

that two events have to happen before

the day of the lord

yeah the fact that paul says these

things must happen

first is important he doesn't just say

these things must happen but these must

happen

first the second problem for

pre-tribulationists

is that at least one of the precursors

mentioned here

the revealing of the man of lawlessness

is an event that takes place

at the midpoint of the seven year period

and most significantly this revealing of

the man

of lawlessness which paul describes

in saying he will set himself up in

god's temple proclaiming himself to be

god

which places the revealing of the

antichrist

at the midpoint so the coming of our

lord and our being gathered

to him cannot occur until after the

midpoint of the 70th week

take a look at this chart detailing the

views of five prominent

pre-tribulationists

about 2 thessalonians 2 and you get a

sense that they

have fundamentally different often

mutually exclusive ways

of explaining this section of scripture

but despite this confusion

there are some pre-trib arguments about

2 thessalonians 2

that are more common than others for

example the most common way that

pre-tribulationists deal with this

is to say that paul did not actually

mean that these two events would happen

before the day of the lord rather he

meant that these two events will happen

during or be features of the day of the

lord

for example in his commentary david

guzik says of this problem

paul will not describe events which must

precede the rapture

but events that are concrete evidence of

the day of the lord

they are saying that paul wasn't saying

these two events would come

before the day of the lord rather paul

was just

naming things that happen during the day

of the lord despite this denial that

paul meant these things would happen

before the day of the lord being one of

the most common ways pre-tribulationists

deal with this problem

pre-tribulationists never seem to

explain why they feel it's okay to

ignore the grammar of this passage

such as the greek word proton which

means that these two events

must come before the day of the lord

you can confirm this by looking at other

places in the new testament

where the same greek construction occurs

the same conditional word

aeon may paired with proton

always means one thing comes before the

other

our law doesn't condemn a man unless

aeon may it first proton

hears from him and learns what he is

doing does it

another example of the same construction

is in mark 3 verse 27

but no one can enter a strong man's

house to plunder his property

unless aeon may he first

proton ties up the strong man then

tate indeed the house can be plundered

mark 3 27 these two examples that share

the same greek construction with 2

thessalonians 2

verse 3 confirm that the correct reading

here

is that before the day of the lord

begins

two events must happen first the

rebellion

and the revelation of the man of

lawlessness so at the end of the day

with all these interpretations the 800

pound gorilla

is the word protos another popular way

that pre-tribulationists try to deal

with 2nd thessalonians 2

relates to the word rebellion sometimes

translated as

falling away or apostasy in verse 3.

it is one of the two things that are

supposed to happen before the day of the

lord

this is usually understood to mean a

falling away from the faith

that is christians apostatizing or

leaving the faith of christianity

recently some pre-tribulationists have

put forward the idea

that the word behind this word rebellion

apostasia

in the greek means the rapture

the idea is that paul was teaching that

the rapture would happen

first and then the man of lawlessness

would be revealed

this is usually done to preserve the

all-important pre-trib

doctrine of imminence that no events can

come before the rapture

but in second thessalonians they come to

this text

they got real problem they know it's

difficult they know it poses a great

problem for their position

and so what do they do they take a word

apostasy

say aha this word is referring

to the rapture the falling away the

taking away

of the believers on the earth this

interpretation has

two serious problems the first is the

complete lack of

any evidence that the word apostasia can

mean the rapture

and the second is that such an

interpretation would mean that paul is

making a nonsensical

and utterly useless point in this

passage

pre-tribulationists claim that the

apostasia can mean the rapture

because the word is sometimes translated

in early english bibles like the tyndale

and geneva bibles

as the english word depart they would

say that if the word can mean depart in

english

it might also be a reference to the

rapture where believers will depart

the earth the problem is that the word

is never used that way

when the early english bibles used the

english word depart

to define apostasia they meant it to be

understood in a non-spatial sense

as in he departed from the faith or

he departed from sound doctrine the word

is never used to describe physical

departure as in

he departed from his house or as in our

case

he departed from the earth it always

means a

non-physical departure such as for

example a political rebellion or a

an apostasy from the faith the word is

used

five other times in the bible and each

time it's used in a political or

religious sense

never in a physical sense even if you

expanded your search to include

all of the secular writings in koine

greek

you wouldn't find the word used in a

spatial or physical sense

show me a historical

reference where this word is used

that way any writing

any historical writings 200 years before

the new testament

200 years after the new testament in

defense of this view

some pre-tribbers will go so far as to

committing the so-called

root fallacy what they will do is say

that the root for apostasia

which is probably the greek word

ephistemy

can mean a physical departure this

method of interpretation is universally

rejected by greek scholars

because it's not a reliable way to

determine the definition of words

to give you an example from english the

root word for

nice in latin actually means to be

ignorant

but no one thinks that the sentence john

is nice

has anything to do with john being

ignorant

bringing up the root of apostasia is a

desperate attempt

to defend a particularly bad theory

the second reason this argument makes no

sense

is that if the word apostasia means the

rapture

then paul's argument to the

thessalonians is essentially that

the rapture can't happen until the

rapture

happens the

fatal problem with this is paul says

that these things

happen before the coming of our lord and

are being gathered to him which is the

rapture

and so it is illogical to say

that the rapture must occur

before the rapture occurs what it's

doing is it's making paul

say that well the rapture can't come

before the rapture

to their credit this apostasia is the

same thing as the rapture theory

is openly rejected by the vast majority

of pre-trib scholars

even their own scholars

such as paul feinberg and john walvoord

two of the most esteemed

pre-tribulational scholars have

completely rejected this interpretation

uh they haven't even convinced all

pre-tribulationists

of this who argue that the apostasy in

greek hay apostasia

means the rapture by that paul means the

rapture

that's a very difficult case to make if

not an impossible case to make

some pre-tribulationists who don't want

to play the kind of games with the text

we just saw

will actually agree that paul wrote that

the apostasy and the revealing of the

man of lawlessness

will occur first or before the day of

the lord

take for example john wolverd and john

mcarthur

both men in their commentaries tell

their readers that the two events

the rebellion and the revealing of the

antichrist would occur before the day of

the lord

which of course we agree with but for

them it's a very odd thing to say

since in other places they teach that

the day of the lord is a seven year

period

which is immediately preceded by the

rapture and since both men

also agree that the revealing of the man

of lawlessness in verse 3

is a reference to the abomination of

desolation

which happens at the midpoint they are

essentially saying

that something which they know happens

at the midpoint

occurs before the day of the lord the

obvious result is that the day of the

lord

can't be the seven year model that they

teach in other places

the rapture must start sometime after

the midpoint

this massive contradiction is not

brought up or

explained in either of their

commentaries

astute viewers have already noticed

another contradiction

which is how can they teach that these

two events occur before the day of the

lord

but not before the rapture since like

most pre-tribulationists

they teach that the day of the lord

occurs immediately after

the rapture with no significant gap

between the rapture and the day of the

lord

in other words since neither walvard or

macarthur are rapture gap theorists

in their view if something is before the

day of the lord

it is necessarily before the rapture as

well

so why are they essentially teaching

here what they certainly don't agree

with in

other teachings that there are events

before the rapture

it's not clear as i said they don't

mention these serious contradictions in

their commentaries

this could be called the forgetful paul

view

because in their commentaries and

sermons they will correctly teach that

in verse 1

the words coming and gathering are in

fact

references to the rapture this is not a

debate among pre-trib or pre-wrathless

pre-tribs and pre-raptors agree that

this reference

the gathering to be with him in in

second thessalonians chapter 2 verse 1

uh is the rapture but they will go

through the rest of their commentaries

talking about these two precursors to

the day of the lord

as if they are only precursors to the

day of the lord

as if they have nothing to do with the

rapture

it's as if paul forgot to talk about the

rapture even though he said that was

specifically what he was going to talk

about in this section

he says now regarding the arrival of our

lord jesus christ

and our being gathered to him let me

just stop there

well paul hasn't made any connections

here he's just saying

now i'm going to talk about this now

isn't it

sort of odd if he says now i'm going to

talk about the rapture

and the parousia and then he doesn't

mention it

ever again well he actually does he's um

he's unpacking what it means the day of

the lord

pre-wrath solves this problem by

understanding that these two events will

occur before the rapture

and before the day of the lord and that

paul is using

both concepts interchangeably here as he

often does in the new testament

pre-wrath also understands the revealing

of the antichrist in verse 3

is a reference to the abomination of

desolation

at the midpoint of the seven year period

they also see the falling away or

rebellion in verse 3

as a reference to the falling away that

jesus mentions in association with the

abomination of desolation

in matthew 24. in fact this clear and

consistent connection between matthew 24

and 2nd thessalonians 2 is a really

important point

a fundamental problem of the way that

pre-tribulational interpreters interpret

the apostle paul is they don't recognize

that paul

is getting his teaching from jesus

for example just look at the

similarities in matthew 24

before the rapture in verse 31 what does

jesus say must come first

you guessed it a falling away and the

abomination of desolation

and it's only after those events occur

that you can expect to see the sign of

the impending day of the lord in verse

29

and the rapture in verses 30 and 31

just before it begins jesus's teaching

on the end times is a perfect mirror to

paul's

in terms of the timing of events which

is probably why paul said that he got

this doctrine about the rapture

quote from the lord how do we know

that the apostle paul received his

teachings

from the olive discourse from jesus's

olive discourse well we know this

we know this because there are

at least 30 parallels between

paul's teaching in 1st and second

thessalonians and between the olive

discourse there's 30 cohesive

links between their teachings it's not

just pre-wrathers that see the

connection between

1st and 2nd thessalonians and matthew

24.

just check the margins of your favorite

bible ever since cross references have

been invented

they have been linking these two

passages it's only the

pre-tribulationists

who can't accept that these passages are

parallel to one another

if you're a pre-tribulationist just you

know lay your presuppositions aside for

a moment and just

read second thessalonians 2 without your

traditions

and see what it says

there are several passages in the book

of revelation supporting the idea that

the church

will face the antichrist persecution

just before the rapture and

that both the rapture and the day of the

lord will not begin

until after the midpoint of the seven

year period

this is all of course contrary to the

traditional pre-trib model

which teaches that the rapture will

occur before the seven year period

begins

in the book of revelation most of the

events that take place in the book

correspond to various stages of a

symbolic scroll being opened

for example there are seven seals on the

scroll

and each time a seal is removed a

prophetic event takes place

after all seven of the seals are removed

seven angels with seven

trumpets are introduced and one at a

time

each angel blows their trumpet and a new

prophetic event takes place

until finally seven angels with seven

bowls of wrath appear

and seven more events take place there

are a variety of different viewpoints in

pre-tribulationism

as to the exact timing of the events

that correspond to these seals

trumpets and bowls the main difference

between pre-tribulationism and pre-wrath

in this regard

is that most pre-tribulationists believe

that all the seals in revelation chapter

6

as well as the trumpets and bowls found

in later chapters

are events that take place during the

day of the lord's wrath

pre-wrathers believe the seven seals on

the outside of this proverbial scroll

are not the wrath of god but rather only

the contents of the scroll

represented in the book by the trumpets

and bowls are the day of the lord's

wrath

and so these seven

seals are preconditions that need to be

met before the scroll is opened

it is only after all seven seals are

broken that the scroll can be opened

and then the wrath of god unfolds and

this is exactly what we see

in the flow of revelation six through

eight

pre-rathers point out that the events

that take place during the seals

are mostly things that are the direct

result of the antichrist

evil workings not the result of god's

wrath

for example the first seal is the

introduction of the antichrist

as the writer on the white horse the

second seal is about the wars that the

antichrist will fight

as he gains power then in the next two

seals you have famines

and people being killed in large numbers

quote

with the sword the fifth seal is an

interesting one

and this is where many prerathers begin

their argument

that these seals cannot be a part of

god's wrath

the martyrs that are depicted

in the revelation at the fifth seal

in my opinion is one of the strongest

arguments for

the pre-wrath position

pre-tribulationists claim

that the sills on the scroll the seven

sealed scroll the seals are

all of god's wrath but

that's contradicted by the fifth sill

in revelation 6 9 it says now when the

lamb opened the fifth seal

i saw under the altar the souls of those

who had been

violently killed because of the word of

god and because of the testimony they

had given

they cried out with a loud voice how

long

sovereign master holy and true before

you judge those who live on the earth

and avenge our blood

each of them was given a long white robe

and they were told to rest for a little

longer until the full number was reached

of both their fellow servants and their

brothers

who were going to be killed just as they

have been

but they asked god when are you going to

start

your wrath on the people on the earth

who are responsible for our death that

is powerful

in my opinion because to me

that explicitly declares that the wrath

of god

that eschatological wrath has not begun

how long o lord until you vindicate our

blood on those who dwell on the earth

in other words it hasn't been happening

yet up to the fifth seal

they're told wait a little while until

the rest of your brethren

are killed and then

the sixth seal is open and the great day

of god's wrath

has arrived there are very few

pre-trib responses to this issue but one

example

is from robert thomas who though he

doesn't say it directly

implies that what the martyrs were

actually doing is crying out for god's

wrath

to finish in other words the martyrs are

crying out

for the end of god's wrath not for god's

wrath

to begin the problem of course is that

the plain reading in both the greek and

english of this phrase how long before

you judge

and avenge our blood means that no

judgment of any kind

has begun at that point this is

reiterated in the next verse

when god tells them to wait a little

while longer

until the full number of christian

martyrs are killed

both grammatically and contextually god

has not begun his judgment on the wicked

at this point

which is probably why we found so few

pre-trib commentators

willing to try to explain this passage

at all

this causes another problem for

pre-tribbers because if god's wrath has

begun by this point

as they say it would mean that these

christian martyrs in the fifth seal

had been going through god's wrath which

contradicts the doctrine that christians

will not

go through the wrath of god derived from

first thessalonians

5 9 and other places a doctrine that

is agreed upon by all signs of this

debate

god promises that that believers

will not have to experience the wrath of

god the day of the lord's wrath

and yet pre-tribulationists contradict

themselves

when they say that the fifth seal is

god's wrath you can't have

both pre-tribulationists try to get

around this by calling these christians

tribulation saints they define

tribulation saints

as people left behind in the rapture who

become christians

during the day of the lord well a common

argument that i hear often is that oh

well

these they're these these believers

they're not quote unquote part of the

church

uh they're they're quote unquote

tribulation saints and

they'll even go to the extent not all of

them but some of them will

actually say you know because they

didn't accept christ before the rapture

this is like a

certain judgment on them i'm sorry

that's absurd and it also again it

contradicts what paul

says in first thessalonians chapter five

is that we are promised exemption from

god's wrath some pre-tribulationists

bill salus for one have proposed an

entirely new theory

which removes the fifth seal from the

70th week altogether

salus places the first five seals before

the seven year period

which avoids the fifth seal martyr

problem but this model is almost

unheard of in pre-trib circles while

many pre-tribbers argue about where to

put the first three seals

and some pre-tribbers do in fact put the

first three seals before the seven year

period begins

placing the fourth and fifth seals

before the seven years

is fairly radical because they have such

strong ties to the midpoint of the seven

year period

but it does have the one benefit of

keeping these

fifth seal martyrs out of the wrath of

god and thus

avoiding this major contradiction the

next bit of evidence to which

pre-rather's point

to show that the wrath of god has not

begun during the seals

is the celestial disturbance sign found

in the next seal

the sixth seal this is the sign which

joel 2

verse 31 says will occur before

the day of the lord so if this sign in

the sun

moon and stars in revelation 6 is the

same one that joel talked about

then the day of the lord cannot have

begun by this point

because this sign happens before the day

of the lord begins

we see evidence that this cosmic

disturbance sign in revelation

6 is in fact the same one that announces

the day of the lord's wrath

because as a result of people seeing

this sign in the heavens

we see the following reaction then the

kings of the earth

and the great ones and the generals and

the rich

and the powerful and everyone slave and

free

hid themselves in the caves and among

the rocks of the mountains

calling to the mountains and rocks fall

on us

and hide us from the face of him who is

seated on the throne

and from the wrath of the lamb for the

great day of the wrath has come

and who can stand revelation

6 15 to 17.

here again a plane reading shows that

the people of the earth believe that the

wrath of god

is about to begin at the sixth seal

the earth dwellers are diving into the

rocks

because it is now time

for the day of recompense for the day

of uh repaying the world

for persecuting the people of god

in an attempt to deal with this damning

evidence that the seals cannot be the

wrath of god

pre-tribbers will typically argue about

the tense form of the greek word for

has come in revelation 6 17

many pre-tribbers say that since the

phrase has come

is in the greek errorist tense form it

is in the past

tense in this case they would prefer a

translation such as

the wrath of god has been occurring

pre-tribulationists generally want to

argue the day of the lord

began with the first seal and so when

people say the great day of god's wrath

has arrived

all they're doing is finally recognizing

that they've been experiencing the great

day of god's wrath

a growing number of greek scholars

strongly disagree with this idea

pointing out that the reason any greek

word is rendered in the past

present or future tense is determined by

the context

not from greek tense form this can be

seen by reviewing other instances in the

bible

including in revelation 19 verse 7

where the errorist indicative tense form

is clearly not

supposed to be translated in the past

tense it says

the wedding of the lamb has come which

is obviously not supposed to be

translated

the wedding of the lamb has already come

take the text at face value allow the

text to speak

the fact that the arrest is used more

than 11 times in that sixth seal

all of a sudden just the one occurrence

of it though has such

high and important significance seems to

me to betray the very system you're

trying to build

also consider the actions of the people

in this verse

they are hiding themselves in the rocks

because they saw the very same sign

joel said would herald the wrath of god

these people didn't hide

themselves during the first five seals

what has changed

other than the celestial announcement

that the wrath of god

was about to begin another line of

evidence for the pre-wrath position in

revelation 6

comes from the recognition that the six

seals line up

perfectly with the teaching of christ

during his olivet discourse

revelation 6 is a revelation to a lot of

people when you start to compare it

to matthew chapter 24 of the olivet

discourse and this is a

very key part of pre-wrath rapturism is

actually something that was key

to me really coming into the position

juxtaposing both the flow of

matthew 24 and revelation chapter 6

shows a lot of parallels the opening of

the seals

is parallel to the

elements of jesus's discussion in

matthew 24. so

the writer on the white horse

corresponds to the false christs

the writer on the red horse is war uh

the black horse is famine the the sickly

horse

is death and then there's martyrs

the first three sills these are

corresponded to

jesus's beginning birth pains the

fourth seal is correlated to the

persecution of

the antichrist great tribulation and the

fifth seal is part of the great

tribulation too but it's showing the

result of the

persecution and that is martyrdom that's

why it's called the fifth seal

martyrs in case there is any doubt we

are on the right track

the next thing mentioned after the

persecution in matthew 24

is the celestial disturbances sign in

the sun moon and stars

which we now know means the day of the

lord is about to begin

we see this exact same sign in the sixth

seal

which all but confirms that this

parallel between matthew and the seals

in revelation

6 is correct in the book of revelation

in exactly the right location as you're

reading it sequentially

you'll find a clear discussion of

something happening to the sun

the moon and the stars this is the clear

identifier indicator that god's wrath is

about

to commence it is about to pour down on

a wicked

world now the reason why this is so key

is because in both the olivet discourse

and the book of revelation

we have this sign occurring

and that which occurs in the wake of

this sign

is an indication of deliverance

it is immediately after the distress of

those days

that jesus appears in great power and

glory and gathers his elect

from the four winds what so few people

realize is that you can see the rapture

directly

after the sun moon and star sign in

revelation as well

though there is a kind of interlude

after the sign

and before the wrath of god for example

the very next thing we see is an angel

saying

do not harm the earth or the sea or the

trees

until we have sealed the servants of our

god on their foreheads

then these angels go about sealing the

144 thousand to protect them from the

wrath that is about to come

you get this interlude in chapter 7 and

the interlude is explicitly centered

around

protecting people from god's judgment

and so it says be hold on before

don't let any wind blow on the trees and

things like that

um but before any of that happens we

want you to seal the servants of god

on their forehead directly after the 144

000 are sealed we see the result of the

rapture

from the viewpoint of heaven a great

multitude that no one could count

from every nation from all tribes and

peoples and languages

standing before the throne and before

the lamb

clothed in white robes with palm

branches in their hands

revelation 7 verse 9 be

we are given the final proof that the

pre-wrath view of this timeline is

correct

a few verses later when the angel tells

john exactly who this group is

these are the ones coming out of the

great tribulation

they have washed their robes and made

them white in the blood of the lamb

revelation 7 verse 14 be

remember the great tribulation is not a

seven year period

theologically speaking it is the

persecution that begins

just after the midpoint and extends

until it is cut

short by the rapture this phrase out of

the great tribulation then

confirms the pre-wrath timeline and it

means that the day of the lord will not

begin

until after the sixth seal and that the

rapture occurs at some point after the

midpoint of the seventieth week of

daniel

and finally that the church will face

the persecution of the antichrist

before the rapture there's a depiction

of the church's

appearance in heaven apparently as a

means of protecting them from god's

wrath

between the arrival of the great day of

god's wrath

and the actual execution of the great

day of god's wrath

that's a pre-wrath rapture regarding

this multitude in heaven

pre-tribbers would emphatically declare

that this group is

not the raptured church but rather the

so-called

tribulation saints but if you press them

about

why they must be tribulation saints and

not the church

they will answer with a classic circular

argument

they don't believe the church will be in

the great tribulation

so this group can't be the church there

are as far as i know

no other arguments for the existence of

the tribulation saints view

you may be wondering why

pre-tribulationists believe that the

seals in revelation

6 have to be a part of the day of the

lord's wrath especially in light of all

this evidence to the contrary

do they have some proof text i'm not

telling you about

not really the most common defense

pre-tribulationists

offer is that the seals are the wrath of

god

because jesus opens them this argument

comes from revelation chapter 5

verse 9 which says and they sang a new

song

saying worthy are you to take the scroll

and to open its seals for you were slain

and by your blood you ransomed people

for god

from every tribe and language and people

and nation they argue essentially that

since jesus was the only one worthy to

break the seals and

open the scroll the seals as well as the

scroll

must be judgment since in other places

in the bible

jesus is said to be the only one worthy

to judge the world

the problem of course is that it doesn't

logically follow that just because

jesus is the only one worthy to break

the seals and open the scroll

that the seals on the scroll are

judgment

this verse in revelation 5 9 would make

just as much sense in the pre-wrath view

in which the scroll's contents not the

seals of the scroll

are the actual judgment this is often

the sole argument from

pre-tribulationists

to prove that the seals are the wrath of

god and in my opinion

it's rather weak especially when you

compare it to the actual explicit

biblical evidence we have seen here and

that brings us to something we have

referenced

many times in this film but have yet to

fully explain

the pre-trib doctrine of imminence

imminence is really a keystone issue for

the pre-tribulational rapture

well in the pre-tribulational

theological sense of the term eminence

means that there are no prophesied

events that must happen

before the rapture the rapture is

signless

it can happen at any moment right now

and hence

they consider the rapture imminent it's

hard

to overemphasize how important this idea

of imminence is

to the concept of the pre-tribulational

rapture

pre-tribbers often claim that imminency

and pre-tribulationism

are basically one in the same thing

take for example this quote from one of

the most prominent pre-tribulational

scholars

john wolvert for the most part

scriptural evidence for imminence today

is equivalent to proof of the

pre-tribulation viewpoint

for all practical purposes abandonment

of the pre-tribulational return of

christ

is tantamount to abandonment of the hope

of his imminent return

the first thing that you should know

about imminence is that it is a brand

new doctrine

it appears to have originated in the

early 1800s

with the so-called plymouth brethren and

john darby

and there is no sign of the belief in an

imminent rapture before the antichrist

arrives

among any of the church fathers of the

previous 1800 years before darby

and it's not just pre-trib critics

saying that

even pre-tribulationists agree that it

cannot be found in the writings of the

early church

take for example dr larry crutchfield an

expert in church history and a

pre-tribulationist

he spent a huge amount of time looking

for evidence of imminence in the early

church writings

and concluded his paper on the subject

like this

while there are in the writings of the

early fathers

seeds from which the doctrine of the

pre-tribulational rapture

could be developed it is difficult to

find in them an

unequivocal statement of the type of

imminency usually believed in by

pre-tribulationists

we do not say that the early fathers

were pre-tribulationists in the modern

sense

only that the seeds were indeed there

earlier in the paper crutchfield said

that what the early church did believe

about the timing of the rapture

should be termed something like imminent

intra-tribulationism

meaning that most of the church fathers

believed that the rapture would only

come

after the antichrist was revealed and

the persecution of christians began

they believed the rapture would be

imminent but only after the certain

precursors occurred

most notably the abomination of

desolation at the midpoint

this pre-tribulational expert on the

church fathers therefore

is essentially telling his readers that

the early church was for

all intents and purposes pre-wrath

we will deal more with the early church

in the last section of this film

but for now we will go through all the

ways pre-tribbers will try to prove

imminence

from the bible alone if you take all the

verses that pre-tribulationists use

to prove imminence a few patterns emerge

so we have categorized each proof text

in its own group

the first group i will call waiting for

verses

this includes verses like titus 2 verse

13

which says waiting for our blessed hope

the appearing of the glory of our great

god and savior

jesus christ or philippians 3 verse 20

which says

but our citizenship is in heaven and

from it we await a savior

the lord jesus christ you can see

another example of this type of proof

text in first corinthians 1 verse 7

but the basic idea is that believers

should wait for

and be expectant of christ's return

there is no technical reason to believe

that these verses are speaking of

imminence

in other words you can do a word study

in greek with the terms for

waiting for or await and you will find

that these words do not mean

that no events will occur before

something or another takes place

or that something could happen at any

moment

they mean pretty much what they mean in

english that you are just

waiting for something in the case of

this

waiting for group of proof texts a

pre-tribulationist would say

that if you are eagerly waiting for the

rapture then the rapture must be able to

happen

at any moment but it should be obvious

that that doesn't

logically follow you can eagerly await

all kinds of things that are not

imminent you can eagerly await christmas

but it doesn't mean christmas can occur

at any moment

you can eagerly await a wedding but it

doesn't mean that the wedding will

happen at any moment

you can see a biblical example that

imminence is not the logical conclusion

of eagerly awaiting something

in second peter 3 13 where it says

but according to his promise we are

waiting for

prasdaka new heavens and a new earth

in which righteousness dwells the

apostle peter

says that we are to watch for and to

expect

the new heavens and new earth but we

know and even pre-tribulationists would

admit

there are certain prophesied events that

have to happen

before the new heavens and the new earth

so if

to watch means imminence that then they

would have to admit that

the new heavens and the new earth are

imminent events which of course

they would not admit what the bible is

saying is that we should as

christians look forward to wait for

and eagerly anticipate all the wonderful

things that god has in store for us

including his return so we can begin

our eternal life and be with him

but to be expectant of something is

obviously not the same thing

as thinking it will happen at any moment

the next group of proof texts for

imminence could be called

be good because jesus is returning this

is probably the largest group of

pre-trib proof texts for imminence

which consists of verses like 1st john 2

verse 28

which says and now little children abide

in him

so that when he appears we may have

confidence

and not shrink from him in shame at his

coming

or hebrews 10 verses 24 and 25

which says and let us consider how to

stir one another to love and good works

not neglecting to meet together as is

the habit of some

but encouraging one another and all the

more

as you see the day drawing near there

are a few

more verses like this that are basically

saying the same thing

that christians should strive to live

moral lives

to do good works and that they should

live those moral lives

because jesus is returning the argument

pre-tribbers would make here

is that because the new testament

writers are telling people to be morally

blameless

because of jesus's return it must mean

that his return could happen

at any moment without signs in other

words

according to pre-tribbers the new

testament writers were telling people

that they should keep doing good

because if they don't they could get

caught doing something bad

because jesus could return at any moment

and surprise them

while they were sinning pre-tribbers

have taken this concept

very seriously and have even developed a

doctrine about sanctification

which uses this idea as its base that is

that the fear of being caught in the act

of sinning from an imminent rapture

keeps christians on the straight and

narrow path pre-tribulational teacher

john mcarthur claims that our

very sanctification depends on

imminence he says quote

the hope of christ's imminent return is

therefore the hinge

on which a proper understanding of

sanctification turns

this position really does not accurately

reflect how the scriptures declare we

are to seek to live godly in christ

jesus

i live the christian life because i love

god

the fact that his son is coming for me

is added benefit

but not knowing when he's going to come

does not demure

my desire to live holy

at all you better have more motivation

than merely the fear that jesus

is going to come back uh to lead a life

of

of um committed discipleship uh

if that's your only reason for for

for being committed to christ or

submitting to his lordship then you've

got a deficient view of discipleship

the question is though is there a better

explanation

for why the bible says that christians

should do good works

because of christ's return the answer is

resoundingly

yes in fact these verses which

pre-tribbers think

are about imminence are really just a

few more examples of one of the most

prominent themes in the new testament

which is that christians should live

godly lives in light of the fact

that they have been given eternal life

let's turn back to ii peter 3

to show how this works since all these

things are thus to be dissolved

what sort of people ought you to be in

lives of holiness and godliness

waiting for and hastening the coming of

the day of god

because of which the heavens will be set

on fire and dissolved

and the heavenly bodies will melt as

they burn but according to his promise

we are waiting for new heavens and a new

earth

in which righteousness dwells therefore

beloved

since we are waiting for these be

diligent to be found by him

without spot or blemish and at peace and

count the patience of our lord as

salvation

just as our beloved brother paul also

wrote to you according to the wisdom

given him

this verse shows us that the reason we

are told to live godly lives

is not because of an imminent rapture or

anything at all to do with being

surprised by something unexpected

rather the point peter is making is that

the new heavens and new earth

are a picture of the eternal life that a

believer is promised

that is why we should live godly lives

because of the joy of our inheritance

because of the sureness of our

resurrection to eternal life

when you look at the other so-called

proof texts in this group

it becomes clear that the same theme

here in second peter is in view

and that the only reason those verses

even mention the rapture

is because the rapture is the very

picture of eternal life

it's the moment believers become

immortal but the point is exactly the

same

let me show you a few more verses where

it says the same thing in the supposed

imminence proof texts

except the rapture is replaced with

eternal life

so we can be sure this is less about the

event of the rapture

but more about what the rapture

represents i.e

our eternal life for the one who sows to

his own flesh

will from the flesh reap corruption but

the one who sows to the spirit

will from the spirit reap eternal life

and let us not grow weary of doing good

for in due

season we will reap if we do not give up

galatians 6 verses 8 and 9

here paul says that reaping eternal life

is a reason

christians should not grow weary of

doing good not the rapture

not being scared of being caught by

something sudden

but because of something sure and

wonderful

i know some of you are thinking this is

a little too legalistic for comfort

are we to do good works to obtain

eternal life

well don't worry because in the next

verse paul clears all that

up it's found in one of the most famous

passages in the bible

first corinthians 15 58 therefore my

beloved brothers

be steadfast immovable always abounding

in the work of the lord

knowing that in the lord your labor is

not

in vain since this verse comes directly

after paul was talking about the amazing

gifts of immortality

death where is your sting and all that

we can see that he is saying here

that christians do good works because

eternal life

is a sure thing it's real our good works

are not

in vain we will be rewarded on that day

we will live eternally in the new

heavens and new earth with jesus

that is the blessed hope of christians

in any case i hope you can at least

agree that whatever these verses

mean they are most certainly not giving

us any information about whether or not

there are prophesied events before the

rapture

hopefully you are starting to see how

absurd that particular idea is

the next group of proof texts for

imminence is the easiest to dismiss

for some reason these verses always

appear in pre-trib lists of proof texts

but all they prove is that christians

will not go through the wrath of god

which of course pre-wrath and many other

viewpoints

also teach one example from this group

would be 1

thessalonians 5 verse 9 which says for

god has not destined us for wrath

but to obtain salvation through our lord

jesus christ

in a recent major theological paper that

was supposed to be about proving the

doctrine of imminence

two of the six verses offered up in

defense of eminence

were these two verses which have

literally nothing

to do with imminence you can carefully

read through the argumentation on these

verses

in that paper and see he doesn't even

try to make an argument for imminence

he is literally just using these verses

to show that the church will not

go through the wrath of god and i guess

hoping his readers will believe

that somehow proves imminence the next

type of proof text for imminence is one

of the strangest

but also one of the more popular it

could be called

the rapture is a good thing proof text

and it comes from

john 14. let not your hearts be troubled

believe in god believe also in me in my

father's house are many rooms

if it were not so would i have told you

that i go to prepare a place for you

and if i go and prepare a place for you

i will come again

and will take you to myself that where i

am

you may be also and you know the way to

where i'm going

so you may be asking yourself where does

this talk about the rapture coming at

any moment

or that there are no prophesied events

that come before the rapture

well don't worry you didn't see it

because they derive eminence from this

verse in a way that is less than obvious

their argument has two premises number

one

that jesus implies that the rapture is a

good thing when he says

let not your hearts be troubled and

number two that the rapture is in fact

what jesus is talking about

because he says i will come again and

will take you to myself

which is a reference to the rapture so

far i am in total agreement with these

premises

the rapture will be good and this

passage is about the rapture

but the odd conclusion

pre-tribulationists draw from these two

points

is that because the rapture is

considered good by jesus

it therefore can't have anything bad

before it

namely the persecution of the antichrist

they insist

that if christians were to go through

some kind of persecution

before the rapture then jesus would not

have implied that they should not

be troubled about it first of all the

reason that jesus told them not to be

troubled

was not because they were worried about

persecution just before the rapture

he told them not to be troubled because

of what they were talking about

just before he said this simon peter

said to him

lord where are you going jesus answered

him

where i am going you cannot follow me

now but you will follow afterward

after jesus tells them what he does he

then concludes it by saying

and you know the way to where i am going

so we know that the let not your hearts

be troubled statement

was concerning their fear that they

would not know where he was going

or how to follow him there to further

illustrate how absurd

the idea is that jesus was saying let

not your hearts be troubled

to assure his followers that they would

not have to go through terrible

persecution

before the rapture consider that most of

these very disciples would be tortured

to death

not many years after this in fact

millions of christians have died in the

past

and will die because of persecution the

fact that the rapture is a good thing

is in no way promising that the events

just before it will be without pain

and more to the point this verse is not

even in the same ballpark

as a discussion about whether or not

there will be prophesied events before

the rapture

contextually just in case you think we

are cherry-picking bad arguments for

imminence

that paper i mentioned earlier opens up

with this verse

it is the headliner argument he has for

imminence

but all it really does is demonstrate

how bankrupt the argument for eminence

really is

in modern pre-tribulationism the next

group of proof texts are what i call

nearness proof texts they are verses

that speak of the rapture as being

near or soon a prominent example

is in philippians 4 verse 5 which says

let your reasonableness be known to

everyone

the lord is at hand and there are

several others like this

but the doctrine being expressed in each

of them is that the lord's return

is near and because it's been around

2000 years

since the time these verses were written

people are usually looking for a new

definition of the word near

or at hand and pre-tribbers choose to

define it

as imminent once again we need to point

out that the underlying greek

is of no help here the words being used

don't have a technical meaning of

imminence

or that something will happen at any

moment according to the lexicons

they just mean that something is near

let's look at one of the most famous

passages supposedly about imminence

to see if we can tell if james is

talking about an any moment rapture

be patient therefore brothers until the

coming of the lord

see how the farmer waits for the

precious fruit of the earth

being patient about it until it receives

the early and the late reigns

you also be patient establish your

hearts for the coming of the lord is at

hand

do not grumble against one another

brothers so that you may not be judged

behold the judge is standing at the door

this verse from james is clearly

parallel to jesus's teaching of the fig

tree parable in matthew 24.

we know this in part because of the word

near and the idea that the judge is

standing at the door

both of which appear in the fig tree

parable but most of all

we know its derivative because it is the

exact same teaching

about the same issue the rapture in the

fig tree parable

jesus is saying that you will know that

his return is near

engus at the very door or gates

thura because you will see certain signs

namely the signs he just got done

telling them about in the same way that

you can tell summer is near by studying

the leaves on a fig tree

you will see the signs and know his

return is near

james is saying the same thing with his

agricultural parallel

that the harvest of fruit the rapture

cannot occur until certain things happen

first

until it receives the early and late

reigns

and so they need to be patient and

establish their hearts

obviously the harvest or rapture is not

supposed to be understood as imminent in

this illustration

as a number of things have to happen

before crops can be harvested

not the least of which is the early and

latter rains and the actual growing of

the crops

even james telling his readers to be

patient three times in this passage

is the exact opposite thing to teach if

what he meant was that the rapture could

occur

at any moment while it is true that the

rapture being spoken of as being near

is a difficult thing to understand in

light of it having been two thousand

years and counting since the prophecy

was made

i don't think it means we should go

looking for a new definition of the word

near

i think we can take some instruction

from this passage in 2 peter 3

which seems to suggest that any delay in

events

leading up to the rapture and the day of

the lord is to allow for more to be

saved

before the judgment begins but do not

overlook this one fact beloved

that with the lord one day is as a

thousand years

and a thousand years as one day

the lord is not slow to fulfill his

promise as some

count slowness but is patient toward you

not wishing that any should perish but

that all should reach repentance

2nd peter 3 verses 8 and 9

and that brings us to our final group of

proof texts which is the thief in the

ninth

proof texts there are several instances

in scripture

in which the return of jesus is spoken

of like a thief

for you yourselves are fully aware that

the day of the lord will come like a

thief in the night

1st thessalonians 5 verse 2

the idea is that if jesus's return is

unexpected

like a thief breaking into your house at

night then it must be imminent

interestingly this line of argumentation

seems to have fallen out of popularity

with pre-troopers recently

because if you follow the thief idea

throughout the new testament

it ironically ends up proving imminence

wrong

the reason for that is that all of these

coming like a thief verses

can be traced back to jesus who in this

section of the olivet discourse

was talking about the need for his

followers to watch for the signs of his

return

he says watch therefore for you do not

know what hour your lord is coming

but know this that if the master of the

house had known what hour the thief

would come

he would have watched and not allowed

his house to be broken into

therefore you also must be ready for the

son of man is coming

at an hour you do not expect this is

confirmed

in spades all throughout the new

testament where the idea of the thief is

specifically about the importance of

watching for the signs of the return of

christ

and that the lord's return like a thief

is only for those unbelievers who do not

know or care to watch for it

let's take the very verse pre-tribbers

use in 1st thessalonians 5

and put it back in context to show the

utter uselessness of the thief idea to

prove imminence

now concerning the times and the seasons

brothers you have no

need to have anything written to you for

you yourselves are fully aware

that the day of the lord will come like

a thief in the night

while people are saying there is peace

and security

then sudden destruction will come upon

them as labor pains come upon a pregnant

woman

and they will not escape but you are not

in darkness brothers

for that day to surprise you like a

thief for you are all children of light

children of the day we are not of the

night or of the darkness

so then let us not sleep as others do

but let us keep awake

and be sober the thief motif is not

talking

about an imminent event what it is

talking about is that when he does

return it's going to happen suddenly

that's different than the idea of

imminence

jesus's return will come as a thief but

is going to come as a

thief to unbelievers not believers

so the return of christ will only be

like a thief for unbelievers

for them it will come suddenly and

unexpectedly

because they will not be watching for

the signs of it

and the very idea of watching for signs

of the rapture

means that there are prophesied events

before the rapture

if you tell me to watch

then i've got to be watching for

something all the disciples

most of the early church millions of

christians of all ages

have been brutally tortured and killed

for their faith

it is something jesus over and over told

us not only to expect

but to rejoice in so i can't follow the

logic that says

that the rapture will prevent one small

group of christians from persecution

but not others whatever the blessed hope

is

it must be a blessed hope for all those

martyrs of the past as well

which is of course the resurrection to

eternal life itself

i believe that like the man behind the

curtain in the wizard of oz

simply revealing to pre-tribbers what

most pre-tribulationists really teach

about imminence

is enough to understand that the concept

of an imminent rapture

is a totally new fraudulent doctrine

that needs to be quickly abandoned for

the good of the church

[Music]

one of the foundational arguments for

the pre-tribulational rapture

is concerning the relationship between

national israel

and the church it's based on daniel 9

verses 24 to 27

where we find the so-called 70 weeks

prophecy

this prophecy is where we get the

concept of a future seven

year period in which the majority of the

end times events

take place this prophecy in daniel is

about the future of israel

the weeks as in the 70 weeks prophecy

are understood to mean groups of seven

years

so 70 weeks would be 70 groups of 7

years

which works out to 490 years

in daniel these 70 weeks are divided

with the first

69 weeks having been fulfilled in the

past

and the final week the final seven year

period

still awaiting fulfillment in the future

and during the gap

between the first 69 weeks and the final

week

there has been something like 2 000

years and counting

this gap of time that we are currently

in is commonly referred to

as the church age most of the proponents

of the various rapture positions we have

mentioned in this film

like pre-trib post-trib and pre-wrath

all agree on the basics of this prophecy

that there is a future seven year period

in which the end times events will

primarily play out

and that the seven year period will

culminate with god fulfilling his

promises

to national israel i think the

scriptures are very clear that god

uh has a future for israel and that that

future is going to be

uh culminated in the millennial reign of

christ on earth after his return

pre-tribulationists however have

proposed a unique interpretation of this

prophecy

which supports their view of the rapture

the theory

is that god does not work with israel

and the church at the same time

they insist that a hard distinction must

be made here

that god has completely and totally

paused his dealings with national israel

during the church age pre-wrath takes a

similar view

with the difference being that pre-wrath

teaches that god has only

relatively postponed his dealings with

israel during this church age

not absolutely and that god can and has

worked with both the church and israel

during the church

age and that he will continue to do so

in the final seven year period

the reason pre-tribbers are so insistent

that god will absolutely not work with

the church and

israel at the same time is because they

use that particular idea in one of their

arguments for the pre-trib rapture

which is that since the 70 weeks

prophecy was made to israel

and is about israel and since the time

between those two sections of the 70

weeks

is the church age they say that when the

clock starts on this prophecy again

it will be all about israel and so the

church must be raptured before it begins

they'll say that god doesn't work with

israel and the church at the same time

israel is going to be part of the seven

year period therefore the church cannot

be part of the seven year period

the assumption is that

god cannot deal with israel and the

church

at the same time and so since daniel's

70th week

was part of god's dealing with israel

the church must not be

on earth when daniel's 70th week begins

let's start with their premise that

because this 70 weeks prophecy was made

to and concerning israel that the church

will not have any part in its

fulfillment

one great way to show the complete

inconsistency of pre-tribulational

thinking here

is by turning to jeremiah 31 verses 31

to 34

where we see a prophecy that in many

ways is just like the 70 weeks prophecy

for example it was explicitly given to

israel

and was concerning only israel i will

make a new covenant with the house of

israel

and the house of judah and like the

seventy weeks prophecy it was given at a

time when the church

didn't even exist but in this case

nearly every christian agrees that this

prophecy applies to the church as well

as it is talking about the new covenant

instituted by christ

in which the spirit of god will dwell

within the hearts of man

and change them from the inside out

before i show more evidence that this

idea is wrong

i would like you to notice that this

critical doctrine among

pre-tribulationists

that god does not will not work with

israel and the church at the same time

has no actual proof text like other

doctrines do

it is merely an assumption among

pre-tribulationists

and worse it's an assumption that they

routinely abandon

when it suits them take for example the

so-called

tribulation saints idea whenever a

pre-tribber reads in the bible about

christians existing within the last

seven year period which is a very

frequent occurrence

they call those people tribulation

saints

people of various nationalities left

behind after the rapture

who become christians well if god won't

work with the church and israel at the

same time

how do they explain these tribulation

saints

are they not saved do they not have the

holy spirit

are the gentile believers among them not

the church

is god not working with them because he

won't work with them

and the jews at the same time to drive

the nail in the coffin of this

unbiblical doctrine

that god won't work with israel and the

church at the same time

let me simply show you lots of places

where the bible says god works with both

groups in the past

in the present and in the future

in the past god worked with israel

during the church age in

ad70 before the death and resurrection

of jesus

during the old covenant dispensation a

prophecy was given to israel concerning

god judging

israel with the temple's destruction

jesus

on a number of occasions he prophesied

the judgment

on israel when did that happen in

80 70. god is also working with both the

church and

israel at the same time in the present

in at least

two ways the first is that god is making

israel jealous and saving a remnant of

jews during the church age

paul cites the following prophecy about

god making israel jealous through

extending his salvation to the gentiles

but again i ask didn't israel understand

first moses says i will make you jealous

by those who are not a nation

with a senseless nation i will provoke

you to anger

and isaiah is even bold enough to say i

was found by those who did not seek me

i became well known to those who did not

ask for me

paul responds to moses and isaiah's

prophecies

exclaiming god's faithfulness to his

promise to israel

i ask then they did not stumble into an

irrevocable fall did they

absolutely not but by their

transgression salvation has come to the

gentiles

to make israel jealous for i do not want

you to be ignorant of this mystery

brothers and sisters

so that you may not be conceited a

partial hardening has happened to israel

until the full number of the gentiles

has come in god is using the salvation

of gentiles as a means to provoke

israel to come to salvation and he is in

fact

saving a remnant through those means at

this time

if we look at the last 2 000 years plus

god has been dealing with israel in the

church

at the same time the the church

defined as the assembly of the lord

of both jew and gentile god has

the gospel going out and he is gathering

the constituents of his kingdom

and he has been doing that but israel is

still

his chosen nation still his people

they are still under under-disciplined

there still is a remnant

being saved the other way god is working

with israel in the present age

is by god re-gathering israel back to

their homeland

a key aspect to this would be the

monumental event of the creation of the

modern state of israel

in 1948 god has been

and continues to this day providentially

regathering jews

to their homeland israel the prophet

ezekiel prophesied that this would

happen

in his dry bones prophecy in ezekiel 37

verses 1 to 14. in 1948

israel became a nation again it's

fulfilled these are the dry bones of

course the flesh the flesh part of the

prophecy has not been fulfilled that's

going to be the spiritual

regeneration of israel that will happen

at the end of the seven year period

but the dry bones part of the ezekiel

prophecy by the way

ezekiel's prophecy was made to israel

but is being fulfilled

during the church age in the future

this next one cuts to the very core of

the matter since if you can show that

god

in the future works with both israel and

the church

specifically during the final seven year

period

you have refuted the very foundation of

this odd doctrine

and while there are many ways to show

this there is one in particular that i

like the best

and it is found in revelation 12 which

says

but the woman was given the two wings of

the great eagle

so that she might fly from the serpent

into the wilderness

to the place where she is to be

nourished for a time and times

and half a time the serpent poured water

like a river out of his mouth after the

woman to sweep her away with the flood

but the earth came to the help of the

woman and the earth opened its mouth and

swallowed the river that the dragon had

poured from his mouth

then the dragon became furious with the

woman and went off to make war on the

rest of her offspring

on those who keep the commandments of

god and hold

to the testimony of jesus revelation 12

verses 12 to 17. here we have a picture

of events squarely within the last seven

year period

and yet we read that after the dragon

becomes furious at his inability to get

to the representative of israel

i.e the woman he then goes after the

church

i.e those that hold to the testimony of

jesus

both groups are obviously on earth at

the same time

and obviously during the final week of

daniel because of the reference to the

last

three and a half years in verse 14. so

it follows that god

is in fact working with both groups at

the same time

in the end times as well god

works with israel in the church at the

same time

in the past and in the present so it

shouldn't be surprising that the church

will also

enter into with israel this future seven

year period

the antichrist is going to go after both

groups not just israel

but israel and the church during the

great tribulation

the last pre-trib problem that we will

cover in this film

concerns patristics which is a name for

the study of the writings and beliefs of

the early church

the writings from the early church

fathers date back to the first century

and of course we should never take their

writings as proof of one doctrine

over another the bible is always the

ultimate source for our doctrine

but at the same time most if not all of

the doctrines we

hold today were taught at some point by

the early church fathers

at the very least these writings provide

insight into what the earliest

christians believed about certain

subjects

whether those beliefs were right or

wrong so the big

question is what did the early church

believe about the timing of the rapture

and in one sense the answer to that

question

is pretty simple every single early

church father who taught on the

relationship between the church and

the antichrist believed that the church

would face the antichrist before jesus

returns

the belief that christ was going to

return

after antichrist had done damage to the

body

that believers had suffered and had been

under his uh

rampage and that they would be set free

from that

by the appearing of christ in the sky

that is the basic sequence and you'll

see that

in the writings of the fathers you'll

see that in say the decay

as we kind of look at their collected

writings

they believed in the truth that the

church was going to encounter the

antichrist in that the coming of christ

was going to occur

in the wake of their encountering of the

antichrist

it's not just pre-wrathers that think

this either

pre-trib scholars would by and large

agree with what was just said

i mentioned in the section of this film

about eminence a paper written by a

pre-tribulational early church expert

named larry crutchfield

in which he concluded that while he

couldn't find any evidence of

pre-tribulationism

in the early church he did find what he

called

intra-tribulationism by which he meant

people who believed they would be

raptured out of the middle

of the persecution of the antichrist

which is essentially pre-wrath

in another paper written more recently

james

stitzinger who is very much a

pre-tribulationist

agrees with crutchfield's conclusion

when he wrote the early fathers largely

held to a period of persecution

that would be ongoing when the return of

the lord takes place

and most would see the church suffering

through some portion of the tribulation

period

he further writes a type of imminent

intra-tribulationism

crutchfield or imminent

post-tribulationism

walvord with occasional

pre-tribulational inferences

was believed in this paper he quotes

15 church fathers which as we will see

certainly do not help his case and then

oddly concludes his paper by

contradicting his opening statement when

he says

george ladd post-tribulationist is no

longer credible when he writes

we can find no trace of

pre-tribulationism in the early church

and no modern pre-tribulationist has

successfully proved that this particular

doctrine was held

by any of the church fathers or students

of the word before the 19th century

so i'm going to go through these quotes

he provided so i can show

you his logic and by extension most

pre-tribulational logic

as it concerns the church fathers before

we get started though

i want to reiterate something that is

crucially important

as i said these pre-tribbers know and

freely admit

that the early church almost without

exception believed that the rapture

would occur

after the antichrist showed up and began

to persecute the church

they also freely admit those church

fathers that mentioned

the seven year timeline in relationship

to the rapture

universally believed the rapture would

take place in the last half of the three

and a half year period

so pre-tribbers know very well that they

will never

ever win an argument about the early

church teaching pre-tribulationism

in any kind of traditional way it's just

far too obvious that the early church

was

anything but pre-tribulational so what

they do is never mention to their

congregations what the early church

actually believed about the timing of

the rapture

and instead claimed that the early

church believed in imminence

you'll remember that is the idea that

jesus could return

at any moment so the thinking is if they

can prove that the early church believed

the rapture could come at any moment

they will call that proof of

pre-tribulationism

even if the church father in question

also taught the rapture would occur

after the midpoint

and after the persecution of the church

by the antichrist

which is the very opposite of

pre-tribulationism

and as absurd as that premise is they

don't even manage to accomplish that

much

in stitzinger's paper 6 out of the 15

quotes from the early church

can be placed into a category which

could be called

imaginary imminence proof texts this is

where he quotes early church fathers who

mention words that pre-tribbers have

defined as meaning

imminence but don't actually mean

imminence

for example a church father might

mention the rapture is coming soon

or that it is near or that it will be

sudden or that we should watch for it

on the one hand we could rehash what we

talked about in the section on imminence

which is that just because something is

soon or near

doesn't mean it is imminent a harvest of

crops can be near

but that doesn't mean the harvest will

occur at any moment with no preceding

signs

another way to prove this wrong is by

noticing that in most cases

the same writers stitzinger says

believed in imminency

also teach in other places that lots of

signs will come

before the rapture in other words when a

church father said that the rapture is

at hand or near they clearly didn't mean

it was

imminent since they also said there

would be lots of prophesied events

before the rapture one of the best ways

to illustrate this

is with the didache the very first

document outside

of the new testament is called the

dedicated

and it was written roughly uh of the

turn of the first century in his paper

stetsinger says the following

the final chapter of the didache

provides one of the clearest and most

comprehensive statements

on imminency and then he quotes this

line

be watchful for your life let your lambs

not be quenched and your loins not

ungirded

but be ye ready for ye know not the

hour in which our lord cometh so the

writer of the dirake is simply telling

his readers to be watchful and to be

ready because they don't know the day or

the hour of the rapture

as we have seen in the pre-trib mind if

you are watchful and ready for something

it means that thing could occur at any

moment

and that such words in and of themselves

are proof

of imminence but if you read the full

quote from the didache

you will see that the writer goes on to

name the various signs

he wanted them to watch for signs he

believed must come before the rapture

by my count there are 18 events that the

writer believed would need to come to

pass

before the rapture most notably the

antichrist declaring himself to be the

son of god

and the persecution of christians that

would follow that event

so you can see the problem stitzinger

tells his readers that the writers of

the dirakke clearly and comprehensively

taught the rapture could come at any

moment just like he believes

but all you have to do is read a few

lines after this quote

to find out that the writer actually

believed there were multiple things that

must

happen before the rapture i.e

the opposite of imminence this is by no

means the only instance of a

pre-tribulational scholar

in a highly respected journal quoting

church fathers out of context

it's unfortunately incredibly common

many have tried to look at some of the

the quotes from some of the early church

fathers and have tried to say well see

it looks like their pre-tribulation

pre-tribulational because they hold to

imminence which is the idea that

jesus christ can return at any moment

there are no prophesied events that need

to transpire before he returns

and i would suggest to you strongly that

the

the early church fathers did not

subscribe to an imminent

rapture conversely many of them

understood and made it clear in their

writings that there would be

a time of coming persecution before

believers would be raptured the

centerpiece of pre-tribulational church

father quotes though

is from pseudo-ephraim and i should

mention that we have moved well beyond

the early church at this point this

particular quote was from the middle

ages

and it is almost certainly a forgery

pseudo-ephraim thousands of dollars

spent

countless hours spent searching every

historical record we could find

for a reference or proof of the pre-trip

position

they come up with a document that's

called pseudo

ephraim pseudo means

false so here is a writing

ascribed to a man named ephraim that

everybody knows he didn't write it

and it supposedly is proof

of a pre-trib rapture and lots of

writings

written by somebody who wanted it to be

more important than it really was

so he puts the name of an important

person on it in order to give it

legitimacy

we have lots of those writings but the

fact that the

pre-trip system would use one of those

writing as a basis for the proof of

their position

to me is unconscionable but regardless

of who wrote it

this is the section they will usually

quote all the saints and elect of god

are gathered together before the

tribulation which is to come

and are taken to the lord in order that

they may not see

at any time the confusion which

overwhelms the world

because of our sins stitzinger says the

following of pseudo-ephraim in general

it describes the imminent rapture

followed by three and a half years of

great tribulation

under the rule of antichrist followed by

the coming of christ

the defeat of antichrist and the eternal

state

let's talk about the before the

tribulation quote first

as we discussed at the beginning of this

film the word tribulation has only

recently been used to refer to the

entire seven-year period

like the way modern pre-tribbers use it

and if pseudo-ephraim did mean to refer

to the entire seven-year period when he

used this word tribulation

it would be the earliest recorded

instance of the word being used that way

the greek word ethlipsis or tribulation

is used in many ways in the bible

it can refer to the wrath of god general

persecution

or earthly worries it depends on the

context

so the question that stitzinger forgets

to ask here is what does this writer

mean

when he uses the word tribulation what

does the writer think we are going to

escape by the rapture

is it the wrath of god the persecution

of the antichrist

all of it the answer is not what

pre-tribbers want it to be at all

which is why they never quote the final

paragraph of this letter which says

and when the three and a half years have

been completed the time of the

antichrist

through which he will have seduced the

world will come the sign of the son of

man

and coming forward the lord shall appear

with great power

and much majesty and also even with all

the powers of the heavens

with the whole chorus of the saints with

those who bear the sign of the holy

cross upon their shoulders

as the angelic trumpet precedes him

which shall sound and declare

arise o sleeping ones arise

meet christ because his hour of judgment

has come

then christ shall come and the enemy

shall be thrown into confusion

and the lord shall destroy him by the

spirit of his mouth

now remember stetsinger said that this

writer said

that the rapture would be followed by

three and a half years of rule

under the antichrist but this shows that

the writer believed that the rapture

where the sleeping ones arise at the

angelic trumpet sound

would occur after the three and a half

year period

so that's either mid-trib pre-wrath

or post-trib the only thing it really

can't be is pre-trib

when i looked at the document and

studied it it seemed to me that it

argued more for a mid-trib

a rapture or a rapture that was

certainly not pre-tribulational

it didn't seem to me to support the idea

that there was going to be a rapture

before the seventh week even started

there are actually a couple of ways to

check our facts here

the first is this idea about being

thrown into confusion

here in this last paragraph this

confusion

is what happens after the rapture the

author equates the judgment of the world

and the wrath of god

with confusion and if we go back

up to the quote pre-tribbers always use

we can see something

interesting when it says all the saints

and elect of god are gathered together

before the tribulation which is to come

and are taken to the lord in order that

they may not see at any time

the confusion which overwhelms the world

because of our sins

this confusion is what the writer said

christians would escape

by participating in the rapture so we

have contextual proof that when the

writer said the church would escape the

tribulation

he was using the word tribulation to

describe the wrath or judgment of god

upon those left behind we certainly know

he wasn't talking about

escaping the antichrist or persecution

since he absolutely believed the church

would face the antichrist

before the rapture so once again the

pre-tribs

swing and miss when it comes to the

church fathers

another 5 of his 15 quotes in this paper

are from about

1586 to 1795

there are quotes from pre-millennial

historicists who believe in something

called

the pre-conflagration theory now on the

one hand

these quotes are irrelevant because they

are all things that pre-wrathers believe

too take for example this quote from

peter giriu

who died in 1713. christ would come in

the air to rapture the saints

and return to heaven before the battle

of armageddon

this quote may be a problem for some

post-tribulationists

but pre-wrathers like pre-tribbers

believe that the rapture will happen

well before armageddon that is the

rapture happens

and then armageddon happens later on so

it's notable that stitzinger wastes a

full

5 of his 15 quotes on something that is

at best

a rebuke of some post-tribulationist

you might as well call these proof for

the pre-wrath rapture

if your only criteria is that the quote

must be bad for post-tribulationists

interestingly thomas ice of the pre-trib

resource center

wrote a paper which is effectively

rebuking people like stitzinger

who use quotes from

pre-conflagrationalists

and claim they are supporting

pre-tribulationism

because as ice who is obviously a

pre-tribber

notes mead's interval the

pre-conflagration theory

between the rapture and the second

coming is likely only

hours or days but not years as required

by a pre-tribulational viewpoint

the second peter 3 verse 10

conflagration is a final destruction of

the heavens and earth in preparation for

the millennium

within mead system stitzinger never

mentioned

any of this in his paper in fact he

points to one of these

conflagration quotes from john gill in

his conclusion

as conclusive proof for a pre-darby

belief in the pre-trib rapture

which is utterly absurd the few quotes i

haven't dealt with yet

are pretty easily dismissed for example

he quotes a cult leader

in the 1300s and even the guy who

originally published this particular

quote

admits that the writer actually believed

that they were living in the last three

and a half years of end time tribulation

so whatever it is it's not

pre-tribulationism

in conclusion pre-tribbers know they

can't find

anything close to pre-tribulationism in

the early church fathers

the early church almost without

exception taught that the rapture would

take place at some

unknown time after the antichrist

arrived and began persecuting christians

in other words if you had to pick a

modern rapture position that best fit

the early church

it's obviously the pre-wrath position

if you liked this film please consider

sharing it with your friends and family

it is by far the best way to help get

the message out

we are counting on the small percentage

of you that understood and were impacted

by this film

to reach those that you feel need to

hear this message

this film is free on the web but you can

buy physical copies at our website

7 sevenpretribproblems.com where we will

provide free resources

videos and much more content to learn

about the pre-wrath rapture

thanks for watching

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

you