IMMINENCE
Does the Bible Teach an
Any-Moment Rapture?
by Marvin J. Rosenthal
Almost two thousand years ago, the Son
of God left Heaven's glory and came to earth to become the Son of Man.
He who had eternally existed with the Father and Spirit in perfect unbroken
fellowship, took on human form and became a man. His miraculous birth,
sinless life, substitutionary death, bodily resurrection, glorious ascension,
and enthronement at the right hand of His Father are all brilliant facets
related to the first coming of Christ.
The implications of that direct intervention
of God in the affairs of men can neither be fully fathomed nor, with the
greatest of oratory and literary skills, overstated by mortal man.
The Lord's first coming was the noon hour
of at least 6,000 years of human history. Astoundingly, but not surprisingly,
as the Jewish prophets foretold, God was dwelling in human form among His
creation. Men could see the visible Son and know precisely what the invisible
Father was like, for Jesus was the "the brightness of his glory, and
the express image of his person" (Heb. 1:3).
Only one event, in the still-to-unfold
future that awaits mankind, will be able to compare in significance with
the first coming of the Son of Man. That event can be succinctly summed
up in four words: Jesus is coming again.
Among the major purposes associated with
the Second Coming will be the consummation of salvation for those who have
died in Christ ("the dead in Christ shall rise first" {1 Th.
4:16}); deliverance of the living who have trusted Christ as Savior ("Then
we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them"
{1 Th. 4:17}); the judgment of the wicked during the day of the Lord ("For
yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief
in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction
cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not
escape"{1 Th. 5:2-3}); and the establishment of Christ's rule over
the earth ("The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of
our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever" {Rev.
11:15}).
The resurrection of the dead, the final
redemption of the righteous living, the judgment of the wicked, and the
introduction of a golden age, then, are major themes related to Christ's
return.
IS THE RETURN OF CHRIST IMMINENT?
For those who believe and honor God's
Word, the fact of the return of Christ to earth is beyond debate.
Concerning that return, a significant number of Bible-believing Christians
believe the Bible teaches that Christ's return will be premillennial --
that is, at His return He will personally establish a literal, thousand-year
kingdom on the earth. And, with that position, this writer strongly concurs.
However, there has been considerable,
spirited debate with regard to the seven-year period (often referred to
as the Tribulation Period, or the seventieth week of Daniel) immediately
preceding Christ's physical return to the earth and its relationship to
the timing of the Rapture. Some contend that the Rapture of the Church
will occur prior to the commencement of that seven-year period, or
pretribulationally.
Intimately associated with the pretribulational
view of the Rapture is the belief in imminence. Imminence is commonly expressed
by the concept of an any-moment Rapture. It is sometimes voiced with the
sentiment, "I'm looking for the upper Taker (Christ), not the undertaker
(the Antichrist)."
A number of Second Coming hymns suggest
imminence in their lyrics. Leila Morris wrote:
"Jesus is coming to earth again --
What if it were today? Coming in power and love to reign -- What if it
were today? Coming to claim His chosen Bride, All the redeemed and purified,
Over this whole earth scattered wide -- What if it were today?"
And in the same vein, George Whitcomb
wrote:
"Jesus may come today -- Glad day!
Glad day! And I would see my Friend; Dangers and troubles would end If
Jesus should come today."
Many outstanding seminaries, Bible colleges,
missionary agencies, and churches include imminence in their doctrinal
statement.
A large number of those who hold to a
pretribulational and imminent return of Christ view imminence as
an important doctrine, but not a divisive doctrine. They
give genuine latitude to those holding divergent views on the chronology
of the Second Coming. Others, however, have "set" pretribulational
rapturism "in concrete," and in such circles to even raise genuine
questions concerning imminence is to incur wrath and to be held
suspect.
Amazingly, a doctrine which was virtually
unknown in America 120 years ago has now become, for some, a fundamental
of the faith. Of course, the bottom line -- the final arbiter in every
spiritual debate -- is to be the Word of God; never tradition, church dogma,
or human preferences.
THE ORIGIN AND EARLY DEFINITIONS OF IMMINENCE
Some writers have attempted to anchor
pretribulational rapturism and its handmaiden, imminence, in the
rock of antiquity and the early church. It has been suggested that extant
historical documents show that the early church believed in an any-moment
pretribulational Rapture. In point of fact, quotations from the early church
fathers suggest that (1) they believed that Christ could return in their
lifetime, and (2) that His return would be preceded by a period of difficulty.
But in no sense did they teach that the Rapture was pretribulational or
imminent.
"A review of Ante-Nicene writings overwhelmingly
substantiates the reality of this statement. Neither the writings of Clement
of Rome (A.D. 30-100), "The Epistle to Barnabas (A.D. 130), "The
Shepherd of Hermas" (A.D. 150), "The Didache" (A.D. 150),
Ignatius (A.D. 150-115), Polycarp (A.D. 70-167), Papias (A.D. 80-163),
Pothinus (A.D. 87-177), Justyn Martyr (A.D. 100-168), Melito of Sardis
(A.D. 100-170), Hegisippus (A.D. 130-190), Tatian (A.D. 130-190), Irenaeus
(A.D. 140-202), Tertullian (A.D. 150-220), Hippolytus (A.D. 160-240), Cyprian
(A.D. 200-258), Commodian A.D. 200-270), Nepos (A.D. 230-280), Coracion
(A.D. 230-280), Victorinus (A.D. 240-303), Methodius (A.D. 250-311), nor
Lactantius (A.D. 240-330) lend support to the validity of a pretribulation
rapture." 1
John Sproule, writing in defense of pretribulational
rapturism, nonetheless with candor and integrity, noted concerning Imminency :
". . ., one of the recognized deans
of pretrib. eschatology, refers to Imminency as the heart of pretribulationism.
Yet he is able to muster only a few vague quotations from the Early Church
Fathers plus a few debatable scriptures (Jn. 14:1-3; 1 Th. 1:10, 13-18;
5:6; 1 Cor. 1:7) to support his statement." 2
Sproule goes on to write:
"Pretribulationism can ill afford
to rest on the shaky foundation of traditionalism and eisegetical {reading
into the text what is not there} statements. If its {i.e., pretribulationism's}
"heart" is a debatable and inductively determined doctrine of
Imminency then, perhaps, an exegetical "heart transplant" may
be in order." 3
Far from having its roots in the early
church, pretribulational rapturism and an any-moment Rapture can trace
its origin back to John Darby and the Plymouth Brethren in the year 1830.
Some scholars, seeking to prove error by association, have attempted (perhaps
unfairly) to trace its origin back two years earlier to a charismatic,
visionary woman named Margaret MacDonald.4 In any case, neither its recent
origin nor its source proves or disproves its correctness. But if pretribulational
rapturism is used for a badge of fellowship and orthodoxy, one is faced
with the perplexing question of what to do with the millions of godly believers
who, for almost eighteen hundred years, did not hold to pretribulational
rapturism. Among them are heroes of the faith like John Wesley, Charles
Wesley, Charles Spurgeon, Matthew Henry, John Knox, John Huss, William
Cary, John Calvin, Isaac Newton, George Whitfield, A. B. Simpson, George
Mueller, John Newton, Jonathan Edwards, John Wycliffe, John Bunyan, and
multitudes more. Would these men be spurned today because they were not
pretribulational?
The pretribulational view of Christ's
return made its way from England to America in the 1870s and with it, unfortunately,
came friction and division. The Scofield Reference Bible (which has helped
millions of people in their personal Bible study) made pretribulational
teaching a major facet of its 1917 revised edition. Untold multitudes became
pretribulational as a result of Scofield's notes which, because attached
to his reference Bible, became highly authoritative in the minds of many.
It was the Niagara Bible Conference, however,
which initially spearheaded the growth of pretribulational rapturism and
the concept of an any-moment Rapture in America. In 1878, the Conference
adopted a 14-point doctrinal statement. The fourteenth section dealing
with the return of Christ stated: "This personal and premillennial
advent is the blessed hope set before us in the Gospel for which we should
be constantly looking."5 This was a broad statement which could be
embraced by all premillenarians. However, later that same year, The First
General American Bible and Prophetic Conference (closely aligned with the
Niagara Conference) in New York City passed five resolutions. In Article
3, they went beyond the Niagara statement. Their resolution stated: "This
second coming of the Lord is everywhere in the scriptures represented as
imminent, and may occur at any moment."6 Debate on the interpretation
of the meaning of imminence followed. Some argued that imminence
meant meant that signs could be fulfilled and that Christ could
return within the lifetime of any individual generation of believers.7
This view of imminence could better be described as expectancy.
It conveyed two facts: (1) Christ could return in any generation, and (2)
signs could precede His coming. If the word could in point two (2)
were changed to will, their statement would reflect precisely the
view of this article. A second group argued that imminence meant
that the coming of Christ was possible at any hour.8
It was the position of this latter group
which, in the years that followed, dominated pretribulational thinking.
With the passing of time, the definition
of imminence was more closely defined. John R. Rice wrote:
"Christ's coming is imminent.
That means that Jesus may come at any moment. That means that there is
no other prophesied event which must occur before Christ's coming. Nothing
else needs to happen before Jesus may come. No signs need precede it. Jesus
may come today.9
Any moment -- no prophesied event must
occur -- nothing else needs to happen -- it could be today; these are the
points Rice emphasizes.
John Sproule, in a context of taking issue
with posttribulationist Robert Gundry's definition of imminence,
wrote:
"More representative of the
pretrib.
concept of Imminency is the belief that, without qualification, Christ
can return for His Church at any moment and that no predicted event will
intervene before that return." 10
In this definition, the emphasis is changed
from no prophesied event must occur to no prophesied event
will intervene before Christ's return.
It is one thing to speak of the Rapture
as imminent and mean by that that Christ could come in one's lifetime
and signs can precede that coming. It is another thing altogether to define
imminent as meaning that Christ could return at any moment, that
his return is signless, and that no prophecies will intervene before He
returns.
IS IMMINENCE A BIBLICAL DOCTRINE?
It has already been noted that there is
no historical evidence to demonstrate that the early church believed in
an any-moment Rapture. (It should be added that that fact is in marked
contrast to the overwhelming evidence that the early church was premillennial.)
In fact, biblical statements preclude the early church from believing in
imminence. The gospel had to be preached throughout the world before
Christ could return (Acts 1:8). For the early church, that precluded an
any-moment Rapture. Peter was to live to be an old man (Jn. 21:18-19).
For the early church, that precluded an any-moment Rapture. The Temple
was to be destroyed before Christ returned (Mt. 24:1-3). For the early
church, that precluded an any-moment Rapture.
Some, attempting to circumvent this very
real dilemma, have suggested that after those events were fulfilled, the
Church began to believe in imminence. Not only is there no valid
evidence for that reasoning, but it continues to contradict Scripture.
Based on Daniel 9:27 and the prophet's
words, "He shall confirm the covenant with many for one week,"
pretribulationists have historically and continuously insisted that the
Antichrist will make a covenant with Israel to protect her for seven years
(the seventieth week of the Book of Daniel). It is that event which triggers
what is commonly referred to as the Tribulation Period. But from
the defeat of the Jewish nation in A.D. 70 until the emergence of the modern
State on May 14, 1948, no Jewish nation or representative government existed.
Hal Lindsey has written:
"The events leading up to the coming
of the Messiah Jesus are strewn throughout the Old and New Testament prophets
like pieces of a great jigsaw puzzle. The key piece of the puzzle which
was missing until our time was that Israel had to be back in her ancient
homeland, reestablished as a nation. When this occurred in May 1948, the
whole prophetic scenario began to fall together with dizzying speed."
11
It would have been impossible for the
Antichrist to sign a covenant of protection with a non-existent nation.
An any-moment Rapture, therefore, was not possible before the modern State
of Israel was resurrected out of the ashes of the Second World War. Israel
could have become a nation during any generation -- but the Rapture could
not have preceded that event. Above all other issues, the fact remains
that there is not one verse of Scripture that teaches imminence,
if by imminence it is meant that Christ's return is signless, any-moment,
and without the possibility of fulfilled prophecies preceding it. The student
of the Word will search in vain for exegetical evidence to support Imminency .
The fact that men are to "wait for," "expect," "look
for," "keep awake," "be free from excess," "be
alert," (and similar phrases) does not substantiate the claim that
no prophesied event can occur before the Rapture. A chart listing verses
that demonstrate that fact follows:
| TEXT |
BASIC MEANING (GREEK) |
| Luke 12:36; Titus 2:13 |
Wait for, expect |
| Romans 8:23; Galatians 5:5; Hebrews 9:28 |
Await eagerly |
| James 5:7 |
Expect, wait for |
| Matthew 24:50; 2 Pet. 3:12-14 |
Wait for, look for, expect |
| 1 Thessalonians 5:6,8 |
Be sober, self-controlled |
| 1 Peter 1:13; 4:7 |
Free from excess |
| Matthew 24:42-43; Rev. 16:15 |
To be awake, to keep awake |
| Mark 13:33; Hebrews 10:25 |
To see, look at |
| 1 Thessalonians 1:10 |
To wait for, expect, near |
| Philippians 4:5; James 5:8-9 |
At hand |
If church history and the New Testament
do not support an any-moment, signless, no-prophesied-events-can-occur-first
concept of the Rapture, from where did such a concept come, and how did
it grow to dominate much of the conservative Bible-believing, evangelical
church?
Pretribulationists have rightly understood
that the Book of Daniel provides the backbone of prophetic interpretation;
that at the end of Daniel's sixty-ninth prophetic week, the Messiah (Christ)
would be cut off (Dan. 9:26). They also correctly understood that an indefinite
period of time intervened between the sixty-ninth and seventieth week.12 Coupled with that
was the belief that Israel's prophetic time clock will again commence when
the seventieth week is initiated with the signing of the covenant between
the Antichrist and Israel. Of necessity, for pretribulationism to be correct,
the Rapture must occur before God's prophetic time clock begins
again with the seventieth week of Daniel. Pretribulationism requires a
signless, any-moment, imminent Rapture of the Church. Without imminence,
pretribulationism is dead. Or, put another way, if pretribulational rapturism
could be exegetically proven, imminence would be demonstrated to
be a logical corollary. Imminence would be a necessary outgrowth
of a proven pretribulational Rapture, but an unproven concept of imminence
cannot be used to prove pretribulationism. Here is a classic illustration
of putting the cart before the horse, and it is routinely done in defense
of pretribulational rapturism. The battle cry is sometimes voiced this
way: Christ can come for the Church at any moment. Prophetic signs cannot
occur. Therefore, the Rapture must be pretribulational.
Pretribulational rapturists, with few
exceptions, believe that the Day of the Lord commences with the Rapture
of the Church. The Scofield Reference Bible is typical of this position.
It teaches that the Day of the Lord will commence with the translation
(Rapture) of the Church.13 However, since the Day of the Lord is a period
of direct, divine wrath upon the earth (Joel 1:15, 2:1-2, 10-11, 30-31;
Isa 2:12-21; Zeph. 1:14-2:3; 1 Th. 5:2-4), and since Paul taught that believers
are "not appointed . . . to wrath" (1 Th. 5:9), it is convenient
for pretribulational rapturists to commence the Day of the Lord with the
Rapture of the Church. Doing so, however, has created monumental problems
for the belief in an any-moment, no-prophesied-event-can-occur-before-the-Rapture
position. Because of space restrictions, a few of these problems can only
be briefly mentioned.14
First: The Bible makes it clear that cosmic disturbance must precede
the Day of the Lord. The prophet Joel wrote:
"And I will shew wonders in the heavens
and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke. The sun shall
be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and
the terrible day of the Lord come" (Joel 2:30-31. See also Acts 2:19-20;
Isa 13:9-11; Mt.24:29-31; Rev. 6:12-17.)
Second: There remains a word from the last of the Old Testament prophets
concerning that future day. It is a message that holds out some hope. Before
the Day of the Lord begins, God will send a messenger to call the nation
of Israel to repentance. Malachi, God's spokesman about four hundred years
before Christ, recorded:
"Behold, I will send you Elijah the
prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And
he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of
the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse"
(Mal. 4:5-6).
Third: In the clearest possible way, the apostle Paul notes two events
which must precede the Day of the Lord. There must be (1) the apostasy
and (2) the revealing of the man of sin in the Temple of God. Paul wrote:
"That ye be not soon shaken in mind,
or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us,
as that the day of Christ {the Lord} is at hand. Let no man deceive you
by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling
away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that
is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing
himself that he is God" (2 Th. 2:2-4).
The Word of God clearly teaches that cosmic
disturbance must precede the Day of the Lord, that Elijah must appear before
the Day of the Lord, and that apostasy and revealing of the man of sin
must occur before the Day of the Lord. Since pretribulationism states that
the Day of the Lord starts at the Rapture, the concept of an any-moment,
no prophesied-event-will-occur-first position is biblically impossible
to sustain.
EXPECTANCY NOT Imminency
Many believers within the early church
had either seen Christ during His incarnation or known fellow-believers
who had known Him. Consequently, Christ's life, death, burial, and resurrection
were not abstract issues of theology -- they were vibrant realities. His
promise of personal return was dominant in their thinking. Their Lord was
coming again in power and glory. Things would be different when that occurred.
God, not Rome, would be the victor. Christ, not the emperor, would reign.
Righteousness, not wickedness, would be the order of the day. Unlike today,
the heart of the Apostolic Age burned with the prospect of their Sovereign's
return. They knew full well that the Church Age had commenced. The apostle
Paul had revealed that fact (Eph. 3:4-6). But they had absolutely no concept
of its duration. It is easy for believers in the twentieth century to look
back at two thousand years of church history, but the first-century church
had no basis for anticipating that kind of extended period of time between
their own day and the return of Christ. They believed that their Savior
could return in their lifetime, and their lives revolved around the expectation
of that event.
That expectancy can be seen in Paul's
first epistle to the Thessalonians. He wrote:
"But I would not have you to be ignorant,
brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as
others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again,
even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this
we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain
unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent {precede} them which are
asleep" (1 Th. 4:13-15).
With the use of the personal pronoun we
in the phrase "we who are alive and remain," Paul clearly includes
himself among those who could be living at the time of Christ's return.
In his second epistle to the Thessalonians, he emphasized the same truth.
He wrote:
"Now we beseech you, brethren, by
the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto
him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit,
nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at
hand" (2 Th. 2:1-2).
The adjective our in the phrase
"our gathering together unto him" again demonstrates the apostle's
expectancy of Christ's return.
A score of verses teach the Second Coming
of Christ. All are consistent with the thesis that Christ could return
in any generation. Among those verses are the following:
"Looking for that blessed hope, and
the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior, Jesus Christ (Ti.
2:13).
So that ye come behind in no gift, waiting
for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 1:7).
For our citizenship is in heaven, from
which also we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ (Phil. 3:20).
So Christ was once offered to bear the
sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second
time without sin unto salvation (Heb. 9:28).
And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom
he raised from the dead, even Jesus, who delivered us from the wrath to
come (1 Th. 1:10)."
Expectancy -- yes; Imminency -- no. There simply are no verses in the Bible
which teach that Christ's return can occur at any moment, is signless,
and that no prophesied events will precede it -- an absolute necessity
to sustain pretribulationism. What the Word of God does teach is that every
generation should be living with the expectation that Christ could return
in its lifetime. That fact should be so real, that expectation so conspicuous,
that it becomes a catalyst for holy living. But, the generation which enters
the seventieth week of Daniel will know that Christ's return is near. They
will know precisely, because signs will be given to that generation. The
Lord taught: "Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch
is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh"
(Mt. 24:32). They did not know the hour or day when summer would begin,
but they did know the general time period. For the Jewish person of the
first century, the fig tree was a sign of approximation. When its branch
became tender and put forth leaves, one knew that summer was getting close.
That was a non-debatable fact. And then, using the parable, the Lord taught
this truth: "So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know
that it {My return} is near, even at the doors" (Mt. 24:33).
The things that indicated that
Christ's return was near had just been revealed by the Lord in Matthew
24:3-28 in answer to the disciples' question. They had asked, "And
what shall be the sign of they coming, and of the end of the age?"
Those things are (1) the emergence of Antichrist, (2) war generated
by the Antichrist, (3) famine as a direct result of the war, (4) pestilence
because of the resultant unsanitary conditions, (5) martyrdom of some who
will not submit to the mark of the Antichrist, and (6) cosmic disturbance.
These events will indicate that the Rapture is near. Like the fig tree,
they will be signs of Christ's return. They will not indicate the precise
hour or the day, but the general time period.
These signs of His coming cannot possibly
have reference to Christ's physical return to the earth at the end of the
seventieth week as some contend. That event will occur precisely three
and one-half years (or 1,260) days) after the abomination of desolation
occurs at the midpoint of the seventieth week. The precise day of His physical
return will be known.
The coming of the Lord for His Church
can best be described by the word expectancy. Jesus can come
during any generation of history, but only those who are alive when the
seventieth week of Daniel commences will know that the Lord's return
is near. They will not know the hour or the day, but they will know the
general time period because signs will precede His coming. That is the
significance of the Lord's teaching: "Verily I say unto you, This
generation {the generation that enters the seventieth week} shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled" (Mt. 24:34).
THE CHURCH WILL ENTER THE SEVENTIETH WEEK
God never exempts His children from the
normal and natural difficulties of a sinful unregenerate world. The destruction
of Sodom was God's work -- so He told Lot to get out of the city. The universal
flood was His judgment -- so He told Noah to get into the ark. The difficulties
of the first part (the first six seals) of the seventieth week of Daniel
are the result of the emergence of the Antichrist and the rebellion of
unregenerate men against God. From those events the Church is not exempt.
She will be exempted, however, and raptured before God's wrath commences
with the opening of the seventh seal (Rev. 6:17; 8:1).
Therefore, it must be concluded that the
Church has yet before her a period of great difficulty related to the activities
of Antichrist before her final deliverance.15 No normal person enjoys persecution,
and the prospect of entering an unprecedentedly difficult period of time
(the seventieth week of Daniel) is not a pleasant prospect. Understanding
that fact should not cause God's people to recoil in fear and intimidation;
it should be a call to holiness and preparation.
The Church is the Bride of Christ, and
the Bridegroom would never harm His bride. The Bible teaches that he does
not -- He raptures her before His wrath against the wicked commences.
The first part of the seventieth week
is not the wrath of God. It is a period of time when the Antichrist will
arise; he will deceive many; he will enter the temple erected for the glory
of God; he will demand the worship from men that should be directed to
the true Bridegroom alone. In that day, the true Bridegroom will be under
attack. A false lover will seek to capture the hearts of men.
It would not be comely for the Bride to
absent herself during such an hour of history. A true and courageous Bride
will want to remain, fight, and give her life in martyrdom, if need be,
to condemn the false lover and tell the world that Jesus Christ alone is
the true Lover of her soul.
Nearing the end of his life and anticipating
the approach and anguish of Calvary, the Lord asked three of his disciples
to watch and pray with Him. They could have been of great help -- an encouragement
to the Savior in His time of need. However, when the Lord returned from
His awesomely difficult time in the Garden of Gethsemane, He found His
disciples asleep. The first Gospel records it this way: "And he cometh
unto the disciples, and findeth them asleep, and saith unto Peter, What,
could ye not watch with me one hour?" (Mt. 26:40). Gethsemane means
olive press, for in that garden, olives were squeezed to
produce olive oil -- and in that garden the Lamb of God was squeezed as
he anticipated that which was before Him, and He "sweat . . . great
drops of blood." He desired the support of His disciples in an hour
of great need, but they did not give it.
During the seventieth week of Daniel,
the Lord will need and want a courageous Bride to stand for Him and speak
of His exquisite perfection as the gates of Hell are arrayed against His
character through the Antichrist who will be directly empowered by Satan
(Rev. 13:4). Will the Church, His bride, be asleep, having been convinced
of an any-moment, signless, imminent Rapture? Will she have become
so complacent and worldly that her only concern will be her well-being
and escape rather than the glory of the Bridegroom? Will she neglect the
oft-repeated warnings to be ready, watching, and expectant?
The apostle Paul taught an important principle
which the church in America would do well to be reminded of: "If we
suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny
us" (2 Tim. 2:12). This could be the generation that will enter the
seventieth week of Daniel. Some of us may be called upon to suffer, even
to the extent of martyrdom. If we are not willing to make such a sacrifice
for our sovereign Lord, we are not deserving of being called His disciple.
Jesus is coming again. The dead in Christ
will be raised, the living caught up -- both to meet the Lord in the air
and be forever with Him. The true believer just can't lose -- Jesus is
coming again.
1 William
R. Kimball, The Rapture (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1985) 20-21.
2 John A. Sproule, In Defense of Pretribulationism(Winona Lake, IN: BMH Books,
1980) , 18.
3 Ibid.,
23.
4 Pretribulation
traced to Margaret MacDonald, See Henry Hudson, A Second Look at the
Second Coming (Massillon, OH: Calvary Chapel) 3.
5 Ernest
R. Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism: British and American Millenarianism
1800-1930 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970), 276-77.
6 Nathaniel
West, "Introduction," Premillennial Essays of the Prophetic
Conference held in the Church of the Holy Trinity, (New York City,
Oct. 30-Nov. 1, 1878, Ed. Nathaniel West (Chicago: Revell, 1879), 8.
7 Samuel
H Kellog, "Christ's Coming -- Is It Premillennial?" in Premillennial
Essays, 57.
8 William
J. Erdman, The Parousia of Christ a Period of Time; or, When Will the
Church be Translated? (Chicago: Gospel Publishing House, n.d.), 126.
9 John R.
Rice, Christ is Coming -- Signs or no Signs (Murfreesboro, Tennessee:
Sword of the Lord Publishers, 1945), 3.
10 Sproule,
In Defense of Pretribulationism, 12.
11 Hal Lindsey,
The Promise (New York: Bantam Books, 1984), 199.
12 That fact
can be demonstrated in that at the end of the sixty-ninth week, Messiah
would be cut off (Dan. 9:26). That occurred approximately A.D. 32, but
the seventieth week (Seven-year period, or Tribulation) would not commence
until after the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70. Therefore, the seventieth
week could not possibly immediately follow the conclusion of the sixty-ninth.
There was, of necessity, a gap of 38 years which has now extended more
than nineteen hundred years.
13 The
New Scofield Reference Bible, C. I. Scofield,
ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1967), 1372.
14 For a
fuller discussion, see the author's book, The Prewrath Rapture of the
Church, published by Thomas Nelson, and found in most Christian bookstores.
15 The apostle
Paul taught that one evidence of God's righteousness during His day of
the Lord judgment of the wicked would be based on the wicked's persecution
of the righteous during the seventieth week of Daniel (2 Th. 1:4-8).
Return to Prophecy Perspective Index
Questions and Comments are
always welcome
Link to Zion's Hope Website
