Five Terrible Objections to the Rapture

Some objections are principled, thoughtful, these are not.

"I am... the Bright and Morning Star" Revelation 22:16“The word rapture isn’t in the Bible.” This objection is so bad it didn’t even make the list! The word is right here:

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17: “the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.” The Greek word that is translated “caught up” in English, is translated ‘raptura’ in Latin, which is where the English word ‘rapture’ comes from.

This passage, along with a few others like 1 Corinthians 15 and John 14, is the basis for the premillennial, pre-tribulation rapture doctrine. Briefly, the doctrine says that Jesus will take the church to heaven before the great tribulation – a time of great judgment on the earth, lasting seven years until Christ returns (with his saints) to set up his Millennial kingdom in Jerusalem.

Many sincere, godly Christians object to this teaching, including good friends of mine. Lord willing, we’ll examine the relevant scriptures and show that the Bible does in fact teach this, but for now let’s look at some of the worst reasons for rejecting this doctrine.

“It’s not a traditional church doctrine – it only started with J. N. Darby in the early 19th century.”

This is a very common objection. The claim is, if it was a true teaching of the Bible, surely the early Church fathers, and the reformers would have believed it! But no, the pre-tribulation rapture doctrine is nowhere to be found until the Plymouth Brethren movement in the 1820s. This fact can be surprising to many Christians who aren’t familiar with Church history, and after all, “if it’s new it isn’t true, and if it’s true it isn’t new!” However,

It’s a terrible objection because… It’s a textbook genetic fallacy. A genetic fallacy is a failure to reason correctly; it’s when someone attempts to argue against a position by explaining the origin of the belief. The fact that some guy named Darby is the first to explicitly write about a particular doctrine is just not related to whether it’s true or not. The real question is not, “how old is it?” or “how did it start?” but, “does the Bible teach it?”

After all, we could make the same “argument” against any theological insight since the apostles. The rapture doctrine is only 200 years old? Well, insights from the reformation are at most 500 years old! (Penal-substitutionary atonement, distinct roles for the persons of the Trinity, or anything else) That’s still 1400 years after the New Testament was completed! Really, the age of a belief just isn’t a test for truth. Many doctrines were either not recognized, or lost for long periods of time, but if they are true, they were in the scriptures all along. If something as central as grace-through-faith-alone can be lost or obscured, how much more a teaching like the rapture?

“It’s doomsday hysteria.”

The Left Behind series, the endless speculation, the borderline-date-setting, the constant hand-wringing over headlines and geopolitics… surely nothing that incites such hype is Biblical. This guilty-by-association view of the rapture is very prevalent today. Whether it’s just a ‘hipster’ mentality, or a reaction against real spiritual abuse by a church they grew up in, it’s a common and sometimes understandable point of view for many young Christians today. But,

It’s a terrible objection because… It’s a strawman fallacy. It’s like saying, “I don’t believe in the Bible because Ned Flanders is embarrassing.” Just because some authors and filmmakers made the Christian equivalent to Twilight, doesn’t mean the teaching of scripture they claim to adhere to is wrong. From Young-adult fiction to pulp-prophecy books, from conspiracy theories to “headline exegesis,” Apocalypse hype is a misrepresentation of Bible prophecy. Hysteria misses the point.

Deep down, if this is the real reason you dismiss the rapture doctrine, you should ask yourself if the Westboro Baptist folks are a reason to reject Christianity. Again, the question is not, “how embarrassing are the loudest proponents?” but, “what does the Bible teach?”

“I heard a sermon once…” “My pastor said…”

Many sincere Christians dismiss a teaching like the rapture, simply because an influential teacher or pastor spoke against it. “I used to believe that, but I heard a sermon once about how it isn’t true.” However,

This is a terrible objection because… even the most upright pastor, brilliant scholar, or gifted preacher is still fallible. Unless your objection is really based on his arguments, it’s just an appeal to authority, not a real reason. Did he give reasons why? Did they make this list?

Influential shepherds are both a blessing and a source of danger. In a brand new Christian’s life, they can quickly help someone grow, especially if there is a child-like trust in a mentor. But it is so important to mature beyond an unquestioning reliance on a teacher, and be able to reason from the scriptures for yourself; learning from leaders in the church, but never following blindly.

Dig into God’s word, test all things, and hold fast to what is true! Learn from the experts and scholars (of course!), but don’t look for their opinions, look for their reasons. Weigh those reasons against the opposition, and check them against scripture. Pray! God loves to answer prayers for wisdom! And since these are deep, spiritual matters, we need His Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:14).

“It’s escapism.”

According to many, this doctrine is just a cop-out. It’s an escape hatch to heaven.

This is a terrible objection because… just because some people have thought of it that way, doesn’t mean the rapture doctrine actually promotes that attitude. Plenty of people have abused Christian doctrine throughout history. Does that make it false?

The doctrine of the pre-tribulation rapture and premillennialism is not about the timing of Jesus’s return, it’s about the manner of his return. It is our “blessed hope,” (Titus 2:13) not simply because it might happen tomorrow, but because Jesus will come back suddenly, and personally, and powerfully, and He will fix this broken world.

But shouldn’t we be willing to endure the tribulation? The Bible promises us that we will suffer, and “in this world you will have tribulation,” (John 16:33), but there is a vast difference between trials or persecution, and God’s wrath. God’s wrath is precisely what the tribulation is about (Revelation 6:16).

Besides, it’s one thing for you and I in the U – S of A to desire escape from our #FirstWorldProblems, but can you imagine the comfort this doctrine would be for persecuted Christians? If it’s true, they know that their savior 1) could rescue them, without death, at any moment; 2) will return to personally avenge them; and 3) keep them safe from that same vengeance (1 Thessalonians 1:10). But perhaps,

“The teaching has caused generations of Christians to give up on their nation, culture, and world.”

The charge is that the pre-tribulation rapture teaching, and more generally, premillennialism, causes Christians to have apathy toward their nation or the world around them. This accusation often comes from Christians championing social justice, but also those working toward a more Christian America or a restored Western Culture.

This is a terrible objection because… yet again, it says nothing directly about the truth of the matter. Beyond that, however, the return of Christ for His Church should inspire vast evangelism and missionary efforts… and it has![1] Christians living in view of Christ’s return, should be all the more inspired to love the people around them, and work to see the gospel preached. Urgency, not apathy, is the proper response to the doctrine.

Well, it may have inspired missions and evangelism, but what about the culture, and the nations? The social injustices?

Well, what if it’s true? What if the Bible actually does teach premillennialism, a great tribulation of judgment on the earth, and the rapture of the church beforehand? If it does, then Jesus will fix and redeem the nations, Jesus will right the social injustices, and Jesus will make all things new, when He returns. In other words, this objection begs the question. If the doctrine is true, the church’s purpose is to evangelize. We are still commanded to love people and stand for justice, but to do so in order to rescue people from the world, not to change the world. If this doctrine is what the Bible teaches, true peace won’t come to earth until the Prince of Peace brings it back with Him.

Whether this is the correct perspective, or whether we should fight to save the culture as well as souls, completely depends on which view the Bible actually teaches. I hope you can see just how important this topic is for the Christian life. Like all of scripture, it has real, practical effects on each of us. So,

What does the Bible say?

Like every other doctrine, it all depends on what God has actually said. Many Christians are overwhelmed by the whole subject of Christ’s return, but we shouldn’t be. You don’t have to be a scholar to grasp what God has told us about the future. We have God’s clear Word, a rational intellect, and the indwelling Holy Spirit. And what does the Spirit say? “I don’t want you to be ignorant, brethren!” (1 Thessalonians 4:13)


Photo: “I am… the Bright and Morning Star” Revelation 22:16
Photo credit: wikimedia commons

[1] From the Plymouth Brethren movement, to D. L. Moody, Billy Graham, J. Vernon McGee, the Jesus Movement of the 60s and 70s, and Greg Laurie’s Harvest Crusades, much of the evangelism efforts of the last 200 years came from Christians who held this view of Christ’s return.
Even a strong critic of this position, George E. Ladd, said this: “It is doubtful if there has been any other circle of men who have done more by their influence in preaching, teaching and writing to promote a love for Bible study, a hunger for the deeper Christian life, a passion for evangelism and zeal for missions in the history of American Christianity.” Ladd, Crucial Questions About the Kingdom of God, 49

This entry was posted in Doctrine Study, Prophecy. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Five Terrible Objections to the Rapture

  1. Amy Easley says:


    “The doctrine of the pre-tribulation rapture and premillennialism is not about the timing of Jesus’s return, it’s about the manner of his return. It is our “blessed hope,” (Titus 2:13) not simply because it might happen tomorrow, but because Jesus will come back suddenly, and personally, and powerfully, and He will fix this broken world.”

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dennis Kronk says:

      The Lord does not come back at the Rapture to fix this broken world, only to take the Body of Christ to heaven. He returns in the second coming for Israel and to destroy this wicked world. Only then He restores this broken world and rules over Israel and the nations in righteousness with a rod of iron.


  2. Pick6Pat says:

    Wow great topic, I’m writing my thoughts down as I read through so forgive me if the format of this reply is funky!

    1. Ha great opener mentioning raptura; it’s funny and people really disbelieve the rapture because of this objection.
    2. What another great point, saying that substitutionary atonement is only 500 years old and so on – turns the argument back on the one who posed it! (You know what I’ve always been interested in since getting my feet wet with this objection is wondering what is theologically or culturally out there pre Darby for rapture…)
    3. You turned the straw man on its head again with that next one.
    4. Wow love the appeal to authority section, so relevant, great job. Love how you dropped test all things in there ha! It’s true and it got me thinking – I love being reminded to even prayerfully test our mentors, pastors we listen to and look up to, experts, etc. … And myself too I guess
    5. Great, powerful. Is heaven escapism just because it’s a good thing that happens to me instead of a bad one – (maybe that doesn’t express accurately your point but I liked it very much, the argument, and found it sincere and… glorious for God)
    6. Urgency not apathy is what it did for me!
    7. Very nice lead into upcoming things, what the Word has actually spoken!

    Thanks for pointing me to this! Excited to see and read the future developments. For me it’s all about Daniel, and timeline, for my solid basis, plus what I believe are the plethora of New Testament (plain) statements on the subject, that confirm this doctrine to me that is. May all your readers read and know that he’s coming back! Ha

    Liked by 1 person

    • David says:

      Hey, thanks for commenting! I hope to publish a study of the Thessalonian epistles soon, so then we’ll actually dig into what the Bible says. In the mean time, I briefly read your article, and I think you have some serious misunderstandings of what the doctrine of the rapture actually says. As just one example, no proponent of the pretribulation rapture of the Church ever claimed that it happened before, or apart from a resurrection event. In fact, the rapture is primarily a resurrection event. The unique and surprising bit is just the “we who are alive and remain” bit. As Paul says in 1 Cor 15, “Behold I tell you a mystery, we will not all sleep [die]… but be changed in a moment.”

      Check out what John Walvoord’s study of the Thessalonian epistles for more details:


      • Ike12Stones says:

        The reason that I address 1 Thess 4:16 first is that when discussing the resurrection of the dead with pre-tribbers, I am always told that I have not made the appropriate the appropriate distinction between the ‘rapture,’ and the resurrection of the dead – but that the rapture occurs PRIOR to the resurrection of the dead (which is plainly taught to occur AFTER the tribulation (Mat 24:2-31; 2 Thess 2)

        How do pre-tribbers deal with the fact that the DEAD rise first (which is a plain statement testifying that no living soul can be caught up prior to the resurrection in some sort of separate ‘rapture’ event)? How is claiming there will be a catching up of living saints from the earth prior to Christ’s return and the resurrection NOT a complete denial of Paul’s plain statement?


  3. Ike12Stones says:

    That is: correct me with scripture, don’t send me to someone else’s page. (I was taught the rapture growing up, so I have heard most of the logic that falls behind the arguments for it – bible, concrete text that a fool like me can understand without getting whirled about in someone’s interesting logic.)


    • David says:

      Well, clearly the dead in Christ are resurrected first, before those who are alive when He comes are transformed and caught up. No one is disputing Paul’s plain statement. 🙂 The Rapture is a resurrection.

      But your confusion seems to be over the other descriptions of resurrection in the bible. Do you think there can only be one resurrection “event”?

      If pre-tribbers are correct, then there will be lots and lots of people dying after the rapture-resurrection… During the tribulation, countless people will turn to Christ and countless more will die rejecting Him, so there would have to be another resurrection event. Does the Bible state somewhere that there is only one event in which people are resurrected?


      • Ike12Stones says:

        Excellent question. According to scripture there are [ONLY] TWO resurrections. This point can be found in Revelation 20 (specifically v. 5 & 6).

        Here, according to John, the apostle Jesus Christ returns AT THE END OF THE TRIBULATION – His coming marks the destruction of the beast from the sea (the antichrist kingdom) and the false prophet (the antichrist person), himself. John declares that the resurrection of the dead, which marks Christ’s return, and the end of antichrist’s reign specifically as the FIRST resurrection:

        Rev 20:5
        But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. THIS IS THE FIRST RESURRECTION.

        The first resurrection BEGINS the millineal reign (which is evidently post-trib). The FIRST resurrection is also called ‘the resurrection of the just.’ (Luke 14:14)

        But there will also be a resurrection of the UNJUST (Acts 24:15 & Dan 12:2). THAT is the SECOND resurrection, wherein is the final judgment (Rev 20:5-6 & 11-15).

        So, yes there are TWO resurrections I suppose that constitutes ‘multiple events,’ but they both take place AFTER the tribulation (one before, and one after the millennial reign).


  4. Dennis Kronk says:

    Ike is right there are only two resurrections ever mentioned in the OT the Gospels and Revelations as they refer to Israel’s prophetic promises concerning a kingdom on earth. The Church which is Christ’s Body with a heavenly calling and rapture was exclusively revealed as mystery truth only to the Apostle Paul and only found in his epistles. John 14:1-6 and Matthew 25 ‘one taken and the other left’ is the Second coming and is when the first resurrection happens. So the Lord revealed to Paul about a new Church with new heavenly truths. Part of these new heavenly truths includes the rapture with an obviously new resurrection only for the Church which is Christ’s Body.


    • David says:

      Thanks for the comment, Dennis! You bring out some good points. An often overlooked aspect of biblical prophecy is the progression of revelation, and the specific audience of each passage. That Paul calls it a mystery should be a clue that something about this is different from previously described events. (FWIW, I would say that John 14 does refer to the rapture. but one of these days I might actually get around to writing more.)


  5. I am so glad to have found your page, and I’m looking forward to more! I did a word study in my Sunday school class a while back on the harpazo and it was one of my favorites.
    Thank you for this one, Brother!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dennis Kronk says:

      When we look at the ‘Gospels’ it should be plain to see they are a record of the prophetic fulfilment of the O.T. promises for Israel and concern their prophesied kingdom on earth with Christ their Messiah. It then becomes clear that the Lord Jesus could not have been speaking about the mystery ‘Rapture’ in John 14. The Lord’s ministry on earth was exclusively for Israel and their earthly kingdom promises. Many don’t understand that Christ and the 12 preached the ‘Gospel’ good news of this kingdom. To enter this earthly kingdom [the kingdom of heaven] Jews were required to undergo a water baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. This meant they were turning back to their covenant relationship with Jehovah God and acknowledging that Jesus was their Messiah. The apostle Paul alone was revealed from the Lord in glory by direct revelation new heavenly truths concerning a new called out people called ‘the church which is Christ’s body’ There is no record in scripture of a ‘church’ before Paul where Jew and Gentile are joined together in one body on an equal basis. Ephesians 2:14-16 Therefore there was no need of a special ‘Rapture’ mentioned before Paul’s time as their was no church blessed with spiritual blessings in heavenly places to be promised it. We cannot read truth back in scripture where it has no place or relevance.


      • David says:

        Thanks for the comment! The distinction is not quite as sharp as you say. Jesus himself predicted the church in Matthew 18, and in Acts, we see the church being formed through Peter and the other apostles initially. Paul was specially called to reach gentiles, and he was given unique revelation for the church, but to say the church begins with Paul ignores the book of Acts, and the latter part of Christ’s ministry. Check out our articles on The Kingdom. They should help sort out how the gospels apply.


      • Dennis Kronk says:

        The book of Acts is in fact the answer to why the Church which is Christ’s Body did not begin until Paul. Acts is a transition book clearly depicting the change in God’s program from Israel’s earthly prophetic O.T. promises to the new revelations given to Paul concerning the heavenly calling of the ‘Body Church’. Christ and Peter never preached about a church where Jew and Gentile would be joined together in one Body on an equal basis. Christ said he would build up His kingdom church of Israel. Matthew 16:18 ‘on this rock I will build my church’ means ‘On Peter’s confession that Jesus was the Messiah this kingdom church of Israel would be founded’ This church [called out ones] only consisted of Jewish believers looking for the earthly kingdom. Nothing in early Acts shows any change from this earthly kingdom program of God continued since Abraham. Peter quotes in Acts 2:29-30 about the Christ being risen to sit on David’s throne in the millennial kingdom. He proceeds to offer this kingdom to Israel in Acts 3:17-26 ‘times of refreshing’ v19 ‘restoration of all things’ v21. Acts 1:6 shows the disciples were expecting their Messiah to set up this earthly kingdom. Peter’s quote from Joel is exactly what will happen in the tribulation time, and these Jewish believers at Pentecost [Jewish feast day under the Law] got a foretaste of the Spirit’s power. [Not the indwelling] Notice the tribulation events of v 19-20 did not happen at Pentecost. So Acts begins with everything concerning Israel’s promises with ‘Jew first and Jew only’ to ‘Lo I turn to the Gentiles’ Acts 13:46. The only change in between is the calling of Paul and his revelations of the mystery church which is Christ’s Body and the Rapture.


      • David says:

        There are kernels of insight in this, but you miss the mark. Please check out our articles on The Kingdom, especially the portion about the postponed kingdom. In it we address virtually all of the questions raised here.


  6. Dennis Kronk says:

    I write the above comment to show that unless we clarify the distinction between Israel’s prophetic promises of their earthly kingdom and the second coming of Christ to that of the Mystery revelations of new heavenly truths revealed only to Paul then we continue to mix up and confuse Christians with the distinct differences between the Rapture and the Second coming. At the Rapture Christians need a new spiritual body for heaven whereas at the second coming when the O.T. saints are raised to live in the millennial kingdom they do not need this change.


  7. Pingback: 5 MORE Terrible Objections to the Rapture | testing 5-2-1

  8. Pingback: Bad Objections to the Rapture, Part III | testing 5-2-1

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s