Left Behind Theology

Guest

Left Behind Theology

In Defense of the Faith
Friday, February 21, 2014
Alf Cengia

The term ''left behind theology'' has been evoked to marginalize pretribulationism by non-pretribulationists. It is also used to attack dispensationalism by advocates of Covenant Theology etc. The inference is that most people who believe in the pretrib rapture have derived their theology from the popular Left Behind books.

Personally speaking, I was raised in an amillennial system. On becoming a premillennialist I defaulted to posttribulationism. After years of getting lost down New Age rabbit holes I met the concept of pretribulationism with skepticism. In fact I'm skeptical about anything new nowadays, so I had no horse in the rapture race.

Having noted the attacks on the pretribulational view and the recurring themes, I decided to check how valid these gripes were. As a result of that search I came to the conclusion that the pretribulational rapture has the best arguments going for it.

Following are a few examples of these objections and some brief responses.

1) John Darby got the pretrib rapture idea from Margaret MacDonald's vision:

This myth was popularized by Dave MacPherson. Those who repeat it haven't checked the facts. As Mike Stallard observes, MacDonald and Irving were historicists; they thought they were living in the three-and-a-half years of the Great Tribulation. MacDonald wrote that: "The trial of the Church is from Antichrist." She wasn't pretrib.

2) The word "rapture" isn't in the Bible:

Neither is the word "Trinity". But the concept is still there. You won't find "Monergism" in a concordance but Reformed Theology teaches it.

3) No one taught pretribulationism (or dispensationalism) before Darby:

We might argue that Paul did. It was during the 19th century that a more literal hermeneutic was finally applied to Scriptures involving Israel and prophecy.

Pretribulationism reemerged out of that process.

Invoking the church fathers can be a two edged sword. A prewrather appealing to Irenaeus or Hippolytus should note that they understood the Great Tribulation as lasting three-and-a-half years, not less as Van Kampen taught late last century.

Yet this tenet is critical to that system.

Not only did the fathers often disagree on eschatology (premil & amil) but they also saw the church as being the New Israel. In that light they allegorized texts concerning future Israel. Appealing to history as an indicator of authenticity is a problem considering the latish date of the Reformation, 16th century Covenant Theology, even more recent New Covenant Theology, Postmillennialism, Seventh-day Adventism and Preterism.

4) Show me one Scripture that teaches two second comings of Christ:

Show me one text that teaches the Trinity or that Regeneration precedes Faith.

Both are deductions from a set of Scriptures. Ironically, there are six verses in Rev 20 that give us the length of the millennium but amillennialists still deny it.

Amillennialist Riddlebarger squeezes the entire church age into the last half of the 70th week of Daniel! Yet the 70 weeks were applicable to Daniel's people - Israel.
The originator of the most recent rapture view (prewrath) actually taught four comings of Christ in a "single parousia." Some advocates teach that when Christ comes for His church, they hover in the atmosphere. Ironically, they teach that the Great Multitude in Rev 7 is the church. Yet this Multitude is worshiping the Lamb in heaven. They also have to deny thatJohn 14:2-3 is the rapture and allegorize Rev 19:11 to preserve a "single coming."

At times Christ tells His audience to watch out for certain signs of His coming (the Olivet Discourse). Those same texts depict a horrific period before His return (Matt 24: 21: Rev 6:4,8 etc). In contrast, Matt 24:36-39 and 1 Thess 5:2-3 depict Christ coming as a surprise during a period of relative peace. How can both be true of the One Coming? See also Matt 24:42, 44,50, 25:13 and Mark 13:34-37.

5) Matt 24:31 is obviously the rapture which occurs after the tribulation:

Jesus uses the word "gather" (episunago) in Matt 23:37-39 in relation to Israel. The same word is used in Matt 24:31. Christ is alluding to the promised final gathering of Israel. As God scattered Israel to the four winds, so will He gather them back after they repent. See Duet 30:1-5; Isaiah 11:10-12; Isaiah 27:13, 43:5-7, 10, 20; Ezek 5:10, 12, 17:21; Hos 5:15; Zech 2:6; 13:7-9. The Great Tribulation is designed to bring about Israel's repentance, not to "purify" the church.

If the rapture occurs at the end of the Great Tribulation, why is there a need for a Sheep & Goat judgment? Haven't the Sheep (believers) already been separated from the unbelievers?

6) The church is exempt from God's wrath (1 Thess 1:10, 5:9) but wrath is not mentioned before Rev 6:17. Therefore the seals do not contain God's wrath:

Neither is the rapture mentioned in Revelation 7 or at the 7th trumpet, yet non-pretribbers place it at those times. The church isn't mentioned in Revelation 6-18 but people find ways to put it there.

Pretribulationists note that God's wrath is evident in the 4th seal. In Ezekiel 5 and Ezek 14:21the same four elements found in the 4th seal are called severe judgments, and also God's anger (aph), fury (chemah). Furthermore, Ezek 7 associates God's anger, fury and wrath with famine, sword and pestilence and this time in context to the Day of the Lord. Given that these judgments were God's wrath in the Old Testament, the same can be said of them in Revelation.

7) 2 Thess 2 is a nightmare for pretribulationists:

I once read that pretribbers avoided 2 Thess 2:1-8 because they had problems with it. Someone has now produced an 8 minute video claiming it is a nightmare for pretribbers because there are so many different interpretations. Using that same logic; because these people can't agree on why pretribbers have problems in this area, they are probably wrong as well.

In fact pretribbers do address 2 Thess 2 and some of them do disagree on certain aspects. But as F.F. Bruce (who wasn't a "Darbyite") notes, there are a variety of views among many non-pretrib scholars regarding these verses.

Eric Douma's essay, Robert L Thomas' article on imminence and David Guzik's onlineexposition of 2 Thess 2 are recommended resources. I don't agree with everything they write and neither do they always agree with each other. That doesn't make pretrib wrong. Remember that non-pretribbers often disagree with each other on aspects of their own systems.

Cool

There is only one resurrection and the Last Trump (1 Cor 15:51-52) is the same as the 7th Trumpet of Revelation. Therefore the rapture cannot be pretribulational:

Pretribbers point out that Revelation was given to John after Paul's discourse. Paul must have spoken in terms the Corinthians would have understood at the time. Even if Paul had special insight prior to John's Revelation, he likely would not have been permitted to utter it (1 Cor 12:2).

While posttribulationists often link the Last Trump to the 7th trumpet, thy need to re-arrange the chronology of the book of Revelation in order to make it fit. They must shift the 7th trumpet forward to Christ's coming in Rev 19:11, and move the Rev 20:4 resurrections back to that event as well. Moreover, the later resurrection of the tribulation saints is supported byDan 12:12-13 where Daniel's resurrection is implied to be at the end of the 1,335 days. Therefore this isn't likely to take place at the 7th trumpet.

Dr Ice's article on The Last Trumpet responds to some of these objections. Dr Renald Showers has also contributed his thoughts in when the last trump sounds.

This was hardly an exhaustive response to all the objections against pretribulationism. Space doesn't permit addressing them all in detail. Neither was this intended as an attack on other systems. The point is that the pretribulational rapture didn't derive from pop theology. There is a wealth of biblical evidence that undergirds it.

Maranatha!

Posts : 229 Reputation : 48 Join date : 2012-01-06

Alf, " in defense of the faith" , yep , it takes faith to support pre tribulation rapture. Yep , I agree.

Posts : 580 Reputation : 82 Join date : 2012-01-04

what is this little didy mean ?

luke 21:32 Truly I say to you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.
33 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
34 And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come on you unawares.
35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.
36 Watch you therefore, and pray always, that you may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

what comes as a snare, the tribulation, to all who dwell on the earth. how can u be accounted worthy, for a thousand alex...

what is the RAPTURE...

Posts : 580 Reputation : 82 Join date : 2012-01-04

french coneheads for eight hundred, please...

Posts : 250 Reputation : 38 Join date : 2011-08-16

your exactly right Murray

there are 2 returns of the Lord....and Luke was written at the beginning of the church.....i hate when people try to say pre-trib was taught recently

the end of the 7 years will by no means whatsoever come about as a snare.

the few left alive...will know the exact day the lord's return,and will be hiding out hoping they make it alive....except for the Jews who made it to the safe haven in the wilderness......now they too,will know the exact day the Lord will return...which is at the end of the Tribulation.

but theres a "coming of the Lord" before the Tribulation....that know one knows the day,or the hour.....thats the day Jesus comes to get his bride....and take her to his fathers house for our honeymoon Smile

....kicking the Celebration off with the "marriage supper of the Lamb"