Five Terrible Objections to the Rapture

This is the first in a series of posts on the doctrine of the Rapture of the Church.


"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. In the next few articles on this topic, we’ll study some of the key Bible passages, and along the way, we will address some of the ways Christians can get confused about Bible prophecy. 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

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

9 Responses to Five Terrible Objections to the Rapture

  1. Amy Easley says:

    Amen!

    “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

  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:
      http://walvoord.com/series/321

      Like

      • 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?

        Like

  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.)

    Like

    • 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?

      Like

      • 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).

        Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s