From the introduction:

The purpose of this brief study is to show that the pretribulation rapture theory is not plainly taught or directly stated in any place in Scripture, cannot be deduced from biblical teaching, contradicts the general teaching of the Bible regarding Christ’s second coming and was never taught in any branch of the church prior to 1830.

Whenever a Christian encounters a doctrine that has not been taught by anyone in any branch of Christ’s church for over eighteen centuries, one should be very suspect of that teaching.

Secondly, the Bible itself makes the direct statement that people will come to understand prophecy at the time of the end.

Daniel 12
3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.
4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. ...
8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things?
9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.
10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.

Today, we see fulfillment of Bible prophecies that previous generations have not been able to witness, such as the return of 6 million Jews to Israel.  Also, today, we have technology to implement the mark of the beast, and the stated plans of world banks which intend to make use of this technology.  Also, today, we have the internet, which is helping to spread knowledge widely.  According to Daniel, we should expect knowledge to increase in the time of the end.  And we should expect that the prophecies have been sealed up in previous generations, who did not have our ability to understand them. Earlier in Daniel 11, it speaks of people with understanding shall instruct many.  The history of the pretribulation rapture is that many have been instructed by it, and that it is a doctrine that cuts across denominational lines.  5 million scofield Bibles were sold from the early 1900's until 1967.  Dr. Walvoord states that all independantly founded Bible colleges in the last 100 years have taught the pretribulation rapture.  Tens of millions of books were sold by pretribulation rapture teacher, Hal Lindsey.  And again today, millions of books are being sold in the "Left Behind" series by Tim LaHaye.

Daniel 11:
33 And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days.
34 Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen with a little help: but many shall cleave to them with flatteries.
35 And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.

Second, the factual information is that the pretribulation rapture was not invented in the 1830's, but earlier than that.
http://www.apostasynow.com/tgd/trump2.html (William Irving 1827 & Emmanuel Lacunza 1797?)
http://www.according2prophecy.org/macphers.html (Morgan Edwards) and
http://www.according2prophecy.org/apredarby.html (Morgan Edwards early 1740s)

Revelation 3:10 Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.

I believe this verse speaks of the pretribulation rapture, and our critic disagrees.

I agree with the critic, that this promise is made to only one out of the Seven Churches of Revelation 2-3, and that this promise is given for a specific reason.  I believe the text indicates that they were worthy, and did not deny the Word of God, as Jesus says, they "kept the word of my patience", and as verse 8 puts it, "hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name".  However, other promises are made to all who repent, overcome, watch, or have an ear to hear the Spirit, in each of the other seven Churches.  I believe the context clearly indicates that it is appropriate to take each of these promises collectively, as being applicable to all Christians who will be willing to hear the message, "He that hath an ear, let him hear".

(1) Rev 2:7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

(2) Rev 2:11 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death.

(3) Rev 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

(4) Rev 2:26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
28 And I will give him the morning star.
29 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

(5) Rev 3:3 Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.
4 Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy.
5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
6 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

(6) Rev 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
13 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

(7 Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.
22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

That Christians need to be worthy to escape the horrors of the tribulation is also taught in Luke:

Luke 21:36 "Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man."

Unlike the rest of the seven Churches in Revelation, the Philadelphian Church is given the highest praise.  And the Lukewarm Laodicians are told they will be spewed forth out of Christ's mouth if they do not repent.  Given this context of the contrasting spiritual condidtions in the Churches in Rev 2-3, and the message repeated seven times, "He that hath an ear, let him hear...," I do not believe it is wrong to apply these same promises of reward and punishment to other people who maintain similar personal spiritual conditions.  Particularly since it is a New Testament principle to spread these letters from Church to Church, and these particular letters are integral to the overall theme of the book of Revelation, and that we must all stand individually by ourselves before God on judgment day.

2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

To me, it does not make sense for a promise to be given for a reason to the Philadelphian Church, if that same promise does not also apply to ALL who follow after their example.  The attempt to discount the passage of Rev 3:10 from having meaning to our age, and its rapture significance, thus renders the entire passage in Rev 2-3 to have no applicability or significance at all, and robs the Word of God of one of the strongest passages of rebukes and praise for all Christians who have ears to hear.

Second, the critic claims the promise to the Philadelphian Church cannot apply today, because they are all dead.  However, the critic makes no attempt is made to show how the promise of Rev 3:10 actually applied to their time or was fulfilled in history.  This pretribulation rapture critic can only suggest that this promise for the future of the Philadephian Church, as given in Revelation, is not a prophecy of the future and has no relationship to the rest of the prophecies given in Revelation!  Who is taking the quote out of context, really?

Third, the critic attacks the word "from" or "ek" in Greek, saying it does not necessarily imply a spacial removal from the tribulation, but keeping God's people safe through the tribulation.  No, the wording isn't "I also will keep thee out of the hour of temptation", nor does it say, "I also will keep thee through the hour of temptation".  But which reading makes more sense, what does "keep you from" mean?

Finally, the pretribulation rapture skeptic concludes this section by stating that his interpretation is more literal:

Dispensationalists, who are the chief advocates of the pretribulation rapture, claim that they are the champions of a literal approach to biblical interpretation. They say that a literal approach to prophecy logically leads to the pretribulation view. Yet there are a number of important passages such as Revelation 3:10 where Dispensationalists take a very non-literal approach while their theological opponents take a very literal approach.

There is not one thing within the text or context of this passage that indicates that the seven letters are somehow prophetic of seven long periods of church history.

Rev 3:8 I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name.
Rev 3:10 Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.

Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

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

Thus, Revelation 4:1 is not "just another proof text", it is an integral part of Rev 3:8-10, and the promise and context of the entire New Testament.

After being engaged in a deeper study of the Bible and it's critics, I appreciate much more the special promises given in between the lines.  Rev 3:11 "Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown."  Those "no rapture" preachers are literally trying to steal a crown of glory!  There is a special crown given for all who long to see our Lord Jesus Christ in the pretribulation rapture:  2 Timothy 4:8 "Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing."

I believe this verse speaks of the pretribulation rapture, and our critic disagrees.

Pretribulationists cite this verse and then remark that the church is not observed on earth again until Revelation 19 when believers return to earth for the millennial reign of Christ.

The critic attacks this common argument of "The Church is not mentioned from Rev 4 to 18" as "an argument from silence."  However, the critic then attempts to use that same "argument from silence" to suggest there is no Church mentioned in Rev 4:1!  I find it absolutely amazing that a type of argument is both criticized, and then utilized in the same breath!

First, is an "argument from silence" valid or not?  Personally, I think it is.  We cannot assume a passage such as Rev 4:1 is talking about the punishment for murder, because that's simply not what it is talking about, the passage is silent on the subject.  Yes, that is an "argument from silence", but it's valid!  Every time we say, "Look, the verse does not say that", we are using an "argument from silence".  It is an extremely valid method of interpretation.  It is NOT valid to ignore key elements of the passage in one's analysis.  That would be an "argument from ignorance or denial", which is wrong, and not remotely the same.

I believe one of the strongest reasons why pretribulation rapture critics argue so commonly and persistently against the "argument from silence" is that there are four primary chapters in the Bible which speak of the second advent.  The two rapture passages are 1 Thessalonians 4 and 1 Corinthians 15, and in these chapters, the rapture is spoken of at the very end of the chapter, and neither chapter speaks of tribulation which must be endured prior to the rapture.  The two clearest second coming passages are Revelation 19 and Zechariah 14, and in these two chapters, there is no mention of a resurrection, nor a rapture, nor a trumpet blast.   These "arguments from silence" speak volumes against the post tribulation rapture, because the text simply does not present what they say will happen, specifically, that these two events will happen at the same time.

The critic devotes the last three paragraphs to showing that the existence of saints in the tribulation; therefore, he concludes, there must not have been a rapture.  Actually, that saints will be in the tribulaiton is exactly what the pretribulation rapture preaches.  The saints in the tribulation got there because they repent, not because there was never a rapture.  To rephrase: The only way the existence of saints in the tribulation could prove a "no pretribulation rapture" is if it were impossible for people to repent.  Thus, a key unspoken assumption of the "no pretrib" perspective rears it's ugly head, the heresy, "it is impossible to repent and become saved."  If they agree that it is possible to repent and be saved, then the saints in the tribulation is no argument that there cannot be a prior removal of saints at the pretribulation rapture.

Let's get back to the key issue at hand.  Did God intend for Rev 4:1 to be a preview of the pretribulation rapture or not?  Yes, I will admit that there is "no Church" in this verse, but let's examine the key elements that ARE present:  The open door, the trumpet voice, the come up hither.

Revelation 4:1 After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.
Revelation 4:2 And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.

These three key elements are completely ignored by our pretribulation rapture critic.  We have already looked at the open door in connection with Rev 3:8,10.  Additionally, compare the open door with the following:

Mat 25:10 And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.
11 Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us.
12 But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not.
13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.

Luke 13:23 Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few that be saved? And he said unto them,
24 Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.
25 When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying,
Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are:

Our critic is silent on the subject of the connection of the open door from Rev 3:8.  He also suggests that one reason why Rev 4:1 cannot be the raptrue is that Jesus is not descending from heaven as in 1 Thess 4:16, which is quoted just below.  However, John does look and see the open door in heaven, and our same author, John, tells us specifically that the door is Jesus in his Gospel account.  Thus, when John looks and sees the open door, why can't this be symbolic of Jesus who has descended from heaven as in the rapture?

John 10:7 Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.
8 All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them.
9 I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.

Is it conceivable that John is raptured to heaven in some other way?  No.  It is only through Jesus, only through the open door.  Furthermore, the entire Revelation is given to mankind because only Jesus is worthy to open the seals.  Rev 5:2-5.  Again, only through Jesus.

My interpretation might be a bit symbolic on this point.  However, let's not lose focus, that the main points of Rev 4:1 are all rapture symbols.

Next, compare the trumpet voice with the following two well known rapture passages:

[1 Thessalonians 4:16] For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

[1Cor 15:52] In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

Compare the phrase "come up hither" with the following:

Revelation 11:12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.

All the main componants of the verse in Rev 4:1 are connected with the rapture to heaven, and this is exactly what John experiences.  Is it reasonable for us to expect that all these rapture similarities are put into the text to tell us something?  Is John's experience meant to signify the pretribulation rapture?  This is the real question.  Well, how else does the Bible expect us to learn?  Let's see.

Hosea tells us that God uses similitudes to teach us things in prophecy.

Hosea 12:10 I have also spoken by the prophets, and I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes, by the ministry of the prophets.

Paul tells us that the things that happened to people for "ensamples" or "examples".

1Cor 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

So, I believe looking at John's experience as a type of what will happen to the Church is completely in line with, and in agreement with, how the Bible tells us to examine its prophecies.

Although our critic spends a bit of time trying to deny the validity of the "argument from silence", he, himself, attempts to use the same reasoning process to claim that because Rev 4:1 mentions neither the Church nor the descent of Jesus, that it can't be the rapture!  Furthermore, he ignores the topics that the text actually presents.

We can validly use the argument from silence to say Rev 4:1 is not about worship of idols, nor is Rev 4:1 about abstaining from blood, because these topics are not mentioned in the verse!  The argument from silence could be a valid method to say that Rev 4:1 is not the rapture, but only if there are no rapture parallels in the text at all.

Our critic is ironically silent on the three main topics the text actually does talk about, the open door, the trumpet voice, and the phrase "come up hither".  If these are not intended to be a similtude and example of the rapture, then what else?  As we can see, one does not need to argue from silence to show that Rev 4:1 is, or is not, the rapture.  One simply needs to read the actual text, and examine what it is talking about, and the conclusion is forced.

John's rapture is the main subject of the verse, and its context is clearly pretribulational, "and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter."  It is the clear pretribulational context of the verse which has our critic scrambling for ways to deny this as a rapture text.

2 Thess 2:6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
2 Thess 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

I believe these verses speak of the pretribulation rapture, and our critic disagrees.

The subject of debate is the identity of the one who restrains who will be "taken out of the way" which reveals the wicked one.  Again, the critic does not attempt to provide an alternative explanation for what restrains the antichrist from being revealed in 2 Thess 2:7, he merely insists it cannot be the Holy Spirit.  And he generalizes the topic away from the specific event of the revealing of the antichrist, into the more general "resisting & restraining evil".

I find it most amazing that the pretribulation rapture critic forces himself into taking the position that the Holy Spirit, (and by extension, the Holy Spirit filled believer) cannot restrain evil.  The Bible says that even people who are unsaved can restrain evil, yet the pretribulation rapture critic admits he is worse off than the unsaved when he claims, through implication, that he is unable to restrain evil!  Note in the following verse, even people who were not followers of the disciples or Jesus were able to cast out devils in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Mark 9:38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
Mark 9:39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.
Mark 9:40 For he that is not against us is on our part.

The pretribulation rapture critic admits he has less power over evil than those who do not follow Christ, and are able to cast out devils in His name!  The critic, by extension, then, must NOT be like the one who can cast out devils, and is therefore "against us", which is unlike those who are "not against us" and "on our part".

There is another verse which shows that even those who are not believers can restrain evil.  Paul notes that the ruling powers actively work to restrain evil men.

Romans 13
1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

Thus, when the pretribulation rapture critic continually insists he has less power to restrain evil than the ungodly man, what does that say about him?  It is the entire nature of the Christian experience that we have a war between our flesh and spirit.

Galatians 5:17  For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

How can a critic repeatedly exclaim that the Holy Spirt cannot restrain evil?  Jesus tells us that the Holy Spirit will convict men of sin.  When men are convicted and converted, they end up restraining evil in all sorts of ways.  Has our pretribulation rapture critic never seen a man convicted and converted from the error of his ways?

[John 16:7] Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
[John 16:8] And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

It amazes me that our critic knows the Holy Spirit is necessary for a man to be converted.  And he knows the Holy Spirit will be here in the tribulation.  But he confuses the two subjects of restance of evil and the revealing of the antichrist.  Because of such confusion, he argues that the presence of the Holy Spirit cannot restrain evil, and the removal of the Holy Spirit is impossible!

If the Holy Spirit doesn’t leave the scene but merely ceases to restrain the forces of evil as He had before, there is no longer any reason to suppose that this passage indicates the rapture of the church.  The idea that the Holy Spirit is dependent on the church to restrain evil is not supported by Scripture.

Rev 13:7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

Dan 7:21 I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;

Thus, the unsaved today restrain evil.  And the saints in the tribulation restrain evil.  Yet the Church today with the power of the Holy Spirit cannot restrain evil?  This is false teaching!  How much more can true Christians today restrain evil!

Nobody is suggesting that the restraint of evil, or lack thereof, is what allows the appearing of the antichrist.  Nobody is arguing that the unsaved have to be raptured.  Thus, the restraint of evil is not necessarily directly related to the revealing of the antichrist.  These are two different subjects.  Yet, I must protest, and correct both errors of our critic.  Yes, we CAN restrain evil now, just as unsaved do so routinely as they put wicked men behind bars.

And the basic assertion of the text in 2 Thess 2:7, is not that the Church restrains all evil, but that our presence merely restrains the appearing of the evil one.

[2Thess 2:6] And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
[2Thess 2:7] For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
[2Thess 2:8] And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall
destroy with the brightness of his coming:

Thus, once saints are removed in the pretribulation rapture, the antichrist can be revealed.  And once he is revealed, he will again be resisted by new saints who are filled with the power of the Holy Spirit, and protected by the Seal of God.  Yes, the saints in the tribulation will continue the job of restraining that Wicked, but by then, the revealing will already have happened.  As we know, the two witnesses in Rev 11 preach for the first half of the tribulation, and Satan will reign for 42 months only after he kills them in the middle of the tribulation.  Of course Satan is resisted, but by the tribulation, he is already revealed, and that is the subject in question in 2 Thess 2, the revealing of that Wicked one, not resistance or restraint.

Finally, working backwards to 2 Thess 2:2-4, our critic makes several truthful statements, and then inserts a few wild assumptions which are not backed up at all.  I apologize for the length, but I must quote his last paragraph in full in order to show his exact error of reasoning.  His words in italics, [mine in Bold and brackets].

Another reason that this passage should not be considered a proof text for the rapture is Paul’s teaching in the immediate context. The Thessalonians were troubled because of false teaching regarding the day of Christ. Many within the church believed that the day of the Lord had already taken place. Paul wants to remove any misconceptions regarding this coming day by pointing out that certain events must take place before this coming. Paul says there must first be a falling away or rebellion and the man of sin must be revealed. Then he gives certain details regarding the man of sin and when these things will occur. [I agree mostly with everything so far, except that the man of sin is revealed after the apostasia, or falling away, or departure.] What is particularly interesting regarding this section of Scripture is that it proves that the Thessalonians who had previously received instructions by Paul did not know anything about a pretribulation rapture. [Nothing stated thus far supports this assertion, which is contrary to 1 Thessalonians 4 and 5.]

If they had been taught such a doctrine then they would have known that the day of the Lord could not have taken place, for the rapture had not yet occurred. [What I have underlined is exactly the subject in question, and cannot be used as a "given"!  The reason they feared they were in the Day of the Lord was that they feared the rapture had already happened, and that they were left behind!  The rumor that "the resurrection and rapture was past already" is identified as the type of message that caused this kind of trouble in the first place!  [2Tim 2:18] "Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some."]

Furthermore, it proves that Paul did not believe in a pretribulation rapture (or that he was negligent in his instructions), for Paul says nothing about a rapture that is to occur seven years before the day of the Lord. [Now this assertion shows the critic's error of thought more fully.  The Day of the Lord is understood by nearly everyone to be the moment of the rapture.  Post tribulationists put the Day of the Lord at the end of the tribulation, as does this amillennialist critic, while most pretribulationists put the Day of the Lord at the start of the tribulation.]

If Paul believed in pretribulation rapture one would expect him to say: “Don’t be deceived that the day of the Christ has already come, brethren. It can only come after you have been raptured to heaven. The fact that you are still on earth is proof positive that it had not yet occurred.” [Paul, in fact, makes such a statement!

[2 Thess 2:3] Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day [of the Lord or tribulation] shall not come, except there come a falling away [departure/rapture] first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

[2Thess 2:5] Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you this?
[2Thess 2:6] And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.

The only context that the words "now ye know" make any sense at all, is if they refer to the fact that they had not been raptured, and that they, themselves, are "what withholdeth"!  It is only the position of utmost ignorance that says we cannot know, as they did, "what withholdeth", given that we are reading the same letter they received!

Paul does not tell the Thessalonian brothers to look for the rapture [On the contrary, the Bible does tell us to look for Christ who will appear at the rapture as stated in 1 Thess 4! And we are told to look for Christ's appearing repeatedly! Luke 21:28, Titus 2:13, Phil 3:20, Heb 9:28, Heb 12:1,2, Jud 1:21, and this is just a partial list!]

but to look for an apostasy (or rebellion) and the man of sin. [Read 2 Thess 2 again, it NEVER says to look for the antichrist, only that he will appear after the apostasia, or "the departure".]

If the pretribulation rapture theory were true, why would Paul instruct these Christians to look for events that are supposed to happen during the tribulation, when the church is not supposed to be around? [Our critic might as well ask why saints in the tribulation will need to know what is happening.  It make sense that the Bible contains prophecies and information for them.]

It is obvious that Paul presupposes that the church will indeed be present on earth during the great tribulation.  [On the contrary, it is obvious that Paul is teaching about the pretribulation rapture, and that only those saints who are left behind and actually find themselves in the Day of the Lord, in the tribulation, who will have cause to be troubled, (unlike the Thessalonians), will see the antichrist in the temple declaring himself to be god.]

1 Thess 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,

I believe this verse speaks of the pretribulation rapture, and our critic disagrees.

His first error is repeated.  He believes the Day of the Lord is different from the tribulation.

The context of chapter 5 however makes it abundantly clear that the wrath spoken of in verse 5 is not the wrath of the tribulation but the wrath that occurs at the second coming of Christ—the day of the Lord (cf. 1 Th. 5:1-3).

Second, it assumes that the only method at God’s disposal for protecting the church from His wrath is a total removal from the earth. An examination of the wrath...

Again, the issue has become confused.  1 Thess 5:9 is not a blanket protection from wrath.  It says we are not "appointed" to wrath.  I hope I don't miss the pretribulation rapture appointment.

I fully agree with our critic that one does NOT have to be raptured to be spared the wrath of God.  A simple death in Christ will also spare a person.  However, the rapture, and death in Christ, is exactly the context in which 1 Thess 5:9 is given.  The entire purpose of the book of 1 Thessalonians is to teach a certain aspect about the rapture, namely that those who died in Christ would not miss the glory of the promise.

Many of the tribulation saints, by contrast, will be spared from the time of the wrath of God and all the plagues and suffering through the method of a quick death by beheading.

Isaiah 57:1 The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart: and merciful men are taken away, none considering that the righteous is taken away from the evil to come.

See also Rev 20:4 below, "of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus"

Finally, we learn, through a footnote, that our critic is an amillennialist, one who denies the coming millinnium completely.  Perhaps this is why he selectively quotes 2 Peter 3: in full in his final paragraph to omit verse 8:

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

I believe the "Day of the Lord" is the 1000 years, and starts with the pretribulation rapture, not lasting 1007 years at all.  The pretribulation rapture is the beginning of the rule of Christ in heaven.  Ironing out the all the details of my particular assertion (1000 vs 1007 years) are beyond the scope of this article.  The point is that the Bible says, in the context of Peter's teaching about the day of the Lord, that a "Day" with the Lord lasts 1000 years.  Thus, in line with this teaching, the many verses which show the resurrections of the righteous and wicked taking place on "that day" will be at the start and end of the 1000 years, just as Rev 20 states.

Revelation 20:
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Thus, given the statement in 2 Peter 3:8, that a day is 1000 years, and Rev 20, the rest of the Bible is NOT contradicted at all when it says the resurrections of the righteous and unrighteous take place on "that day". Our critic tries to defend his position when he asks:

Should we interpret Revelation 20 in light of the clear teaching we find in the rest of the New Testament?

Regarding Matthew 25:31-46, the sheep and goats judgment of the nations, this is not the rapture because this is after the return of Christ.  The rapture, by contrast, occurs as the Lord is still in the air, 1 Thess 4:13-18.

Regarding 1 Corinthians 15:23-26, 50-54,
23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

Our critic misinterprets, and then asks a question:

According to Paul, the second coming of Christ and the glorification of the saints will occur immediately prior to the final state. Christ returns, the saints receive immortal, glorified bodies “then comes the end.” (The adverb eita, translated then in “then comes the end” in the New Testament, never refers to a long period of time. It is the adverb used to denote a short period of time.) There is no place in Paul’s understanding of the second coming to put a 1,000 year reign. When Christ returns, the kingdom is delivered to the Father. Furthermore, after Christ’s return, death is completely destroyed and abolished. How can there be converts in the millennium who live, have children and die, if death is abolished at the second coming?

To answer the last question, for those in the pretribulation rapture, death is abolished.  But death is finally destroyed after the millinnium, as seen at the end of Rev 20:7,14.

7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,
14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

As further proof that there is still some death during the millinnium, we read in Isaiah 65 that some still die; a man who dies at age 100 will be considered still just a child.

Isaiah 65:
20 There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed.
21 And they shall build houses, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and eat the fruit of them.
22 They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands.
23 They shall not labour in vain, nor bring forth for trouble; for they are the seed of the blessed of the LORD, and their offspring with them.
24 And it shall come to pass, that before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear.
25 The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent's meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the LORD.

Yes, there will still be some people who reject our Lord Jesus Christ during the millinnium, and this can also be seen in Zechariah 14, where a few nations refuse to worship and will be punished with no rain.

Zech 14:
16 And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.
17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.

Again, without the time period of the millinnium, then Isaiah 65, and Zech 14, and a whole host of other passages that describe this time period would make little sense.

It is true that the rapture and the return to earth are not exactly the same events. This point, however, tells us nothing regarding the time sequence of these events. Jesus could meet the saints in the air as He returns to earth.

Next, he quotes 1 Th. 4:13-17; 5:2-4 and notes that there is sudden destruction at the rapture, and asserts there is no reason to assume a seven year time period.  I agree that sudden destruction of the wicked will happen at the pretribulation rapture, and this ties in perfectly with a seven year time period, and both are explained in Ezekiel 38 & 39.  The destruction of the armies of Gog & Magog is followed by a seven year time period when Israel burns their weapons.  This war is distinct from the war of Armageddon because Armageddon will involve nations from the entire earth, not just armies from the north as in the Gog & Magog war.

Ezekiel 39:
6 And I will send a fire on Magog, and among them that dwell carelessly in the isles: and they shall know that I am the LORD.
9 And they that dwell in the cities of Israel shall go forth, and shall set on fire and burn the weapons, both the shields and the bucklers, the bows and the arrows, and the handstaves, and the spears, and they shall burn them with fire seven years:

This is merely one scriptural reason out of six which I have identified which indicates the tribulation will last 7 years.  See The Tribulation will last 7 years for more.  Briefly, the others are Daniel 9:27, Daniel 4, Jeremiah 30:6,7, the bridal week, and other weeks in type.

Our critic concludes this section with two (almost conflicting) observations, that the event is not a secret, but that he cannot discern the difference in language describing the Lord's "coming".

(1) Furthermore, 1 Thessalonians 4:16 explicitly teaches that the rapture is a public event, not secret: “For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God.”

(2) Why did he use language which Dispensationalists must admit to be confusing?

Prov 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.

[1Cor 14:22] ... prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

And God wants to tell us things that not all believers are instantly ready to hear.

[1Cor 3:1] And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
[1Cor 3:2] I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

Not even the disciples, after three years of learning at the feet of Jesus, were taught everything.

John 16:12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.

This is why some things require diligent study.

2 Tim 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Jesus taught in parables to hide things.  Matt 13:10-17.   Why would the Bible be written any differently than the method in which Jesus taught?  The pretribulation rapture cannot be discerned at first glance, and this is exactly the way God wrote his Holy Word the Bible, on purpose, and is perfectly in line with how he has acted in the past.  Why would God change to suit our current "instant gratification" society?

[1Cor 2:7] But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
[1Cor 2:8] Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Yes, the pretribulation rapture will be a publicly knowable event at the time it happens.  However, right now, the proof of it is hidden in scripture, and it takes faith to see, and discernment to learn.  A skeptical and scorning mind will not be able to learn it.

Proverbs 14:6 A scorner seeketh wisdom, and findeth it not: but knowledge is easy unto him that understandeth.

Furthermore, if the pretribulation rapture happens at the same time as the destruction by fire of the armies of Gog & Magog, and when Satan is cast out of heaven with the stellar signs like the stars falling (Rev 12, Isaiah 24 Ezekiel 32), then both events will be the perfect explanation and "delusion sent from God" (2 Thess 2:11) to get people to believe Satan's lies.  After the rapture, Satan will be able to claim that it will be after Armageddon and after the "Day of the Lord", and that he is god come to set up the millinnial kingdom.  Since people who take the mark of the beast will be tortured by demons, as described in Rev 9, and be unable to kill themselves to relieve their pain, Satan will claim that these people of his are the new immortals of his kingdom.   Already, many new age followers are being conditioned with various explanations to explain missing Christians and the coming tribulation, from everything from UFO abduction stories, to planetary alignment changes, to the "punctuated equilibrium" theory of mass and quick evolution which follows extinction events.  The deception will be very strong, and the rapture will be hidden and lied about even after it happens.  Many people believe it is no mistake that the current "UFO abduction" stories increased in frequency dramatically in 1948, the same year Israel became a nation, and that there is a large number of these stories in and around Israel even today.

Yes, the rapture is a secret, but only to those who are lost.

2 Corinthians 4:3  But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:

Our critic has saved one of the most common "no pretrib rapture" arguments for last, Matt 24.  However, instead of the usual post tribulation rapture position, he states something different.  In fact, I am unable to discern whether this amillennialist critic believes in a coming time of tribulation at all.

I do agree that Matt 24 had some partial fulfillment in 70 A.D. at the destruction of Jerusalem.  In this manner, Matt 24:29, "after the tribulation" can refer to our day and time of tribulation, that our era will conclude with the rapture, before that unique time of "great tribulation".

But a partial fulfillment is no proof that there will not be a fulfillment in the future of the wars, famines and diseases which we read about in Revelation which destroy first 1/4 of the people of the earth, and later 1/3 of mankind for a total of 1/2 of the world's population.  After all, when in history was 1/2 of the population of the earth ever destroyed?

If we read Ezekiel 28, we see the judgment of the prince of Tyrus and Satan.  True, the earthly king died long ago, but that is no reason to say that Satan will not be judged and brought low in the future.  The Chapter has a duel fulfillment, just as the "great tribulation" of Matt 24 is also yet future...

Next, the problem with interpreting the phrase, "the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night", to mean only a destruction on the ungodly, is at odds with John 10:10.

John 10:10  The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.

In fact, the phrase about the Lord coming as a thief to give life is a Jewish expression, which is fitting with how a groom comes to steal away his bride like a thief in the night.  That is why this is a rapture phrase.

Simply put, there is not one shred of evidence that can be found in the Bible to support the pretribulation rapture.

The typical Pretribulational arguments offered reveal a pattern: of imposing one’s presuppositions onto a text without any exegetical justification whatsoever

of finding subtle meaning between words and/or phrases that were never intended by the author

of spiritualizing or ignoring passages that contradict the Pretribulational paradigm

and, of imposing Pretribulationalism upon passages that actually teach the unity of the eschatological complex (i.e., the rapture, second coming, general resurrection, and general judgment all occur on the same day—the day of the Lord)

It is our hope and prayer that professing Christians would cast off this escapist fantasy and return to the task of personal sanctification and godly dominion.

Ephesians 5:26  That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,

Luke 12:9 But he that denieth me before men shall be denied before the angels of God.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Click Here to go Back to the Home Page:
Online Bible Prophecy Studies;
Please feel free to email me, Jason, at
bibleprophesy@yahoo.com
if you have any questions or comments on this article,
or on the subject of the pretribulation rapture,
or if you wish to share any scriptures with me.