Soon after getting saved in the 1980's I came across a Hal Lindsay book, "The Late Great Planet Earth." For the first time, I came across the pre-trib rapture, presented in a very up-to-date (for the time) presentation of when or how Jesus was going to return to the earth. All complete with narratives of how God and Magog were Soviet Russia which Hal predicted, would invade the nation of Israel. And so on and so forth. It was all fascinating to me and seemed to chime with the times. And it put the pre-tribulation rapture as the way everything was going to happen. Considering I just knew that Jesus was going to return but not how He was going to return, this was all a new perspective for me. And quite compelling at the time since I knew little else on the matter.

So, I then went on to read quite a number of his other books popular at the time, "The 1980's Countdown to Armageddon," "There's a New World Coming," and, "The Rapture: Truth or Consequences." And they all quite cemented the idea of the pre-tribulation version of end time events in my mind. Especially in view that I never really heard any other view being put forward. So, the pre-trib viewpoint neatly filled the vacuum. And I started becoming a bit of a self-taught expert on the chronologies put forward, and, as I recall, prided myself that I knew things that were 'hidden' to others.

And this was fine for a time until I would occasionally come across a scripture that didn't seem to fit the narrative. I'll go into some of them later on. Initially I would just ignore them and think, "Well, there must be some other way of reading this scripture," and put it to the side. As the pre-tribulation version seemed to be so chronologically right according to Revelation and the verses that were usually quoted. And most of all, according to the books I'd read. And also, the fact that I never really heard anything else preached at the time. Just the pre-trib rapture theory which was usually put forward as fact. So, because I knew little else, this was what I accepted as 'fact.'

But then I remember reading the Olivet discourse in Matthew, Mark and Luke, and wondering why on earth did Jesus not mention the pre-tribulation rapture? He was being very specific about what was going to come and seemed to be giving quite a clear chronology of events leading to His return. Wars and rumours of wars. Then this, then that. Certainly, the wholescale persecution of believers. But no mention whatsoever of a pre-tribulation, secret kind of rapture. Very odd. And to make it worse (for my belief in the pre-tribulation rapture theory at the time), Jesus gave all this run up of bad things happening, seemingly getting worse and worse, and then the focal point of it all as His glorious return, in which He would send out His angels and gather His elect together. Where was the secret rapture in all of this? It seemed all very triumphant, loud, public and anything but secret. And that everything happened on the Day the Lord Jesus was revealed from heaven.

So, for a number of months I had my doubts and concerns, but just held them there. Not being convinced this way or that. The books seemed to present quite a compelling case whenever I read them. And most people I knew just kind of accepted that that was the way it was all going to unfold. But why did doubts appear in my mind whenever I read what the Bible said about the end times? And why was it never mentioned in the scriptures? But instead, the Bible seemed to clearly portray the event happening at the glorious and very public second coming of Christ.

But after some time of wavering on the issue, I thought I needed to finally look into this in more detail to see whether what I was believing was what the Bible actually said. Or not. So, after quite a long time of personal study on the subject itself, I came to the shocking realisation (in my own mind), that what I had held to so fervently, was not actually the truth on the matter. I found that there was not one verse that clearly spelled out the pre-tribulation rapture.

There were some that seemed on the surface at least to possibly infer a pre-trib rapture if they were taken in a certain way. But not one clear verse that spelled it out. It was all arrived at through implication, conjecture and speculation. Or by viewing the Bible through dispensational glasses and making verses fit the model. Surely, for such a pivotal doctrine that effectively changes the way we view quite a number of the scriptures, there should be at least one verse that clearly spells it out? But there wasn't one. And I kept coming across verses that either strongly inferred that the pre-tribulation rapture theory was incorrect, or that directly contradicted it.

So, eventually I felt unable to hold to the doctrine any longer. Not that I could then put forward a neat chronology for how it was all going to happen. But the one thing I could see was that the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ and the rapture of the church was going to happen all at the same time. Or around about the same time. Certainly, on the same day, the 'Day of the Lord.' The church would be snatched up or raptured just before the full outpouring of God's wrath upon the earth. But it would be just in the nick of time, rather than 7 years previously.

I suppose that chimes more with a 'pre-wrath' view if you we want to put a label on it. I believe the church will go through most of the tribulation, but will certainly be taken up into the air to be with the Lord as He returns in power and splendour. As the fullness of His wrath is being poured out upon the inhabitants of the earth. Whether that's exactly 7 years after the start of the tribulation or some other time, I am not quite sure and would not choose to be dogmatic over it.

So, yes Jesus was coming as a thief in the night. But not in the way the pre-trib teachers put it. They portrayed Jesus as coming secretly and then leaving secretly to go back to heaven with His bride the church. Fulfilling the role of a thief that is trying to stay hidden from the world. Almost as if He were skulking about trying not to be detected. But that's not how the Bible is talking about Jesus when it uses the phrase, "As a thief in the night," to describe His coming.

The Bible uses the phrase, "As a thief in the night," to show that the people of this world would not be expecting Him and the head of the household would not know when He is coming. But once the one coming, "As a thief," appeared, everything would kick off. He was not actually a thief coming to steal away something not belonging to Him. Quietly coming out of heaven, quietly whisking His people up into the air and then quietly sneaking back into heaven with His church. And then quietly looking on to see all the people searching for what He had taken away. No, He was coming, "As a thief," or in the like manner of a thief. In the sense of coming when most people would not expect Him to. Unexpected by the majority of people. And probably unexpected by many believers who were also not looking for His coming.

But once He came, He is no longer the thief coming in the night. He is now come as the conquering King. He is now revealed as the rightful owner of those whom He has taken, the Redeemer of those who have trusted in Him, the rightful heir to the throne of David which He will sit upon and rule the nations from. At the time He is given the Kingdom by God the Father. All very public, loud and glorious.

So, that is my very brief experience of the pre-trib rapture. How I believed it quite fervently, because I read the books and listened to the tapes (it would be listened to the YouTube videos these days!). And though is all sounded so right and correct when I read the books, Biblically it really did not stand up under careful analysis when I finally read with an open mind that sought after truth rather than what I wanted to be the truth. And I found that many of the verses that contradicted the theory were either ignored by the pre-trib teachers, or twisted in a way to make them fit their chronology of end-time events.

I really did want the pre-trib version to be right. Who, after all, wants to go through tribulation, let alone a, "Great tribulation,"? Certainly not me. But eventually after much thought and deliberation I had to come to the conclusion that it was not correct and I then had to embrace what I saw to be true. That the coming of the Lord and our being gathered to Him happened at the same sort of time and on the same day. Not split apart by 7 years with some sort of secret rapture the Bible doesn't actually write about in the way it is presented by the pre-trib teachers of today.

So, I realise that all these things have to come down to our own conviction of what is right, true and Biblical. Only as we make those judgements, let us base our conclusions on what the Bible does say, more so then on what the books say, or our favourite teacher says or our denomination teaches. Because in the end, everything else withers and falls, but only the Word of our God will stand forever. May the Lord lead you as you seek for the truth of His Word in this matter. None of us have got it all down as right. Only the Word of God is right.

And personally speaking, I would give greater credence to the clear scriptures regarding the subject found in the gospels and the epistles than the more prophetic and therefore speculative verses to be found in the book of the Revelation. Not that I'm trying to minimise the verses found in the Revelation. Just I would prefer to interpret them according to the clear verses then to try and fit the clear verses around prophetic scripture that could potentially be viewed in a number of different ways.

So, I'll start with the main verses and points which are made in support of the pre-tribulation rapture theory and give my answer to them. And then go on to those scriptures which contradict or infer something different. So, here goes.


POINTS FOR THE PRE-TRIB RAPTURE:

1. The doctrine of 'Imminency' is best fulfilled by a pre-tribulation rapture.

The point is made that the Bible portrays the coming of Jesus as an imminent event, one where we have to be ready at any moment in case He comes. That nobody knows the day or the hour of Christ's coming, not even Jesus Himself. So, therefore the rapture could happen at any moment. Feeding into the narrative that Jesus is coming, "As a thief in the night." So, it is said, that nobody will know when it will happen (which thief advertises his coming in the way that God has signposted the signs to look out for with regard to the second coming of Christ?) This is probably the single most important point given to support the pre-trib theory by those who believe it.

People go on to say that there are prophecies in scripture that give indications as to when the Lord's glorious and public second coming will be. For example, they say it will happen 7 years after the rapture or the signing of the peace treaty with Israel. Or that it will happen after the great worldwide judgements listed in the book of Revelation. So, there can't be the same imminency attached to that event. Only to a 'secret rapture.' So therefore, the logic goes, the two events must be separate.

Looked at in isolation, this argument could be a pointer towards the pre-tribulation rapture theory. If the pre-trib viewpoint is the closest to an accepted and clearly known doctrine in the church (like the commonly held doctrine that we're saved by grace, through faith), then that would certainly be a plus point for it. The big problem with that is there is no accepted and clearly known, 'doctrine of imminency,' as specifically understood and taught by the pre-trib teachers that is held anywhere else. Either by the churches in general, both now or historically in any of the creeds or councils throughout the ages.

The pre-tribulation advocates state that Jesus could return at any time and nothing else needs to happen before He does. This is their particular interpretation of the 'doctrine' which of course will fit with their viewpoint because that's how they see it. So, they say our viewpoint best fits this doctrine. But it's a doctrine they have created in the first place. The phrase, 'marking your own homework,' comes to mind.

It's a bit like certain Calvinists saying the reformed teaching is correct because it is the only one that is closest to the doctrine of limited atonement. Only they are the ones who created the doctrine of limited atonement, so of course it would most closely follow the Reformed viewpoint and mindset. Nobody else believes in the doctrine of limited atonement, so it is a moot point to make. Yet there are certain Calvinists who will confidently make such a point today.

The pre-trib teachers created their own version of the, 'Doctrine of imminency,' by taking what Jesus said about His coming being at hand or near, or that nobody will know at what hour He is coming, and then saying, "Well that implies that nothing else in the prophetic calendar needs to happen before He returns, so imminency must mean it could happen at any moment regardless of any other signs that must be fulfilled first. So, we'll say that this is the doctrine of imminency." But it is not the Biblical doctrine of imminency. It is their own version of such a doctrine. And it is not what the Bible teaches overall on the subject. It's heavily based upon implication which is not a great basis for forming doctrine.

Certainly, the Bible is replete with warnings for us to be ready at all times for our Master to come. He may come in the second or third watch of the night. So, we should always be ready for Him. But it also teaches that the Lord's coming may take longer than we think. It talks in terms of a delay to His coming. In the parable of the slaves put over the household, the evil slave says to himself, "My Master is not coming for a long time," (Matt.24:48). In the parable of the wise and foolish virgins, the Bridegroom delayed and all fell asleep (Matt.25:5). In the parable of the talents, the Master called His Own servants to Him, entrusted His possessions to them, went on a long journey and then, "After a long time," came and settled accounts with them (Matt.25:19).

There is the sense of imminency in some passages, but then the idea of a long delay in others. They're both true. Only the pre-trib advocates put everything on the side of imminency and interpret it in a way the Bible does not. Whilst ignoring the verses which talk about a delay, or the ones which warn us to watch for the signs of His coming. And then they say, "See, our version of the rapture fits the doctrine better than any other." Well, no wonder that it does because it is a doctrine that has been designed by people who want it to do so. There may be elements of truth in it. But it is not a Biblical doctrine in its entirety. It's a doctrine that has been crafted and put together by people who want it to say what they think it should say. But a doctrine which is at odds with other verses in the Bible. For example,

"So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near—at the doors!" Matt.24:33.

Jesus is talking to His disciples in the manner of, if they were alive at this time, this is what they should be doing. Looking for and interpreting the signs of the times in such a way as to realise that His coming is at hand. Not waiting for a secret rapture which must come before any other sign needs to be fulfilled. And as much as this warning from Jesus could be applied to His disciples who heard Him speak these words, they are also applicable to any other disciple of His who may find themselves in this particular time-period. Jesus is not speaking this warning to a separate class of believer called the, 'tribulation saints,' who are not a part of the church, but somehow believe in Jesus during the Great Tribulation as put forward by the pre-tribulation rapture teachers.

And Jesus says, "When you see ALL these things (not some of these things)." He's talking about the signs He gave in Matthew 24 from the false prophets and false Christs appearing, the wars and natural disasters, the great tribulation His people would go through, the revealing of the antichrist, and finally His glorious second coming visible to all, where He sends out His angels to gather in His elect. The rapture or re-gathering of the church.

"When YOU see ALL these things, know that it is near-at the doors," Matt.24:33.

Rather than teaching that we need to act as though Jesus could come any minute without any previous indications, Jesus taught us to look for the signs He spoke about in His Olivet discourse. Signs such as the outbreak of wars and rumours of wars, of natural disasters, pestilences and famines occurring with increasing frequency. And then a great persecution coming upon the people of God along with a wholesale falling away or apostacy from the faith. The rise of the antichrist and many false prophets, a great tribulation coming upon the earth, all culminating finally in the sign of the Son of Man appearing in the sky which causes great mourning amongst the nations of the world.

Jesus told us specifically to look for all these signs. And when we see them being fulfilled, we would then know that His coming, "Is near, right at the door," (NASB). He didn't teach that He could come at any time and that nothing had to happen before He does come.

God gave us signs to look out for in His Word that are there for the express purpose of indicating the closeness of the Lord's return. And we are to look for, and pay attention to these signs. And if they have not yet been fulfilled, the coming of the Lord will not happen yet either.

The Bible does mention that the Lord's coming is at hand, it is near, or that nobody knows at what hour He is coming. This is all true. But what the pre-tribulation rapture advocates do is add in the 'doctrine' that Jesus could come at any moment and crucially, "Nothing else needs to happen before He does." There is no scripture which says this. It is only put forward by people because they feel the verses talking about the Lord's coming being imminent or at hand, implies such a thing. It doesn't say it outright. And I would say it doesn't say it outright because God didn't want to say it outright. Because that's not really the point of these verses. These verses are giving a warning to believers to be ready for the Lord's coming is at hand. Bearing in mind everything else He said about His coming as well, and not just zoning in on the idea of imminency alone, to the exclusion of everything else that is written on the subject. Not that He could come today because nothing else needs to happen before His coming.

The Bible is clear that a number of things need to happen before the coming of the Lord. The apostacy or great falling away must happen first (II Thess.2:1-3); the man of sin doomed to destruction must be revealed beforehand (II Thess.2:1-3); the gospel of the Kingdom must be preached in all the world as a testimony to all the nations (Matthew 24:14); the antichrist (little horn) would wage war on the saints and overpower them (Dan.7:21); the followers of Christ will be persecuted and hated by all because of the Name of Jesus before the coming of Jesus (Mark 13:13); the people of Israel being restored to their homeland (Isaiah 11:11); the true bride of Christ must get herself ready (Rev.19:7) etc etc.

The Bible teaches that we should be looking at the signs of the times and getting ready because God has put them there to warn us. Jesus gave all the many signs of His coming and the end of the age, and then said to His disciples,

"Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near," Luke 21:28.

Your redemption draws near. He didn't say, "You won't actually see these things because you'll be raptured 7 years before they start to happen. But just so you can warn the 'tribulation saints', when these things begin to happen, the 'tribulation saints' should look up and lift up their heads, because their redemption draws near." Bearing in mind the phrase, 'tribulation saints,' does not appear in the scripture and is a fictious title used by those who wish to explain away the clear and obvious presence of the saints of God on the earth during the tribulation period.

We are called children of the light who should stay awake spiritually speaking and give heed to the signs of the times. Paul says to the church of the Thessalonians,

"But you, brethren, are not in darkness, that the day would overtake you like a thief; for you are all sons of light and sons of day. We are not of night nor of darkness; so then let us not sleep as others do, but let us be alert and sober," I Thess.5:4-6.

Paul had just been talking about how Jesus was coming as a thief in the night. The pre-trib advocates paint this as a secret rapture in which millions of Christians suddenly disappear without a trace, and nobody knows where they have gone to. Everyone is scratching their heads wondering where all the people went, but life sort of continues as normal. And thus begins the countdown of the last 7 years of tribulation and Great Tribulation. A countdown which at first is relatively peaceful as the antichrist rises to power, but then things change around about 3 ½ years in.

This is the meaning the pre-tribulation rapture teachers have given to the phrase, "like a thief in the night." And because that particular meaning has been promoted so widely in our modern-day church through best-selling books, movies (the very influential and popular 'Left Behind' series) and much preaching, anyone hearing those words today tends to automatically just assume that it's talking about a secret rapture as put forward by such teachers.

But this is not at all what the verses actually say. Not at all. Paul is saying that Jesus is coming as a thief in the night primarily to the people of the world, not to the church people who should be aware that is coming is imminent.

"Whilst they (the people of the world, not the church) are saying, 'Peace and safety!' then destruction comes upon them suddenly like labour pains upon a woman with child, and they will not escape," I Thess.5:3.

It's talking very clearly about the very visible coming of Jesus, the Day of the Lord, when destructive judgement will come upon them suddenly. Not the tribulation meted out by the antichrist but the judgement of God upon a wicked world. A judgement which they were not expecting. It came like a thief in the night to the world and not so much to the church. But once the Lord is revealed, He is no longer the thief coming in the night but the Heir coming to receive His Kingdom.

But Paul uses this illustration of Jesus coming as a thief in the night to the people of the world, in order to warn the people in the church to stay awake spiritually themselves. To be spiritually awake like someone who is up and out of bed, walking around in the daytime. Because if they don't walk in the light, the day of His coming might overtake them also. Which sounds to me that they would not be ready for Him at His coming.

But Jesus says that this day should not overtake genuine believers, those who are walking with Him. Because they will be walking in the light of His Word and will be paying attention to the signs of the times as He forewarned them to. So, it just does not fit a secret rapture narrative in which the believers are all completely taken off-guard and have no idea when He would be coming. We certainly will not know the day nor the hour. Only the Father knows that. But as children of the light, we should be aware of the general times in which we live that His coming is close, or indeed, very close. And where does a 'secret rapture' fit into the picture painted by Paul of people saying, "peace and safety!" one minute, and the next minute sudden destruction comes upon them as labour pains upon a woman and they will not escape?

The pre-trib teachers say this is talking about the mayhem released by the antichrist during the tribulation and the judgements that follow. But Paul indicates that at one minute they're all happy saying, "peace and safety!" and the next minute they're being overtaken by a sudden destruction that comes upon them. One immediately follows the other. And it's clearly the Lord's coming that brings such swift destruction upon them, not the tribulation caused by the antichrist.

In the chronology of end-time events presented by the pre-trib teachers, sudden destruction does not immediately break out in the world once the 'secret rapture' takes place. No, there is a lull to events, as the antichrist rises to power and the four horsemen of the apocalypse are released which, in time leads to war, famine and death. Not a sudden destruction that comes upon them from which they cannot escape. A sudden destruction brought about by Jesus at His coming.

In the epistle of II Peter it is even clearer that this sudden destruction is not the tribulation indicated by the start of the tribulation period, but the judgement that will be released at the return of Jesus Christ in glory and power as the King coming to take His Kingdom by force.

"But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and the works in it will be burned up," II Peter 3:10.

That doesn't sound anything like a 'secret rapture' to me. Quite the opposite in fact. This is the Lord Jesus coming, "as a thief," but once He is revealed, quite literally everything kicks off, with the heavens passing away with a roar (also spoken about in Revelation 6:14 at the opening of the sixth seal, and in Hebrews 12:27 and Hebrews 1:10-12) and a judgement of fire upon the earth. All being replaced with new heavens and a new earth.

Peter then goes on to say,

"Since all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of people ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be destroyed by burning and the elements will melt with intense heat!" II Peter 3:11-12.

Peter says that we should be looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God in which the heavens will be destroyed by burning and even the elements themselves will melt with the intensity of the heat. Looking for and hastening which day? The day of the 'secret rapture'? No. The day of the Lord when Jesus is revealed from heaven with blazing fire and His powerful angels. We should be looking for that day.

So, the obvious question to ask is, why should we be looking for that day (the Day of the Lord) if we've already been taken up in the 'secret rapture' 7 years prior to this? Surely if that is true, then we would be looking for the 'secret coming' of Jesus and the rapture of the church? But Peter mentions nothing about Jesus coming in a 'secret rapture.' He talks about us looking for the day of the Lord which comes as a thief, but then explodes into fiery judgement at the revelation of Jesus Christ from heaven, and making sure we're ready for that day (not for a 'secret rapture') that we might be found by Him on that day, "in peace, spotless and blameless."

"Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless," II Peter 3:14.

Peter says that we will be looking for these things. Not looking for a secret rapture which is not mentioned, but looking for the Lord Jesus returning in power and glory and with a fiery judgement upon this world. And because of this we should be diligent to be found by Him at that time in peace, spotless and blameless before Him. Walking in the light as children of the light who are not overtaken by that day when it comes.

The writer to the Hebrews says we should not forsake our assembling together as some are in the habit of doing, but that we should encourage one another all the more,

"As we see the Day approaching," Heb.10:25.

If the rapture is secret and nobody will know when it will take place, how can we, "see the day approaching"?

So, we are to live on one hand with the sense of imminency that today I could be in the Lord's presence, not because of a threat of a 'secret rapture,' hanging over us, but because not one of us knows the time of our death. We could get hit by a bus tomorrow or die of a heart attack today. We do not know. So, we could potentially appear before our Master at any time. So, each of us should live our lives in view of the potential imminency of seeing our Lord through natural death. We shouldn't need the pre-trib version of the rapture in order for us to live with a sense of imminency in our hearts. We should always live as though this could be my last moments on earth. With eternity in our hearts. With the view that the Lord's coming is near and that we need to be ready for it. Walking in the light at all times so that the Day does not overtake us because we have taken our eyes off the ball so to speak. We have become earthly minded, not heavenly minded.

So, to summarise this point, the imminency that the Bible actually teaches fits with the view that the Lord's glorious coming and the rapture of the church are one and the same event, more so than it does with a pre-tribulation version of it.



2. Christ delivers us from the wrath to come. So, doesn't that prove the pre-tribulation theory is correct because the church should not have to go through the tribulation?

God certainly delivers us from the wrath to come. Specifically, from the particular wrath that is to come, which He will pour out upon the wicked on the great day of His wrath that is coming. But this does not mean He will deliver us from the wrath of the devil, nor from the wrath of the antichrist, and nor from the wrath of the nations of this world. And nor does it mean that we are delivered from all consequences of His judgements in the earth before that day occurs.

"For when Your judgements are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness," Is.26:9.

The Lord brings His judgements upon the earth all the time. Great tsunamis, earthquakes and pestilences are all rooted in some way to God's curse and judgement upon this earth. And many believers have been swept away or killed in these great natural disasters throughout history. So, to say we should never experience any aspect of God's wrath is incorrect. Believers have experienced aspects of God's wrath upon this fallen earth throughout history. But the wrath Paul is referring to in I Thessalonians 1:10 is the wrath which is, "to come." Specifically, the wrath to come at the return of Christ in power and glory on the Day of the Lord.

"And to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come," I Thess.1:10.

He will deliver us from this wrath. But it will only be done in the nick of time. Not 7 years previously. Almost simultaneously. The way Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed the moment Lot was in a place of safety. Not 7 years after he reached a place of safety. The judgement was poured out upon them the moment righteous Lot was taken out of the way.

But regarding the tribulation and the idea that Jesus wouldn't let us go through the tribulation time. I have heard certain pre-trib teachers say, "Jesus isn't going to send His bride to Vietnam," inferring that Jesus would not send His bride the church through the tribulation period before He comes for His wedding. Quite why the early church and many genuine believers have had to go through intense persecution throughout the ages, but somehow the last days church would skip it, he did not elaborate upon. Considering also that many Christians in North Korea or Iran are suffering tribulation everyday even as I write this. Maybe he thought they didn't have enough faith? Who knows?

Anyway, it is clear from scripture that as believers we will go through persecution in this world. Indeed, if we do not experience it at some point in our Christian walk it might well be a sign that we're not walking in the light as much as we thought we were? After speaking to His disciples on the Mount of Olives about the beginning of sorrows when wars, famines, pestilences and earthquakes that would occur in various places, Jesus specifically told His disciples that,

"Then, they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My Name's sake," Matt.24:9.

There will be a time when all the nations will hate Christians and turn against them. Jesus speaks to His disciples as if it would happen to them if they were alive at that time. He says, "then, they will deliver YOU up to tribulation." How can that be if the disciples would have been raptured out of the earth before this great persecution arrives during the tribulation period? Jesus didn't say, "then they will deliver the Jews and the tribulation saints up to tribulation." He said, "you." He included those listening to Him. As if it would affect them.

Some pre-tribulation teachers try to get around all of this by saying, "Everything Jesus spoke to His disciples about the end times on the Mount of Olives, He was actually speaking only to the Jews or the 'tribulation saints' who will be saved during the Great Tribulation, not to the church." They say this because Jesus tells them to pray that their flight from the great persecution that will be unleashed upon them at that time would not happen on the Sabbath day, reasoning that Gentiles do not keep the Sabbath so it can't be talking about them.

This is truly stretching a point severely. Firstly, if Jesus were only speaking these things to the 144,000 Jewish evangelists saved during the tribulation, what about the so-called, 'tribulation saints'? Are none of His warnings applicable to them? Because if the pre-tribulation rapture theory is correct, they will also be alive during this time as well. So, they don't need any warning but only the 144,000 Jewish evangelists do? That doesn't sound like our God who shows no partiality.

Secondly, Jesus never said that He was only speaking these things to Jewish believers who will get saved during the tribulation period. No, He said them to everybody. As with everything else He said. To unilaterally decide that Jesus was only speaking to a very small section of people here and not to the whole church, when He doesn't actually say He is, is twisting the scripture and effectively making parts of it null and void. Jesus had harsh words to say to the Pharisees and scribes who did such things to His Word for the sake of their traditions (Mark 7:13). What is the difference?

If we use this sort of logic that because Jesus mentioned fleeing on the Sabbath day, therefore the whole passage is only directed towards the 144,000 Jews saved during the tribulation, then maybe we should just ignore the letter of James also? Because after all, it is addressed to the, "twelve tribes scattered among the nations," and not to the church specifically? Or maybe we should ignore the book of Hebrews as well because it was originally directed towards Jewish believers and not to the gentiles? Or maybe we should ignore the times in scripture when Jesus spoke about the Sabbath to the Jews around Him? After all, gentiles don't keep the Sabbath so it can't be referring to them, can it? Or when He spoke about any other Jewish custom, ritual or law? Like how He spoke about us keeping the Royal Law (Matt.22:37-39) found in the Mosaic Law (Deut.6:5 and Lev.19:18)? Maybe that wasn't for us gentiles either if we use the same logic?

And thirdly, the men He was speaking to at the time were observant Jews who kept the Law. So, they needed to hear Jesus warn them about things that would be an issue in their culture. But just because they needed to hear that, does not suddenly make everything He was saying at the time only apply to the Jews who will go through the great tribulation also. If it were so, He would have made that clear. He did not.

If we would apply this kind of logic and a rather arbitrary cut and paste sort of idea to the rest of the scriptures, what else shall we say doesn't apply to the church either? Maybe the Sermon on the Mount doesn't apply to us, because Jesus was quoting from the Mosaic Law and Gentiles don't seek to keep the Law? Where will it ever end? No, everything Jesus spoke was addressed to all of us, unless He specifically said otherwise. And He certainly did not do that in the Olivet discourse.

Going on with the subject of God's people being persecuted in the last days, the prophet Daniel clearly says that the little horn that spoke arrogantly against the Most High (talking about the antichrist), was making war against the saints and prevailing against them.

"That horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them, until the Ancient of Days came, and a judgement was made in favour of the saints of the Most High, and the time came for the saints to possess the kingdom," Dan.7:21-22.

The antichrist will persecute and make war against the saints until the Ancient of Days comes and makes a judgement in favour of His saints and they possess the kingdom. The saints are not the Jewish people. They are not even the 'tribulation saints.' If Daniel was meaning that the Antichrist was making war against the 'tribulation saints' only, as opposed to His saints in the church, that must mean by definition that the only saints to possess the kingdom will then be the 'tribulation saints' also. Because Daniel is talking about the same group of people throughout the verse. And according to the pre-tribulation rapture teachers, the 'tribulation saints' are a different type or class of saint to those found in the church. The same saints the horn makes war against, are the same type of saints the Ancient of Days comes for and judges in their favour, and the same saints that will possess the kingdom.

No, when Daniel talks about the saints in these verses, he's talking about the holy saints of God who walk in His ways. The true church or Body of Christ. If He were meaning the Jewish nation, or any of the different category of saints that the pre-tribulation rapture teachers put forward in their model, either the 144,000 ethnic Jewish evangelists, or the 'tribulation saints' He would have said so. He didn't and it would not have made any sense if He had done so, because all His saints are to possess the kingdom at His coming. Not just a special class of 'tribulation saint' or 144,000 Jewish evangelists.

And, Daniel says that this persecution initiated by the Antichrist will continue until the Ancient of Days comes, and a judgement is made in favour of the saints and the time came for the saints to possess the kingdom. But according to the pre-tribulation rapture teachers, the saints possess the kingdom at the rapture of the church. So, how can that be if Daniel says that first the Ancient of Days must come. Come to the earth which is the context. Then a judgement is made in favour of the saints, presumably by the Ancient of Days as He comes to the earth? And wouldn't a judgement like that be made on Judgement Day? Not at a secret rapture 7 years earlier? Doesn't the apostle Paul say to judge nothing before the appointed time? The appointed time being when Jesus returns and shines His Light into the darkness of people's hearts?

"Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord comes, who will both bring to light the hidden things of darkness and reveal the counsels of the hearts. Then each one's praise will come from God," I Cor.4:5.

And only once the Ancient of Days comes and a judgement is made by Him in favour of His saints, will the persecution be stopped and the saints will possess the kingdom. According to the prophet Daniel.

Who is the Ancient of Days? God the Father. And when does the Ancient of Days come? At a secret rapture? No, He comes on the Day of the Lord. At the same time that Jesus is finally revealed from heaven in power and great glory and is presented as the conquering king before His Father, the Ancient of Days. The Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, being presented before the Ancient of Days and being given the kingdom. All in full view of a terrified world.

As it says in the prophet Daniel, a scripture which Jesus referred to as, 'the sign of the Son of Man,' appearing in the sky when He spoke about His second coming in the Olivet discourse,

"One like a Son of Man coming with the clouds of heaven! He came up to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him. Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion which will not pass away, and His kingdom the one which shall not be destroyed," Dan.7:13-14.

So, the persecution against God's saints will carry on until the Day of the Lord when Jesus the Son of Man is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels and is presented before the Ancient of Days and given the kingdom. Something that is indicated at the opening of the 6th seal in Revelation 6, where the people of the earth cry out to the mountains and rocks to,

"Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him who sits on the throne (God the Father, the Ancient of Days) and from the wrath of the Lamb (Jesus, the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven to receive His kingdom). For the great day of His wrath has come, and who is able to stand?" Rev.6:16-17.

And this is the time when the saints shall, "Possess the kingdom," Dan.7:22, not 7 years previously as in the case of a secret rapture.

So, believers are told they will be liable to suffer persecution, until the Ancient of Days comes and they receive the kingdom. This is the time He pours out His particular wrath upon the peoples of this world who reject Him and who do not obey Him. It is this wrath that Jesus delivers us from. According to the Old Testament prophets and Peter the apostle, this will be an awesome judgement of intense fire which will melt the very elements and the heavens themselves will disappear with a roar. Quite where this outpouring of wrath fits with the seals, trumpet and bowl judgements listed in the book of Revelation is not quite 100% clear. I am thinking that it will be at the 6th and 7th seals, possibly the 6th and 7th trumpets and possibly all of the bowl judgements. But this is not set in stone, I am open to other opinions and I would not be dogmatic about it.

But it seems clear, the church will be raptured or taken out of the way somewhere towards the end point of the 7-year tribulation period, immediately releasing the full measure of God's wrath upon an unsuspecting world. As it clearly infers in the prophet Isaiah:

"Your dead will live; their corpses will rise. You who lie in the dust, awake and shout for joy, for your dew is as the dew of the dawn, and the earth will give birth to the departed spirits. Come My people, enter into your rooms and close your doors behind you; Hide for a little while until indignation runs its course. For behold, the LORD is about to come out from His place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity; and the earth will reveal her bloodshed and will no longer cover her slain," Isaiah 26:19-21.

Clearly the resurrection of the righteous and the rapture or gathering in of God's people. Not just of the Jewish nation who could not in themselves be described accurately as, "My people," especially in the context of His people that He is coming for at the time of the end. Such a term only represents both Jew and Gentile, one in Christ. The time when the dead of His people will rise as the Lord pours out His wrath upon the inhabitants of the earth.

"As He says also in Hosea: 'I will call them My people, who were not My people, And her beloved, who was not beloved,'" Rom.9:25.

The resurrection of the dead in Christ. To be hidden their rooms for a little while whilst the indignation runs its course. Remember Jesus said in His Father's house are many dwelling places or rooms that He will take us to. The dwelling places that are in Christ whose body, the church, is the Father's house. Where we hide, in the secret place, in the cleft of the Rock where we find sanctuary. And notice that we will enter our rooms for the purpose of hiding from the indignation that will run its course for a little while. The wrath of the Lamb that will be unleashed at His return. We don't enter our rooms in order to wait for the indignation to come years later. We enter our rooms to hide from the indignation which will be unleashed immediately once we are safely out of the way.



3. After being mentioned multiple times in chapters 1-3 of Revelation, the church is not mentioned from Revelation 4 onwards. But instead the rapture of God's people is alluded to in the very next verses where a door appears in the heavens and John is taken up into heaven. So, that must mean the church is not around during the tribulation. It must have been raptured beforehand.

It is true that the word 'church' ('ekklesia' in the Greek, or 'called out ones') is not mentioned from chapter 4 of Revelation onwards, in the sense of something happening to 'the church'. The word 'ekklesia' is mentioned in Revelation 22:16, but only in connection with Jesus referring to His previous letters to them in Revelation chapters 1 to 3. So, something in the past, not the present. It is also true that the very next thing to be written, verses 1 and 2 of Revelation chapter 4, seem to be indicating that John had some sort of rapture-type experience. He was told to, "come up here," with a voice that sounded like a trumpet. Similar in ways to how the rapture will occur with the commanding voice from heaven and the sounding of a trumpet. So, it seems to be a type of a rapture experience, and might possibly be foreshadowing the rapture of the church in the last days. Not 100% clear, but a possibility.

So, we have what looks like the church age indicated by the seven letters to the churches, followed by a rapture type of experience where John is called up to heaven by God, and then the word church or, "ekklesia," is not mentioned again. And so, the pre-tribulation rapture teachers put these three points together and assume that the church must have been removed out of the way by a secret rapture, before any of the judgements that occur in the world from chapters 4 of Revelation onwards. Because the word, "church," is not mentioned from chapter 4 onwards. And it's from chapter 6 that the judgements of God really start.

The book of Revelation does not say all of this. The inference can be made, to a greater or lesser extent depending on which part of that statement we are talking about. If we're talking about the church being raptured after the church age, then that could be seen to be inferred in the text. But the point about the church avoiding the tribulation time because the word, "church," is not mentioned from chapter 4 onwards is pretty tenuous to say the least. I would say that is reading into the text something that is just not there.

The pre-tribulation rapture teachers say that because the inference can be made, that they will base their doctrine upon it. That is highly speculative as the scripture does not say these things. And inference or speculation are never a good enough foundation stone on which to form doctrine.

Whilst I would agree that the letters to the seven churches could possibly be seen as a picture of the age of the church. And John's rapture type experience could be seen as the church being raptured up to heaven once their time on earth is up. There are some parallels there. Yet, it is another thing entirely to then say that the church misses out on any tribulations or judgements happening upon the earth because they are recorded later on in the book of Revelation. That is an assumption the pre-tribulation rapture teachers make based upon a linear chronological view of the book of Revelation whereby everything is happening as the same story, in a set order of time. So, there's no side stories being described or happening anywhere that fall out of this strict chronological timeline.

Chapters 1-3 cannot be a separate part of the letter that is just looking at how Jesus views His churches, nothing more and nothing less. Nor even as an overview of the seven ages of the church. No, they must all fit chronologically as the same story, together as one. Happening in the same strict timeline and chronology. From chapter 1 through to chapter 22. So that chapter 4 historically and literally happens after chapter 3. And then both historically and literally comes chapter 5, then 6, and so on and so forth. Everything happens in an exact time order as it is written down.

Anyone familiar with prophetic passages of scripture will know that they are often jumping from one time frame to another. Both forwards and backwards. And from one different perspective to another different perspective. One time Isaiah is prophetically picturing Israel as God's vineyard (chapter 5). The next he's having an awesome vision of God and receiving his calling as a prophet (chapter 6). And then he's prophesying about the virgin being with child and being given the name Immanuel (chapter 7). With all manner of other things and different time frames popping up within just these three chapters.

Prophetic literature is almost never laid out in a neat chronological order as the pre-trib teachers assume the book of Revelation to be written in. Routinely prophetic verses can sit next to each other in the Bible, but have hundreds if not thousands of years in-between them. And be interspersed with different scenarios and scenes that do not always flow in the same timeline as the rest of the passage around them. That is the norm for much of the prophetic scriptures.

The book of Revelation does seem to have something of a chronological order to much of its writings. But not a clear and strict chronological line going through all its chapters and verses. There are exceptions. For example, Revelation 12:1-5 which talks about the woman clothed with the sun and crowned with twelve stars being in labour and giving birth to a Son who would rule all the nations? Clearly a picture of the birth of Jesus Christ. And the red dragon casting a third of the stars down to the earth who wanted to devour the child? Clearly a picture of Satan causing the fall of a host of angelic beings and desiring to kill the Lord's Messiah. As events, these both occur way before any of the letters to the churches. Yet it is only written about once halfway through the narrative in the book of Revelation. After the letters to the churches, after the various scenes in heaven, after the opening of the scroll with seven seals, after the appearance of the two witnesses and after the blowing of the seven trumpets. After these have all happened. If Revelation was supposed to be taken solely as occurring in a strict chronological order, surely these five verses of Revelation 12 should occur in chapter 1 instead?

And in Revelation 14:8 an angel declares that, "Fallen is Babylon the great," and then two chapters later in Revelation 16:19 it says that God remembered Babylon the great and gave her the cup of the wine of His fierce wrath. Yet in Revelation 18:4, two chapters further still, a voice is then heard telling God's people to come out from her (Babylon) so that we do not participate in her sins nor receive any of her plagues. Surely chronologically they are all in the 'wrong' order? But that's how God wanted them written. Because the book of Revelation is not to be taken as a strict chronological timeframe throughout.

If it is true that John's rapture type experience, when he is summoned into heaven after the finishing of the letters to the churches, is a picture of the rapture of the church after the age of the church (or to be more precise, the times of the gentiles are fulfilled), this does not necessarily mean the church will escape the time of the tribulation too. It just means that the church will be raptured once the times of the gentiles are fulfilled. Nothing more and nothing less. And everyone agrees that this is what will happen. Nobody disputes this.

Only the pre-tribulation rapture teachers then add to this their guess that this removal of a primarily gentile church once the times of the gentiles are finished has to happen before the tribulation. And as we have already mentioned, this is solely based upon the fact the word, "church," is not then mentioned during the tribulation period described in the book of Revelation from chapters 4 onwards. But the fact is, it is clear that God has His saints upon the earth during the tribulation time.

So, although the word, "church," does not appear from Revelation 4 until chapter 22, it is clear that God's saints are still on the earth during the tribulation period. It refers to the, "Fellow servants and brethren," of the souls under the altar (Rev.6:11), to, "The servants of our God," (Rev.7:3), to, "A great multitude...clothed with white robes," who came out from the great tribulation (Rev.7:9), to men who, "Have the seal of God upon their foreheads," (Rev.9:4), to the woman's, "Offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ," (Rev.12:17), to, "The saints," (Rev.13:7 & 10), to, "The saints...who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus," (Rev.14:12), to, "The saints...and martyrs of Jesus," (Rev.17:6), to, "My people," (Rev.18:4), and to, "His servants," (Rev.19:2) all being around during the time of the tribulation.

The early Christians were known as the saints (Acts 9:13, 32, 41). When Saul persecuted the church, he referred to them as the saints (Acts 26:10). And the books of Romans, I Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians were all addressed to the saints in those places. "The saints," is a term used to describe members of the church. Believers in Jesus Christ. So, it is logical to consider the saints mentioned in the book of Revelation are members of the church also. Especially considering there is nothing specific in the text to indicate any other way of reading these verses.

The pre-tribulation rapture teachers get around this by saying these people are not the church. No, they are the, 'tribulation saints,' that get saved through reading Bibles left around during the tribulation, or through the witnessing of the 144,000 Jews who miraculously become believers once the church is raptured up to heaven. As I've said before, the term, 'tribulation saints,' is not mentioned in the Bible and is a fictitious term created by the pre-tribulation teachers to try and explain why there are saints of God still on the earth going through the tribulation once the church has supposedly been taken up into heaven.

So, the pre-tribulation rapture teachers effectively create a whole new class of believers literally out of thin air, through inference and speculation. And then start to unilaterally designate certain scriptures that are only supposed to apply to these, 'tribulation saints,' in order to justify their position. So, for example, they will say that the parable of the sheep and the goats is not directed towards the church but instead was spoken about the, 'tribulation saints,' in the sense that they are the, 'sheep,' that come through this judgement of the nations at the return in Christ.

The only evidence they give for this is the fact that Jesus says that the gentiles or nations will be brought before Him, and He will separate them one from another, based upon how they looked after their brothers. In its context this parable is clearly speaking about the mainly gentile church being brought before Christ's judgement seat at His return and the age of the gentiles is at an end. And we will be judged according to what we did whilst in the flesh. Whether we have the fruits of salvation, the evidence that the love of God is in us and whether we walked in it or not. Did we practically love our brothers by helping them when they were in need? Or did we just have nice words but no deeds to back them up?

But the pre-trib rapture teachers unilaterally take the whole parable out of its original context, and say that this is actually talking about how Jesus will judge the nations of the world at His return, in regard to how they treated the 144,000 Jewish evangelists around on the earth at that time. Considering Jesus said in the parable that whatever they did for the least of His brethren, they actually did for Him. And they say that Jesus was talking here about His Jewish brethren only, and not about the gentiles.

A rather big inconsistency with this view is, why would the 'tribulation saints' be judged according to how they treated the 144,000 Jewish evangelists, but not how they treated their own fellow 'tribulation saints'? After all, both groups are around at the same time according to the pre-tribulation teachers. So, why would the 'tribulation saints' be judged according to how they treated the Jewish believers but not the gentiles? And to take it one step further, why would the 'tribulation saints' be judged as to how they treated the 144,000 Jewish evangelists, but not the other way around? Where are the 144,000 Jewish evangelists being judged as to how they treated the 'tribulation saints' in the pre-tribulation model? It is never mentioned. Yet if one group is to be judged, surely the other one should undergo a similar judgement too?

If the gentiles have been made co-heirs with Christ and Jesus calls us His brethren as much as He calls the saved Jews His brethren, surely it matters how we treat all of our brethren, whether they are Jew or Gentile? How can it not seem to matter how they treated their own gentile brothers and sisters, the so-called, 'tribulation saints,' during this time? Their own brothers and sisters in the faith. Is that not important? The only thing that is important is how they treated the 144,000 Jewish evangelists? To say this is unbiblical is a massive understatement. But it is what happens when we start to try and form the Word of God to our own opinions and ideas rather than letting it speak for itself.

Jesus never says the parable of the sheep and the goats is just applicable to the, 'tribulation saints.' He speaks the parable to His own disciples as if it was applicable to them, and by extension to all who would believe in Christ because of them. It is set amongst a run of other parables, all looking at the return of Christ and what He's going to do at His return, specifically as regards His servants, His virgins, His people. Looking at the same thing but from different angles. The judgement of His people at His bema. This is the context. We have to start reading things into the scripture to start saying that most of them are looking at the return of Christ and what He's going to do with His people when He comes, but not the last one. No, the last one, the parable of the sheep and the goats, is dealing with the nations of the world as a whole, and by default, creates an entirely different class of 'believer', called the 'tribulation saints.' Jesus does say that the nations or gentiles will be brought before Him at His return. But in the context of the age of the gentiles coming to an end then and, "the fullness of the gentiles coming in," (Rom.11:25).

The parable of the sheep and the goats is detailing the judgement of a primarily gentile church that has been taken out of the way by Jesus at His coming when the times of the gentiles have been fulfilled. Judgement begins first at the household of God (I Peter 4:17). Before the nations of the world are judged, the nations in the church are judged. Specifically, as to how they treated their brothers and sisters in the faith.

"For he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen?" I John 4:20.

So, when the times of the gentiles are completed or finished, the nations are brought before Him, the multitudes that have made up the gentile church throughout the ages. And Jesus separates the true from the false. The sheep from the goats. The goats look like the sheep but they are not actually sheep. They are goats with a very different make-up to the sheep. Sheep are followers, whereas goats are proud, individualistic and self-sufficient. And in the context of the parable, the sheep follow Jesus and show their love for Him and their brethren by practically helping them. Whereas the goats reveal their true selves by ignoring the words of Jesus and ignoring the plight of His people also.

The parable of the sheep and the goats is the fullness of the gentiles being brought in as spoken by the apostle Paul to the Romans, in order that His grace might then be given to the Jews. At His glorious return. At the end of the times of the gentiles.

"For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in," Rom.11:25.

I mention the mis-application of the parable of the sheep and the goats by many of the pre-tribulation teachers in order to support their theory, because from what I have seen, this can have quite a negative effect upon believer's perception of the end-times and what's actually going to happen at Christ's return.

The parable of the sheep and the goats is one of the most vivid pictures we are given in the Bible to show how our works that we do whilst here upon the earth, will either speak for us, or speak against us at the judgement. Insomuch as whether we have a genuine saving faith, or not. A faith that is evidenced by good works or is not, according to James 2:14-26.

We are not saved by our works but by our faith. That is clear. But we will be judged according to our deeds (Rom.2:6). Because good deeds, or the lack of them will evidence either an alive faith that can save us, or a dead faith that cannot. The evidence for our faith will be required at the judgement. As in any court. And the parable of the sheep and the goats pictures exactly how this will happen. Very practically. But those who ascribe the parable to the 'tribulation saints' and not to the church, effectively make the scripture of no effect to the church. Rendering it null and void to the church to whom it was written. Doing exactly the same thing as the Pharisees of Jesus's day (Mark 7:13). All for the sake of their own traditions.

Scripturally it seems to me that the times of the gentiles finishes when Jesus returns in glory and splendour and takes His predominantly gentile church to Himself, and we all appear before His judgement seat. Exactly as it is portrayed in the parable of the sheep and the goats. This is the rapture of the church. A momentous day when God's fruit from the gentiles is gathered in and examined. A day when His special grace to the gentiles given during the period known as the, "times of the gentiles," (Luke 21:24) is fulfilled or is finished, and this grace is given once more to the natural seed of Abraham, the Jews which are left.

"For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: 'The Deliverer will come out of Zion, and He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob,'" Rom.11:25-26.

The blindness that currently afflicts the Jewish nation will be stripped away once they see their Messiah Jesus, coming upon the clouds of heaven, exactly as it is prophesied in Daniel 7:13-14 and Zech.12:10, and how Jesus told Caiaphas the Jewish High Priest that He would also see Him one day.

"Jesus said to him, 'It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven,'" Matt.26:64.

The Jewish Messiah coming in royal procession with His Father and His saints to receive His Kingdom and to sit upon the throne of David.

As the gentiles have been given grace over the past 2,000 years or so, this grace will instead be given to the Jewish people at His coming. When they look upon Him whom they pierced and they finally realise that Jesus was their Messiah all along. And they mourn for Him with a palpable grief as the stunning realisation hits them and their hearts are opened to be able to receive Him as their Lord.

"And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn," Zech.12:10.

So, the idea that the word, "church," is not mentioned from Revelation chapter 4 onwards and instead we see a rapture type of event being symbolised, does not indicate that there will be a pre-tribulation rapture of the church. A secret rapture that happens before the tribulation period and 7 years before Jesus's glorious second coming. No, it indicates that once the, "times of the gentiles," are finished, the church will be taken up to escape the outpouring of God's ultimate wrath upon a wicked world. No more and no less. And a taking up that will be literally just before the outpouring of God's end-time wrath. More of a 'pre-wrath' type of scenario, than a pre-tribulation scenario.




4. Jesus said that nobody would know the day nor the hour of Christ's coming. But when the Antichrist signs a 7-year peace treaty with Israel, people would be able to count off 7 years and figure out when Jesus is going to come. So, that proves that there must be a pre-tribulation rapture where nobody knows when Jesus will come.

Quite a number of pre-tribulation rapture teachers say that we can know when the public second coming of the Lord will be if we just count off 7 years from the signing of the 7-year peace treaty between Israel and the Antichrist. So, because Jesus says that nobody will know the day nor the hour, this must mean there must be a secret rapture before this happens. Because only then would nobody know the day nor the hour.

This is all based of a dispensational interpretation of just one verse in the book of Daniel which is rather vague, and doesn't clearly say that it is referring to a peace treaty between Israel and the Antichrist. This is the verse:

"Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; But in the middle of the week He shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, Even until the consummation, which is determined, Is poured out on the desolate," Dan.9:27.

The pre-tribulation rapture teachers confidently state that this is referring to a 7-year peace treaty that will be between the Antichrist and the nation of Israel sometime in the future that will herald the start of 'Daniel's 70th week' and the time when God starts dealing with the nation of Israel once more (thus the reason according to their dispensational viewpoint, that the church must be taken out of the way beforehand via the rapture). But is this true?

Well, looking at the verse, does it say the, "He," referred to is the Antichrist? No, it doesn't. The previous verse speaks about the, "people of the prince who is to come," which seems to be referring to a future Antichrist figure. But it also speaks about the Messiah who is to come. So, in context, the, "He," could be referring to either the Messiah or the Antichrist. It's not particularly clear.

But going on. Does the verse say the, "Many," spoken of are specifically the Jewish nation? No, it doesn't. Maybe it refers to the Jewish nation, or maybe it refers to the nations of the world? It is very unclear. It just says, "The many," not, "The Jews," or, "The nations." And does the verse say that the, "Covenant," referred to is a political peace treaty such as those negotiated at the United Nations? Again, no it doesn't.

The word used for, "Covenant," here is the Hebrew word, "Bereeth," which translates as, "Cutting," in terms of cutting a blood covenant between two parties. Sometimes used to denote a blood covenant between two human parties such as between the Israelites and the Gibeonites in Joshua chapter 9, but more often than not to signify a Divine blood covenant between God and man. And in the few times when it is used to describe a covenant between two human parties, it is talking about a special blood covenant done before God by the two parties. Where the two parties walk between the pieces of the animals that have been cut and sacrificed in order to confirm the solemnity of the covenant being made before God. So, not your usual peace treaty between two nations written in ink at the United Nations.

Many scholars take the view that the one who confirms the covenant with the many for one week is the Lord Jesus Christ enacting the New Covenant in His own blood with the, "Many," who are now both Jew and Gentile, and not just Jews only. Where the grace of God has been extended to the many, rather than just reserved for the relative few of the nation of Israel. The New Covenant that effectively does away with and puts an end to the old animal sacrifices and offerings demanded under the Law. Others take the view that it is partly this, and also partly referring to Antiochus Epiphanes the Seleucid king who outlawed sacrifice and offerings to God, and then desecrated the temple in Jerusalem by sacrificing a pig on the altar sparking the Maccabean revolt of 167-160 BC. Others say it is solely referring to an Antichrist figure which is to come.

All this to say, we cannot be 100% sure which of these interpretations is exactly right because the text itself is relatively unclear. And there is no other verse which talks about a seven-year peace treaty between Israel and the Antichrist who is to come. So, to confidently declare that this is what it is referring to 100% is unwise. And the fact it is talking about a blood covenant done before God indicates that it is not referring to some political type of agreement many pre-tribulation rapture people seem to be looking for today. It may be, but it would seem very unlikely.

So, the idea that we would just need to count off seven years from the date of this peace treaty to know the day of the Lord's coming seems very improbable or unlikely to me. People may very well be looking for the wrong thing. So, to use this as a reason for why there has to be a pre-tribulation version of the rapture seems to me to rest on shaky ground. As with many of the timescales given in Daniel or Revelation, they are usually open to differing interpretations. So, I think it is not at all certain that people will be able to spot something happening and be able to say something like, "Well, 1,335 days from now Jesus will come back," when they don't know exactly if that is what the scripture is saying, or where to count from? Could the removal of the daily sacrifice mentioned in connection with the 1,335 days be the removal of animal sacrifices in the new third temple that might be built in Jerusalem some day in the future? Or is it to be understood spiritually as speaking about the offering of regular worship from the church, or from individuals themselves? We don't know. And people usually end up in all sorts of problems when they start categorically ascribing certain current day events to specific prophetic scriptures.

There were so many signs regarding Jesus's first coming yet in spite of them all, most people were taken off-guard and did not recognise Him despite the expectations for the coming of the Messiah reaching fever-pitch in those days. Probably because they were looking for the wrong thing. And it seems from reading the scriptures that the very same thing will be true of His second coming. Despite many people anticipating His return in these days, it seems likely that many of them will be caught out, unprepared and unready for Him when He is finally revealed. Quite possibly because they are looking for the wrong thing. And who knows how many will be offended and caused to stumble when they start to go through a persecution and tribulation that they had been assured that they would be raptured out from by the pre-tribulation rapture teachers?




5. Jesus says in John 14 that He is coming back to take us to His Father's house. Isn't that proof that the pre-tribulation theory is correct and that Jesus is coming to take us to heaven first?

"Do not let your hearts be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father's house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also," John 14:1-3.

The pre-tribulation teachers tell us that Jesus was talking here about taking us back to heaven when He comes. They say that He's not talking about catching us up into the clouds and then descending to the earth as put forward by the pre-wrath or post-trib teachers. No, they say, Jesus promises to catch up His church into the clouds, and then take us to His Father's house, which they say is the present heavens. Because after all, heaven is God's throne, so in a way it could be seen as being God's house. So, they say that this is proof for the pre-tribulation rapture. I get the logic to this. But I think that it is wrong on a number of levels.

Firstly, the Bible speaks time and time again about Christ's second coming as coming to the earth to rule and to reign. And this being the time He gathers His elect from the four corners of the earth (the rapture). It doesn't talk about Him coming, but then going back into heaven for 7 years. No, rather it talks about Him coming to the earth and ruling the nations of the world with a rod of iron, together with His faithful ones who will reign alongside Him.

"Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years," Rev.20:6.

And,

"You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God; and they will reign upon the earth," Rev.5:10.

And,

"He who overcomes, and he who keeps My deeds until the end, to him I will give authority over the nations; and he shall rule them with a rod of iron, as the vessels of the potter are broken to pieces, as I also have received authority from My Father," Rev.2:26-27.

And secondly, it is assuming that when Jesus was talking about His Father's house, He was solely referring to the present heaven in which He presently dwells. In which we should say, He temporarily dwells in. Jesus doesn't say He's going to take us up into heaven. He says He'll take us to His Father's house.

"Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea," Rev.21:1.

Are the present heavens, "the Father's house,"? Well, He currently dwells there. In a sense. The heavens are His throne (Isaiah 66:1). But the scriptures also say that the present heavens cannot contain God (I Kings 8:27 and II Chron.2:6) So, they are His temporary dwelling place which cannot fully contain Him. But they will not be His eternal dwelling place. They will not be the Father's eternal house. He is going to make new heavens and a new earth. So, if the present heavens are not the Father's eternal house, what is?

Hebrews 3:1-6 talks about the house God is currently building today. A spiritual house which is effectively the resurrected, spiritual body of Jesus Christ. The Father's true house which is the Body of Christ. A house and holy temple that we are a part of if we are in Him.

"For He (Jesus) has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, by just so much as the builder of the house has more honour than the house. For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God. Now Moses was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken later; but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house-whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end," Heb.3:3-6.

The Father's house today is not really the present heavens which are due to pass away at the Lord's coming. No, it is the new heavenly house which He is currently building and preparing our place within. The Heavenly house which is the Body of His Son, Jesus Christ. The Father's house which is currently being built and constructed by the Holy Spirit through the Body of Christ. His house in which He will dwell and shine His glory through.

"And He put all things in subjection under His feet, and gave Him (Jesus) as head over all things to the church, which is His Body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all," Eph.1:22-23.

Those who are in Christ are a part of God's household. A household which is the Father's house. A house He is building in the hearts of all true believers by the Spirit of God. Each believer being a living stone in that great and awesome house.

"You also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ," I Peter 2:5.

A spiritual house which is a holy temple in the Lord. A holy temple that God will effectively put together at the return of Christ when He resurrects the dead in Christ and we are changed to be like Him. A great house that will become His dwelling place for all eternity. The Father's house.

"So, then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit (the Father's house)," Eph.2:19-22.

So, when Jesus spoke about preparing a place for us in His Father's house, He was talking about His Own resurrected body. Very much in the same way as when He told the Jews that if they destroyed this temple, that He would raise it up again in three days.

"Jesus answered and said to them, 'Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.' Then the Jews said, 'It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?' But He was speaking of the temple of His body," John 2:19-21.

Jesus was standing in the temple at Jerusalem when He said this to the Jews. So, naturally they assumed He was talking about the natural temple. But He was not. He was talking about His body as the true temple of God. And He does the same thing when talking about His Father's house. His resurrected body will be the Father's house in which His Father will dwell forever. A resurrection body that will give life to all who take shelter within it.

"For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive," I Cor.15:22.

His resurrection is our resurrection. His life is our life. And His resurrection body has plenty of room inside for anyone who seeks to take shelter within it. To hide themselves in Christ, within the cleft of the Rock. A house where there are many dwelling places. And He is preparing a place for each one of His saints there. The idea that Jesus has gone into heaven to prepare great houses or mansions for us in heaven is fanciful. The present heavens will pass away. What is the point of building mansions in a heaven that is going to pass away?

"You, LORD, (speaking of Jesus) in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of Your hands; they will perish, but You remain; and they all will become old like a garment, and like a mantle You will roll them up; like a garment they will also be changed. But You are the same, and Your years will not come to an end," Heb.1:10-12.

When Jesus said He was going to prepare a place of us in His Father's house it did not mean He was going to get some building tools out and erect a few mansions for us in heaven. No, it meant He was going to heaven to send the Holy Spirit down to us to help prepare, mould and shape us into the image of Christ. To form the person of Christ within each one of us. This is what Jesus is doing currently to prepare a place for us in His Father's house. He is preparing our hearts to be like His. He is preparing us by clothing us with Christ as we walk with Him every day. He is looking to form His whole body, every genuine believer in Christ into the fullness of Christ Himself.

"To the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ," Eph.4:13.

And,

"We are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ," Eph.4:15.

And once that preparation is complete, He then says that He will,

"Come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also," John 14:3.

Jesus doesn't say He'll take us up to heaven. He says that He will appear in the sky in order to descend to the earth in triumphant procession. He says once the preparation work is ready, that He will come again to receive us to Himself. To Himself because He is the Father's house. And He is coming for those who are His. That we might fully join with Him, be in Him and be with Him forever. The Bridegroom and His bride being united as one.

In olden days, when a king was to be crowned, in order to honour him, his people would usually go out of their city in order to welcome and accompany him back to the place of his coronation in triumphant procession. A bit like how the crowds welcomed Jesus to Jerusalem during His triumphal procession to Jerusalem when they expected Him to be crowned as king as the rightful, 'Son of David.' And this is how it will happen when Jesus comes to be crowned at His great second coming. And this is one of the reasons why He will rapture the church up into the clouds at His appearing. In order to accompany Him on His glorious procession as the rightful King coming to be enthroned upon the seat of David on this earth.

Jesus is descending from heaven in order to come to this earth to make His enemies a footstool. And He is currently preparing a place for us in Himself. He has many dwelling places for us in Himself. And one day He will come to receive us to Himself. Not initially in the heavens, but in the clouds and then upon the earth as we descend with Him in triumph and glory. Christ comes with all His saints. Christ's Body is the Father's house that will fill all things one day.

"He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things," Eph.4:10.

So, in my opinion, the fact that Jesus says that He is going to prepare a place for us in His Father's house, does not mean He is coming in the clouds only to go back into heaven with us all. It does not evidence the pre-tribulation rapture theory at all. Rather the opposite.

When Jesus ascended into heaven, the scripture says that a cloud received Him out of the sight of His disciples who watched Him leave them. And as they were standing there still gazing up into the sky to try and catch another glimpse of Jesus, two men in white clothing then stood beside them and said,

"Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven," Acts 1:11.

Jesus had been on the earth. Luke records that He was with His disciples at Bethany which is East of the Mount of Olives. And when He lifted His hands and blessed them, He was taken from them and carried into heaven. So, when Jesus returns again, it must be, "In just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven." In other words, He will come back on the clouds of heaven and come back to the earth. To the Mount of Olives as predicted by the prophet Zechariah.

"In that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which is in front of Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives will be split in its middle from east to west by a very large valley, so that half of the mountain will move toward the north and the other half toward the south. You will flee by the valley of My mountains, for the valley of the mountains will reach to Azel; yes, you will flee just as you fled before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the LORD, my God, will come, and all the holy ones with Him!" Zech.14:4-5.

The angels didn't say to His disciples, "This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come back in almost the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven, because this time He'll just meet you in the clouds and take you straight into heaven, and then 7 years later He'll actually retrace His original steps and come back to the earth." No, they said He will come back, "In just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven."

Jesus will come on the clouds of heaven, as recorded in all of the synoptic gospels, and will return to the earth, specifically to the Mount of Olives. The LORD my God will come and all the holy ones with Him. He's not coming in a secret rapture in which He snatches His people away from the earth like a thief would do. No, He is coming to be seen by everyone. The rightful King returning to the earth, in power and glory to judge the living and the dead. He is coming to receive the Kingdom from God His Father and to sit on the throne of David as King.

"Behold, He is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him. So it is to be. Amen," Rev.1:7.




POINTS AGAINST THE PRE-TRIBULATION RAPTURE THEORY:

1. II Thessalonians 1:6-10 directly contradicts the pre-tribulation version of events.

"For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to give relief to you who are afflicted along with us when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with the angels of His power in flaming fire, dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, when He comes to be glorified in His saints on that day, and to be marvelled at among all who have believed-for our testimony to you was believed," II Thess.1:6-10.

The apostle Paul says that when the Lord Jesus is revealed in glory with the angels of His power in flaming fire (without doubt His second coming in the sky visible to all and not a secret rapture), He will punish His enemies and give relief to those like the apostle Paul and the church at Thessaloniki, who were undergoing persecution for their faith. Paul phrases the sentence as if this momentous event would include him and the believers at Thessalonica if they were still alive at that time.

"It is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to give relief to you who are afflicted along with us when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with the angels of His power," II Thess.1:6-7.

He says it will happen, "On that day," (not days) when Jesus comes to be glorified in His saints and marvelled at among all true believers.

If Paul believed in and preached the pre-tribulation rapture theory, surely he would have made it clear that the relief he is talking about here would actually happen seven years prior to this event taking place? I would say that it is clear he did not believe in the pre-tribulation rapture theory because he says that God will give them relief whilst at the same time punishing His enemies, on the same day. The day when the Lord Jesus would be revealed from heaven and not before. There's no other way of reading it.

And Jesus is going to glorified in His saints and marvelled at among all who have believed on that day. Not at a secret rapture that happens seven years prior to this event. Jesus is going to be glorified in His saints when He takes them to be with Him. These scriptures make clear that that event (what we know as the rapture or regathering of God's people) is going to happen at His revealing from heaven along with the angels of His power and might. Exactly as it is described in the Olivet discourses in Matthew 24:30-31, Mark 13:26-27 and in Luke 21:27, and in Daniel chapter 7:13-14 when talking about the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven. This one verse directly contradicts the pre- trib version of events, which by contrast, has no verse that directly and clearly mentions or teaches it.


2. II Thessalonians 2:1-4 also directly contradicts the pre-tribulation rapture theory.

"Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, that you not be quickly shaken from your mind or be disturbed either by a spirit or a word or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. Let no-one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostacy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God," II Thess.2:1-4.

Paul plainly says that the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him will not happen before the great falling away or apostasy occurs first (prophesied by Jesus in Matt.24:10-13) and the antichrist is revealed (again prophesied by Jesus in Matt.24:15). Our gathering together to Him is what is known as the rapture today, and also the resurrection of the dead in Christ.

Paul mentions nothing about a secret rapture, but ties the coming of the Lord with our being gathered together to Him. And he refers to this event as, "The day of the Lord." The apostacy he is referring to is detailed in Jesus's chronology of end-time events given in Matthew 24:

"At that time many will fall away (lit: 'Be caused to stumble') and will betray one another and hate one another. Many false prophets will arise and will mislead many. Because lawlessness is increased, the love of many will grow cold. But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved," Matt.24:10-13.

At what time will many fall away? After the birth pangs of wars, famines and earthquakes, and during the prophesied tribulation that is to come upon all those who bear the Name of Christ. The same tribulation that the pre-trib teachers say we are going to avoid by being raptured out of before it even starts. So, how can that be true, if Paul says our gathering together to Him will not happen before the apostacy happens first? Our gathering together to Him must happen after the apostacy or great falling away that occurs in the last days.

Some pre-trib teachers have sought to try and explain this anomaly with their model by saying, "The Greek word for apostacy ('apostasia') means a, "Falling away," so that is actually talking about the rapture of the church when the church 'falls away' from this earth. It's a bit of a ridiculous point to make, because the verse would then say, "The coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him...will not come unless the apostacy ('rapture') occurs first...". Basically, the rapture must come before the rapture. It doesn't make any sense. And it is clearly doing gymnastics with the text.

But Paul also says the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him will not happen until the man of lawlessness is revealed. This of course is the antichrist figure, whom almost every Bible commentator I've come across agrees will be revealed at around the mid-point of the seven-year tribulation period. So, 3 ½ years in. So, how could it be possible to have a rapture occurring before the tribulation, when Paul says plainly it will happen after the apostacy and the revealing of the antichrist which both happen during the tribulation period? A progression of events which exactly mirrors the chronology of events given by the Lord whilst on the Mount of Olives in Matthew 24 and Mark 13. If the scriptures agree, why do we seek to add to them a different interpretation just in order to give space for a secret rapture which is not mentioned in either of the passages mentioned?

I just read one of Hal Lindsey's books to see how he gets around this scriptural contradiction to the pre-trib theory. Basically, he didn't even mention that this scripture in II Thessalonians completely contradicts the theory. Instead, he said the phrase, "The Day of the Lord," didn't actually mean a day as in a 24-hour period, but rather an extensive period of time of God's judgement, beginning with the rapture of the church and ending with the glorious second coming of Christ to the earth. So, effectively the, "Day of the Lord," is more like the, "Seven years of the Lord," or the, "2,555 days of the Lord," give or take (365 days x 7 years).

It never ceases to amaze me that people can be so concerned about the accuracy of Biblical words when it suits them, but then throw that accuracy out of the window when it doesn't suit them. When talking about the creation account many believers go to great lengths to prove that a day in the creation narrative actually means a day. A 24-hour period. They will fight tooth and nail to prove their point. But then when it comes to the Day of the Lord, all of a sudden that logic and rationale gets thrown out of the window and a, "Day," actually becomes an undefined period of time or seven years. Or two thousand five hundred and fifty-five days instead. And this is done for the sole purpose of trying to get around awkward verses which contradict the pre-trib rapture theory.

Hal Lindsey quoted from a number of Old Testament prophecies which mention the Day of the Lord and said that they all indicated an extensive period of time rather than a single day. And so, he therefore asserted that, when Paul speaks in these verses about the Day of the Lord not occurring before the apostacy and the revealing of the antichrist, he's actually not talking about the first bit of the Day of the Lord (the 'secret rapture' of the church), but the latter end of the Day of the Lord (the second coming according to the pre-trib teachers). The apostle Paul does not say this nor infer it in any way. But that's how Hal and other teachers like him get around a verse which clearly does not fit with their pre-tribulation rapture model.

Quite how we then are to figure out which part of the, "Day of the Lord," Paul is talking about, and which part he's not talking about, is not mentioned. In my mind, as the apostle Paul used the phrase, "the Day of the Lord," and didn't qualify that phrase in any way, he was clearly meaning the one day when everything that is prophesied to happen on, "the Day of the Lord," in the Old Testament was going to happen. All of it. Not just what happens at the end of it. Otherwise, he would have clearly pointed that out. But he does not.

To my mind, this is adding to the text in a most reckless and opportunistic way, in order to try and get around the difficulties the pre-trib advocates have with this (and other) scriptures that talk about the Day of the Lord. By changing the entire meaning of the word, "Day," and saying the scripture could be meaning any part of that, so-called, "Day," they enable the Bible to say whatever they want it to say regarding these matters. And the pre-trib teachers can then give whatever meaning they want to such scriptures. Bearing in mind what the Lord says about those who add to His Word, I would say that this is a very serious matter in His eyes.

So, do the Old Testament scriptures which mention the, "Day of the Lord," conclusively point to the idea that the scripture is talking about an extensive period of time when it uses this phrase? Or do they in reality more point to a single day in which everything is going to change because of what happens on that one day? I would say clearly the latter. In order to change the meaning of a word so dramatically, there must be compelling evidence in the scripture that, "The Day of the Lord," is actually a seven-year period beginning with the rapture and ending with the second coming of Christ. So, does such evidence exist? Not in my reading of the texts.

In order to 'prove' his assertions, Hal Lindsey quotes these references from the Old Testament: Isaiah 2:12-21; Isaiah 13:9-16; Isaiah 34:1-8; Joel 1:14-2:11; Joel 2:28-32, Joel 3:9-12; Amos 5:18-20; Obadiah 15-17 and Zephaniah 1:7-18. Hal doesn't actually quote what they say and I haven't got time to go through them all here either. But suffice to say, I found no compelling evidence at all for the idea that the Day of the Lord actually was talking about an extensive period of time in any of these scriptures.

They do however talk in graphic terms about the Lord's coming as being the Day of the Lord and how everything is going to change on that one day when He comes. The focus is all on the fact that mankind thinks that he is in control and everything is going on as normal. But then in one day, the, "Day of the Lord," everything changes dramatically. The empires and kingdoms of men will all crumble as the greatness and the power of God is released. And all He needs is one day in which to do it. And the idea of fitting a secret rapture into this one day is rather fanciful. They clearly all talk about the overwhelming judgements that are going to be unleashed on the, "Day of the Lord," because the Lord is returning to this earth in power and glory. Not sneaking in and out like a thief who doesn't want to be seen.

In Isaiah the Lord pictures the Antichrist figure who is to come as, "the Assyrian," who oppresses God's people, as historically the Assyrian nation did to Israel. And it pictures his soldiers as the, "trees of his forest," the thorns and briers which have pricked, pained and bloodied the Israelites over the years. But the Lord says that He will burn and devour his thorns and briers in a single day. He emphasises the fact that it will happen on a single day. Not a period of time. A single day. The Day of the Lord.

"And the light of Israel will become a fire and his Holy One a flame, And it will burn and devour his thorns and his briars in a single day," Is.10:17.

The fact that the judgements poured out on that day have long term implications is neither here nor there. The use of the word, "the Day of the Lord," is to make the point that everything is going to change suddenly, without warning. On one day. Not during a seven-year period. As it did when the flood came upon the earth in the time of Noah, or when Sodom and Gomorrah were burnt up. One day when everything changes.

Again, we see the same thing when God judges Babylon the great in Revelation 18. Because Babylon boasts that she sits as a queen, she is not a widow and will have no sorrow, therefore God says,

"Therefore her plagues will come in one day—death and mourning and famine. And she will be utterly burned with fire, for strong is the Lord God who judges her," Rev.18:8.

God will make an example of her because of her pride. And part of this example will be that the power, wealth and luxury she has accumulated over ages will be completely removed in just one day. The Day of the Lord when everything changes.

The Day of the Lord is all about the one day when the Lord returns in great glory and power and unleashes a fiery judgement upon the wicked in this world that will make the hairs on the back of our heads stand up and our knees knock together with the enormity and severity of it all.

So, to then try and say the phrase, "the Day of the Lord," actually refers to all manner of things and different events over an extended period of time is disingenuous at best. It is clearly speaking about one day in which everything is going to change in this world specifically because the Lord comes to the earth on that day and everything changes. As Noah's flood came on one day. And the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah happened on one day. Yes, the flood lasted for quite a while, and yes, the smoke from Sodom and Gomorrah's overthrow went up for a number of days one would expect. But each judgement came on one pivotal day when everything changed. Which is what the scripture is referring to when talking about the, "Day of the Lord," which is to come.



3. None of the accounts Jesus gives for the end-times mentions or even infers a pre-tribulation type of a rapture.

This was a point I used to struggle with quite a bit when I believed the pre-trib version of the rapture. Why did Jesus never mention it? I mean, not at all. But instead, He mentions in all three synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) that the gathering in of His people, effectively the rapture of the church, will happen after a time of Great Tribulation when the sign of the Son of Man appears in the sky causing all the nations of the earth to mourn.

"But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other," Matt.24:29-31.

All very public and open. After the tribulation of those day, the sign of the Son of Man appears in the sky. Literally Daniel 7:13 occurring in front of everyone. The Son of Man coming as King in great glory and majesty, in order to be presented before the Ancient of Days. In full view of everyone. And He is given the Kingdom which He has been waiting for since His ascension into heaven when He sat down at the right hand of His Father awaiting the time for His enemies to be put under His feet. When God the Father will extend His royal sceptre from Zion saying,

"Rule in the midst of Your enemies," Ps.110:1-2.

Jesus says that as He comes with a great trumpet blast, He will send out His angels to gather His elect together. Where is the secret rapture in any of this? Some have said that Jesus is sending out His angels to gather His elect from heaven because they've already been raptured there 7 years previously. This makes no sense as it says He gathers them from the four winds. The four winds are upon the earth, not up in heaven. They are a picture of the geographic spread of where His angels are to gather His people in from. From every corner of the earth. Wherever the four winds blow. From the north to the south and from the east and to the west. Exactly as Jesus pictured it in the parable of the wheat and the tares and the parable of the dragnet.

"The Son of Man will send forth His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness, and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father," Matt.13:41-43.

And,

"So it will be at the end of the age; the angels will come forth and take out the wicked from among the righteous, and they will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth," Matt.13:49-50.

Jesus sends out His angels and they remove the wicked from amongst the righteous and the saints are gathered in to shine forth as the sun in the kingdom. That's not a secret rapture.




4. Many scriptures clearly infer very strongly that the resurrection and rapture of the church occurs at the revealing of Jesus from heaven. Not at a secret rapture.

"Therefore, prepare your minds for action, keep sober in spirit, fix your hope completely on the grace to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ," I Peter 1:13.

Peter says we are to fix our hope completely on the grace to be brought to us at the revelation of Jesus Christ. At the time when Jesus Christ is revealed. He says much the same thing in verse 7 of the same chapter.

Taking things at face value, this would strongly infer that the rapture occurs at Christ's second coming, because that is when He is truly revealed. I say, 'strongly infer,' because technically speaking there is a small possibility that Peter is talking about Jesus only appearing to His saints here. I've had that said to me by some who hold to the pre-tribulation rapture theory. But if that really were the case, wouldn't Peter have said as much? Wouldn't he have qualified his sentence by pointing out that the revelation he is talking about is when Christ appears to His people only in a secret rapture? Because otherwise most people would naturally assume that he is talking about when Jesus Christ is revealed to everyone? Because that is how we would normally understand the phrase, "The revelation of Jesus Christ," considering the revealing of Jesus Christ to everybody is a major theme in the scriptures? When every eye will see Him, and all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him (Rev.1:7).

Whenever the scripture mentions this revealing of Jesus Christ from heaven, it never puts it in the context of a secret rapture unless we read that into the text. But it does clearly link it with His glorious second coming.

"For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with the angels of His power," II Thess.1:6-7.

Paul says that great destruction and punishment will come on those who do not know God or who don't obey Him at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven. He links the revelation of Jesus Christ with His glorious second coming and not to a secret rapture.

And in the gospel of Luke, Jesus had just been talking about the days of Noah when the flood came and destroyed them all. And the days of Lot when the Lord overthrew the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, when fire and brimstone suddenly fell from heaven and destroyed everyone in them. And He specifically links these two cataclysmic judgements falling upon the earth to the day the Son of Man is revealed.

"It will be just the same on the day that the Son of Man is revealed," Luke 17:30.

So, once again, Jesus links the revealing of the Son of Man with His glorious second coming. He's not referring to any secret coming that's for sure. He says that this revealing will be like the lightening when it flashes out of one part of the sky, and shines to the other part of the sky (Lk.17:24). So, as the lightening lights up the whole night sky, so the Son of Man will light up everything on the day He is revealed.

Biblically speaking, the end-times revelation of Jesus Christ is always to do with His glorious second coming and never a secret rapture. Jesus goes on to say that,

"On that night, there will be two in one bed; one will be taken and the other left," Luke 17:34.

A classic scripture used by the pre-trib teachers to try and describe what the rapture will be like in the sense of some people being taken whilst others are left behind. But in context, this scripture is clearly referring to what will happen at the second coming of Christ, when the Son of Man is revealed from heaven as the lightening flashing across the sky. Very visual and very public.

So, as believers we are to fix our hope completely on the grace to be given to us at the revelation of Jesus Christ. Not looking for a secret rapture where the Lord Jesus effectively hides Himself from the rest of mankind.



5. Why would Jesus say the days of the tribulation would be shortened for the sake of the elect, if the elect are not there anymore because they have been raptured years before in a 'secret rapture'?

"For those days will be a time of tribulation such as has not occurred since the beginning of the creation which God created until now, and never will. Unless the Lord had shortened those days no flesh would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect, whom He chose, He shortened the days," Mark 13:19-20.

Clearly Jesus is referring to the Great Tribulation that will occur at the end of time. The time of tribulation such as not occurred since the beginning of the creation and never will again. A tribulation that would have resulted in the elimination of mankind completely if the Lord had not shortened it. But why does He shorten the days of this terrible time of tribulation? Jesus says He does so for the sake of the elect whom He chose. Well, who are they?

Throughout the New Testament, the elect of God are those who have been chosen by Him. Both Jew and Gentile, chosen and one in Christ Jesus. The church of the Living God, elect according to the foreknowledge of God (I Pet.11:2). So, if the elect of God has already been raptured before the tribulation, why would Jesus say that God has specifically shortened the days of the tribulation period for their sakes? It doesn't make any sense.

The pre-tribulation rapture teachers unilaterally try to say that the elect here only refers to the Jewish believers. The scripture does not make this distinction, but it is the only way they can try and explain why the elect of God seem to be still around during the Great Tribulation, when they teach that the elect of God would have been taken up in the secret rapture years before. Jesus Himself does not describe them as the elect Jews. He describes them as, "the elect, whom He chose," which includes both Jews and Gentiles. If He were only speaking of the Jewish nation here, surely, He would have said so?

It is true that the Jewish nation is spoken of as being chosen by God in the Old Testament. But it is also true that in the New Testament the elect of God are both Jew and Gentile, those who have been chosen in Christ Jesus from both groups. So, why would Jesus be solely referring to a Jewish elect in Mark chapter 13, but then referring to both a Jewish and Gentile elect whenever the word is mentioned again throughout the New Testament? Especially considering that He does not say that He is only referring to the Jewish elect in Mark chapter 13.

The word translated as 'elect' here ('eklektos' in the Greek) is used 23 times in the New Testament in books ranging from the Gospels, the Epistles and the book of Revelation. And the context of all of these verses bar two of them, is that the 'elect' that are spoken of are the chosen people of God or the Lord Jesus, whether Jew or Gentile. Not just one group or the other. The only two exceptions to this are I Timothy 5:21, which talks of, "the elect angels," and the second is I Peter 2:6, which uses the word in the context of the Lord Jesus as the elect cornerstone, quoting from Isaiah 28:16.

Clearly Jesus is referring to His elect whom He chose. So, both Jew and Gentile. And He says that the days of the coming Great Tribulation will be shortened for their sakes. So, that means they will still be around during that Great Tribulation. They will not be taken away in a secret rapture that occurs before the tribulation.





6. Noah's flood and the flight of Lot from Sodom are both Old Testament pictures of the second coming of Christ. And both accounts point to a rapture and resurrection occurring after the tribulation, not to a secret rapture.

We've just mentioned in the previous point that the story of Noah's flood and Lot's flight from Sodom are both pictures of the rapture of the church and how it will happen. And both point very strongly to the rapture occurring after the tribulation, or after most of the tribulation, and immediately before great judgement is released upon an unsuspecting world.

God had told Noah to build an ark. A picture of how Christ has been building His church over the past 2,000 years or so. Then, when it came time for God's judgement to come, God said to Noah that in 7 days the flood would come upon the world and destroy everything.

"For after seven more days, I will send rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and I will blot out from the face of the land every living thing that I have made," Gen.7:4.
God gives Noah a warning that in 7 days the flood would come. A bit like a countdown which seems to mirror the 7 years of tribulation and great tribulation that will come upon the earth in the last days.

But does God tell Noah to immediately enter into the ark on the first day of the countdown? As if He were picturing a pre-tribulation type of rapture that occurs 7 years before His judgement falls? No, He does not. Instead, the scripture clearly shows that Noah and his family enter the ark after the 7 days. Once the 7 days are completed. And immediately before the great flood judgement was to come upon the earth. Very much pointing to the fact that the church will go through the 7 years of tribulation and then be taken away from the judgement that is just about to be poured out in the end times. But only just taken out of the way. In the nick of time.

"It came about after the seven days, that the water of the flood came upon the earth. In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open and the floodgates of the sky were opened. The rain fell upon the earth for forty days and forty nights. On the very same day Noah and Shem and Ham and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife and the three wives of his sons with them, entered the ark....and the LORD closed it behind them," Gen.7:10-16.

We see a similar principle in the account of Lot's deliverance from Sodom. Lot and his daughters, together with the two angels are attacked by the wicked men of Sodom. An attack that takes place during the night. Much like how during the 'night' of the tribulation period, the wicked people of this world will also attack the people of the light. God sends the angels to rescue righteous Lot. So, they urge him to flee the city because they have been sent to destroy it. Lot hesitated so the angels seized his hand and the hand of his wife and two daughters and they forcibly brought them out of the city. And they say to Lot,

"Escape for your life! Do not look behind you, and do not stay anywhere in the valley; escape to the mountains, or you will be swept away," Gen.19:17.

Lot asks that they allow him to flee to Zoar because it is nearer and he fears he would not make it to the mountains in time before the cataclysm is released. The angels agree with these words:

"'Hurry, escape there, for I cannot do anything until you arrive there.' Therefore the name of the town was called Zoar. The sun had risen over the earth when Lot came to Zoar. Then the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven," Gen.19:22-24.

The Lord sends His brimstone and fire upon the wicked cities of Sodom and Gomorrah immediately Lot and his family are safe in Zoar (barring his wife of course who looks back and became a pillar of salt). There is a great sense of urgency to everything the angels say. The judgement is imminent but cannot be poured out until Lot is safely away. But within seconds of him arriving in Zoar it is poured out in full measure.

This sense of urgency and the immediate outpouring of God's wrath once His people are safe, is indicated by the fact that Lot and his daughters made it, but his wife who was behind him did not. Of course, she looked back which she was forbidden to do. But the scripture says she was behind her husband. So, seconds away from reaching safety. So, almost the moment Lot and his daughters reached safety, fire and brimstone rained down from heaven upon Sodom and Gomorrah and they were annihilated.

And so, with the rapture of the church. There's not going to be a 7-year gap between the church being taken out of the way and God's judgement being poured out. No, as soon as we have been taken out of the way the judgement will come. God is holding it back until we are taken out of the way. And that is one of the main reasons for us to be removed from this earth. In order that God can pour out His righteous wrath upon the wicked and not upon the righteous. We are not appointed to suffer His wrath. But it happens immediately the church is taken and not 7 years later.

The scripture says that the sun had risen over the earth when Lot came to Zoar and the Lord rained brimstone and fire upon the wicked cities. It was daybreak. And the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to Him is likened to the dawning of a new day and the sun rising in our hearts.

"So we have the prophetic word more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts," II Peter 1:19.

So, if we connect the account of Lot with this verse in II Peter, the scripture is indicating that as the Day of the Lord dawns upon this earth, the rapture and resurrection will occur as Jesus, the morning star arises in our hearts and His judgement is then poured out upon the wicked in full measure.






7. Psalm 110 verses 1-3 clearly state that Jesus will remain sitting at the right-hand of His Father, until the time when God makes His enemies a footstool for His feet. This happens at the second coming of Christ and not during some secret rapture.

"The LORD says to my Lord; 'Sit at My right hand until I make Your enemies a footstool for your feet.' The LORD will stretch forth Your strong scepter from Zion, saying, 'Rule in the midst of Your enemies.' Your people will volunteer freely in the day of Your power; In holy array, from the womb of the dawn, Your youth are to You as the dew," Ps.110:1-3.

This is a conversation between God the Father and Jesus His Son. His Father tells Him to sit at His right hand, until the time when He will put all enemies under His feet. This is a clear reference to the account in Daniel of the Son of Man coming (to the earth) in the clouds of heaven and being presented before the Ancient of Days in order to be given dominion, glory and the kingdom (Daniel 7:13-14 and Matthew 24:30-31). Where all people will serve Him and His kingdom will never end.

So, God the Father has said that Jesus will remain seated at His right-hand until the time when He stretches forth Christ's strong sceptre from Zion and tells Him to, "Rule in the midst of Your enemies." Which He will then start to do with great ferocity and purpose. With His people who have been raptured and are now arrayed with holy and heavenly bodies. Where does a secret rapture fit into this scenario?

The LORD does not say, "Sit at My right hand until You join with Your bride (the church)," which is what it would have to say (or words to that effect, maybe, "Until Your wedding day," or, "Until Your marriage supper,"?) if the pre-tribulation version of the rapture was correct. It says very clearly, "Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet."

So, Jesus is not to come on a quick foray in order to snatch His church up to heaven in order to celebrate the wedding of the Lamb, and then come 7 years later in order to put His enemies under His feet. No, the scripture says He is to sit at God's right hand, until the time the Father decides to send Him to this earth in order to put all enemies under His feet. Then and only then, is He to get up from where He is seated and return to the earth. However hard we try, we cannot make these verses fit the pre-tribulation rapture model. It just doesn't work. The only scenario which these verses fit is that where Jesus is coming on one day to gather His people to Himself, to receive His kingdom and to then put all enemies under His feet.



8. The neat kind of consecutive chronology of events through the book of Revelation which is put forward by the pre-tribulation rapture teachers does not actually work out in practice. It has serious flaws but these are never mentioned by the pre-trib advocates.

The pre-tribulation rapture teachers make a big point of the consecutive nature of events in the book of Revelation. They say everything is written down in order of how it is going to happen. So, that the seals are broken first, then the trumpet judgements commence, and finally the bowl judgements are poured out upon the earth. And then Jesus comes in power and glory.

This all sounds good and appeals to our logical minds. And certainly, there is some chronological order to the book of Revelation. But not a strict, all-encompassing chronology of events. When looking into it more closely we see that this actually doesn't work in the way the pre-tribulation rapture teachers tell us it will. Certainly, the chronology of seals leading to the trumpet judgements and finally to the bowl judgements doesn't work. There has to be some cross-over between them all.

The first and most obvious spanner in the works is the opening of the sixth seal in heaven.

"I looked when He opened the sixth seal, and behold, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became like blood. And the stars of heaven fell to the earth, as a fig tree drops its late figs when it is shaken by a mighty wind. Then the sky receded as a scroll when it is rolled up, and every mountain and island was moved out of its place. And the kings of the earth, the great men, the rich men, the commanders, the mighty men, every slave and every free man, hid themselves in the caves and in the rocks of the mountains, and said to the mountains and rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! For the great day of His wrath has come, and who is able to stand?" Rev.6:12-17.

Most pre-tribulation rapture advocates teach that this tumultuous event happens sometime during the 7-year tribulation period but quite a time from the second coming of Christ. But just a cursory reading of what is being described at the opening of the sixth seal will cast huge doubt on such an interpretation.

To me (and many others) it is as clear as daylight that these verses are referring to the glorious second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. It cannot be anything else. Mighty signs in the cosmos with the sun going dark and the moon becoming like blood. The sky receding like a scroll and every mountain and island moved out of its place, presumably by the mighty earthquake which convulses the planet (Isaiah 24:17-23 springs to mind)? So, no more Mount Everest, Mont Blanc, Mount Fuji, K2, the Eiger or Kilimanjaro. And no more Majorca, Tahti, Corfu or Bali. Or Shetland Isles, or the Isle of Wight. Or how about Hawaii, or even the UK? Aren't we an island after all?

But then to cap all the global terror, the appearance of the Ancient of Days and Jesus the Lamb of God, coming as the Son of Man in the clouds to pour out His great wrath on a rebellious and sinful world. The revealing of the One from whom the heavens and the earth flee away from (Rev.20:11). And no wonder that every man whether slave or free is in absolute terror, preferring the rocks to fall upon them and crush them rather than have to try and stand before the Lord God of heaven and earth.

There is no doubt this is a description of the second coming of Christ. And yet I've never heard a pre-tribulation teacher try and deal with what the text is so obviously saying. All they seem to do is just try to pass it off as a type of nuclear exchange that causes destruction upon the earth and in the heavens, and then go on to the seventh seal and then the trumpet judgements. But say nothing about the obvious pointers in the breaking of the sixth seal to the second coming of Christ. I guess because to admit the opening of the sixth seal is a picture of the second coming of Christ messes up with the neat chronological order of events that they're been taught to believe in.

The language used by John to describe the sixth seal is uncannily similar to the language used by Jesus to describe the upheaval in the heavens and upon the earth just before and during His public unveiling to the world as He comes upon the clouds of heaven.

"But immediately after the tribulation of those days (so not 7 years before), the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky (Dan.7:13), and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory. And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other," Matt.24:29-31.

Jesus clearly speaking about His very public second coming which occurs immediately after the tribulation He had just described. And so similar to the language used by Isaiah when talking about the day the Lord arises to make the earth tremble.

"Men will go into caves of the rocks and into holes of the ground before the terror of the LORD and the splendour of His majesty, when He arises to make the earth tremble. In that day men will cast away to the moles and the bats their idols of silver and their idols of gold, which they made for themselves to worship, in order to go into the caverns of the rocks and the clefts of the cliffs, before the terror of the LORD and the splendour of His majesty, when He arises to make the earth tremble," Isaiah 2:19-21.

Clearly, none other than the day of Christ. His glorious appearing when He arises to make the earth tremble. So, if the sixth seal is clearly a description of the second coming of Christ, that messes up the whole strict chronological basis for the pre-tribulation rapture theory. It disproves it.

Allied to this, the description of the judgements poured out with the seventh bowl of God's wrath pretty much mimics what is described with the opening of the sixth seal. A great earthquake so great and mighty that the cities of the nations fell, every island fled away, and the mountains were not found. Well, if the islands and mountains had all been levelled some years earlier at the opening of the sixth seal, how could they have suddenly all reappeared in order to then flee away and not be found at the pouring out of the seventh bowl of God's judgement? Did people build up the mountains again or form the islands again? I think not.

More likely is the idea that the sixth seal, seventh seal and the seventh bowl judgement happen very close together. In fact, I would say that probably the opening of the sixth and seventh seals, along with the blowing of the seventh trumpet and the pouring out of all the bowl judgements happen in pretty close proximity to one another. When the seventh trumpet is sounded, there are loud voices in heaven saying,

"The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ; and He will reign forever and ever," Rev.11:15.

The twenty-four elders in heaven then fall on their faces saying,

"We give You thanks, O Lord God, the Almighty, who are and who were, because You have taken Your great power and have begun to reign. And the nations were enraged, and Your wrath came (past tense), and the time came for the dead to be judged, and the time to reward Your bond-servants the prophets and the saints and those who fear Your Name, the small and the great, and to destroy those who destroy the earth," Rev.11:17-18.

Surely this is another perspective on the second coming of Christ? When the kingdoms of this world actually become the kingdoms of God and of His Christ, and He begins to truly rule and reign upon the earth. The time of the outpouring of God's wrath and the time for judgement to begin. At the seventh and last trumpet. After all, didn't the apostle Paul state that the rapture would occur at the last trumpet?

I've heard some pre-tribulation rapture teachers say, "No, the blowing of the seventh trumpet isn't the second coming of Christ. It's the Lord proclaiming His intention to do so." Well, how can that be, if the voices in heaven are saying that the kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ? All past tense. Surely if the Lord was proclaiming His intention to take over the kingdom of this world He would have said as much? But He doesn't. And how can it be God signalling His intention to take over the kingdom of this world by establishing His own kingdom, if the Lord has already begun to reign upon the earth? And to enforce that reign through the outpouring of His wrath and the judgement of the inhabitants of the earth?

"In the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he is about to sound (his trumpet), the mystery of God is finished, as He preached the gospel to His servants the prophets," Rev.10:7.

God says that the mystery of God would be finished, accomplished or fulfilled at the sounding of the seventh trumpet. So, what is this mystery?

"For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. This mystery is great; but I speaking with reference to Christ and the church," Eph.5:31-32.

The mystery of God that has been hidden for generations but has now been revealed is the joining together of Christ and His church at the resurrection and rapture. The revealing of the new creation in Christ. The fullness of the Body of Christ which has been under construction for thousands of years, through the working of the Spirit of Christ in our hearts. But is now revealed through the resurrection and rapture of the church. The appearance of Christ and His bride joined together in glory.

"To whom God willed to make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory," Col.1:27.

The mystery of God is accomplished or fulfilled when Jesus comes back for His own and we are glorified in Him. When the bride joins with her Bridegroom, and they truly become one in spirit. When the new creation in Christ Jesus is revealed. So, how can the rapture and resurrection have occurred years earlier as taught by the pre-tribulation rapture adherents? It can't.

The rapture of the church is an essential aspect of this mystery being accomplished.

"Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed," I Cor.15:51-52.

God's mystery that will be, "finished," at the sounding of the seventh trumpet is the resurrection of the righteous and the rapture or re-gathering of God's elect. The revealing of the sons of God which the whole of creation has been longing for (Rom.8:19).

Many people see the opening of the seven seals on the scroll written on both sides in Revelation chapters 6 to 8, to be the opening of the title deed to the earth. So, whoever opens them is effectively opening the title deed to the earth which they now possess. Which begs the question, if Jesus has opened every seal of this title deed, why would He wait for a length of time before taking possession of His inheritance?

When purchasing a property, as soon as the title deed is ours, we take possession of the property. We get the keys and we move in. But the pre-tribulation rapture advocates state that, once these seals are opened, Jesus does not come back to take possession of His inheritance immediately. No, they say He then waits for the trumpet judgements and the bowl judgements to all happen before He will actually return to take up His inheritance. These must take at least 5 months if not longer according to the pre tribulation rapture teachers.

So, when analysed in detail, the chronological order of events and judgements made by the pre-tribulation teachers concerning the book of Revelation does not really work as they say it does. There must be cross-over between the seals, trumpets and bowl judgements. And this shows that we are not to view Revelation through purely chronological glasses, as if moving from point A to point B and then to point C and so forth. As with all prophetic scripture there is a mixture of chronological verses allied with verses that do not fit into a pure chronological order. So many of the Old Testament prophecies follow this pattern, with verses next to each other that go forward or backward in time, depending upon what God wants to say. Sometimes there is a chronological order. But many times, there is not. So, we cannot assume that the book of Revelation should be interpreted in a purely chronological manner which is what the pre-tribulation rapture teachers try to do.



9. Daniel 12 clearly shows that the resurrection (which happens before the rapture), occurs at the time of the great tribulation, not years before.

"At that time Michael shall stand up, the great prince who stands watch over the sons of your people; and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation, even to that time. And at that time your people shall be delivered, every one who is found written in the book. And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, some to shame and everlasting contempt. Those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the firmament, and those who turn many to righteousness like the stars forever and ever," Dan.12:1-3.

The prophet Daniel has just been talking about great wars and conflicts the antichrist will initiate and engage in during the end times. He talks of him setting up his royal tents between the seas and the holy mountain, presumably Mount Zion in Jerusalem, but coming to his end with no-one to help him. So, towards the end of the tribulation period.
And then he says, "At that time," Michael the Archangel who stands watch over the sons of Daniel's people will arise and there will be a great distress such as never was since there was a nation. So, a distress worse than the holocaust and the second world war. But, "At that time your people shall be delivered." At that time. The time of the ultimate distress and the great tribulation that comes upon the earth, that's when Daniel's people will be delivered. Not the time 7 years previously during a 'secret rapture.'

The pre-tribulation rapture teachers say that this is the resurrection of the Old Testament saints who were not resurrected at the rapture of the church 7 years previously. The scripture does not clearly say this, but they have to place this resurrection at a different time to the resurrection of the church in order to make their model work. So, it's all about keeping to their model rather than keeping to what the scripture is actually saying. And they do this based upon the angel's words to Daniel that, "At that time your people will be delivered." They assume because Daniel was a Jew that he is talking about the ethnic Jews here. So, therefore they unilaterally ascribe this resurrection to the Old Testament saints. Because they were Jewish right?

Well, most of them were Jewish that's true. But not all. What about righteous Abel, Enoch and Noah? They were not Jews in the ethnic sense of the word. And what about Rahab the former harlot and Ruth the Moabitess who is included in the lineage of Jesus? If only the Jewish Old Testament saints are being resurrected here, when will the Gentile Old Testament saints be resurrected? The pre-tribulation rapture model seems to make no provision for them.

And quite why the Old Testament saints are not resurrected along with everybody else is not explained. Especially considering they are saved by the same faith we are today. A faith in Jesus their Messiah whom they trusted in from a distance. So, they died, "in Christ." Salvation is found in no other. And the scripture clearly says that they had not received what was promised because they were to receive it together with us. They should not be made perfect apart from us. They have yet to be resurrected because they are waiting to share in the same resurrection with us. The resurrection of Christ.

"And all these (the Old Testament saints), having obtained a good testimony through faith, did not receive the promise, God having provided something better for us, that they should not be made perfect apart from us," Heb.11:39-40.

The scripture indicates that the Old Testament saints and the New Testament saints will all be perfected together, at the resurrection of the righteous at the coming of Christ, our Saviour and theirs. A resurrection that will be at the time of the Great Tribulation. Not at a separate resurrection 7 years later. The resurrection of the righteous, the resurrection which is a continuation of the resurrection of Christ. A resurrection of Christ's bride, the church, whom He is to marry at this time.

If it is true that the Old Testament saints don't get resurrected alongside the church but only after the tribulation time has finished, that means they will miss out on the marriage of Christ and His bride. But if the Old Testament saints miss out on the marriage of Christ and His church, does that not make them an inferior class of saint in the coming kingdom, compared to the so-called 'church age' saints? So, Moses, Elijah, David and Abraham will not be included as the bride of Christ even though Abraham is the father of our faith, Jesus is the Son of David, and Moses and Elijah both appeared with Jesus at the transfiguration looking the same as He did? Does that make any sense?

"But we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is," I John 3:2.

Will we have saints who just about made it through the door on judgement day, as through the flames, in more glorified bodies and of a higher status than great heroes of the faith from the Old Testament such as Joshua, Caleb, Daniel, Isaiah or Jeremiah the prophets? I cannot imagine it. Moses and Elijah both appeared in glory with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration (Luke 9:31). Daniel was told he would rest in death and then rise again to receive his allotted portion at the end of the age. Job said that he would be resurrected and see God when He comes and stands upon this earth. When Jesus returns in exactly the same way as He left, coming in the clouds and returning to the Mount of Olives in Israel.

"For I know that my Redeemer lives, and He shall stand at last on the earth; and after my skin is destroyed, this I know, that in my flesh I shall see God, whom I shall see for myself, and my eyes shall behold, and not another. How my heart yearns within me!" Job 19:25-27.

Job's hope was to see His God when He came to stand upon the earth. The same hope we have. Yes, we will see Him in the clouds first, but when He is coming in royal procession to the earth to take His stand upon the earth, to claim it as His own. The scripture says that the Old Testament saints will be made perfect with us, not separately from us.
Surely the truth of the matter is there is one resurrection of the righteous at the return of Christ which will include all the Old Testament saints and those from the New? A resurrection that occurs at the height of the Great Tribulation, when Christ comes in power and glory to establish His kingdom and put all enemies under His feet?

The scripture says that at that time all of Daniel's people will be delivered. But who are Daniel's people? Usually our minds will think according to flesh. Daniel was a natural Jew, so he must be talking about the Jewish nation here right? But is he? The angel further clarifies who Daniel's people are, by then adding the phrase, "Every one who is found in the book." Presumably the Lamb's book of life?

So, does he mean everyone of Daniel's people the Jews whose names are in the book of life will be delivered at that time? But by implication, the Gentiles won't be? So, the 'tribulation saints' won't be rescued but the 144,000 Jews will be? Certainly according to the pre-tribulation rapture model the, 'tribulation saints,' will still be around at this time suffering a rampant persecution from the people of the world. So why would God ignore them whilst only delivering the Jews? The scripture says that there is no favouritism with God. But this scenario seems to smack of favouritism.

Or does he mean that everyone of Daniel's people in the spiritual sense, will be delivered at that time? Everyone who walks faithfully with God as Daniel did, whose names are in the book? So, all Jews and Gentiles whose names are in the Lamb's book of life will be delivered at that time?

To my mind the latter case seems to be the more compelling one. I could be wrong, but it doesn't make any sense why God would resurrect some of His people based upon their national identity according to the flesh, but leave the others to their rather unpleasant fate? And if only the 144,000 Jews are to be resurrected here, what type of resurrection body will they receive? Considering they are not a part of the glorified church according to the pre-tribulation rapture advocates. So, how will they be resurrected if they're not a part of the blessed first resurrection (Rev.20:6)? And doesn't that make a total of at least three resurrections? If the first resurrection is at the rapture and the third then at the Great White Throne judgement? Will they be resurrected in glorified bodies if they are not a part of Christ's body? Or will they be resurrected like the lost souls before the Great White throne? And if only the Jews are resurrected here, when and where will the gentile 'tribulation saints' be resurrected? The scripture speaks of two resurrections (John 5:29). Not three or even four.

So, how will Daniel's people be delivered? By the resurrection from the dead. And though it is not mentioned, presumably by the rapture of God's people who are still alive at that time.

"Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake," Dan.12:2.

But it is not just a resurrection taking everybody to heaven. No, it is a resurrection where individuals are separated. Some are resurrected in glory, whereas others are resurrected to shame and reproach.

"And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, some to shame and everlasting contempt," Dan.12:2.

So, quite different to how the resurrection and the rapture of God's people is often portrayed today. Especially by the pre-tribulation rapture teachers, where the indication is given that all those raptured or resurrected go straight up into heaven. Instead, Daniel portrays it as a resurrection to glory and a resurrection to condemnation. Very much in keeping with how Jesus described His coming, as being a time when He separates His people into two camps. The true disciples from the false. The wheat from the tares. The faithful servant from the wicked and lazy servants. The sheep from the goats. Some awake to everlasting life, but others to shame and everlasting contempt. So, not just a temporary shame which passes but a contempt that is eternal.

And just to be clear, those resurrected to shame and everlasting contempt here are not those true believers who Paul talks about who just about squeeze into the kingdom, "As through fire," (I Cor.3:15) because they had the foundation of Christ in their life but spent their time building upon that foundation with hay and straw rather than with the imperishable things represented by gold or silver. Anyone who makes it into the kingdom will not suffer eternal contempt. They are a child of God under no condemnation. No, those who endure this fate are those who were of God's house in some way or other, but either fell away by trusting in their own dead works or departed from Christ by walking in unrepentant sin.

I don't see how these verses can be read in any other way that fits with the pre-tribulation model. They clearly talk about the resurrection (and therefore the rapture as well) as being toward the end of the tribulation period. Trying to say they are the resurrection of the Old Testament saints opens up a can of worms and isn't mentioned or even inferred in the text.

And then again later in the same chapter Daniel is told to shut up the words and to seal the scroll that God was giving to him.

"But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end; many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase," Dan.12:4.

The scroll was to be sealed and shut up until the time of the end. Many scholars link this scroll as being the same scroll that Jesus, the Lamb of God opens in the book of Revelation. The seven sealed scroll that counts down the end times tribulation period, culminating with the second coming of Jesus Christ in power and great glory.

And one of the angelic beings asks another when the fulfilment of these wonders would be? In other words, when would the seals on the scroll be opened so that it might be read and understood?

"Then I heard the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand to heaven, and swore by Him who lives forever, that it shall be for a time, times, and half a time; and when the power of the holy people has been completely shattered, all these things shall be finished," Dan.12:7.

So, the seals would all be opened and the scroll read and understood, "When the power of the holy people has been completely shattered, all these things shall be finished." So, that would put the opening of the seventh seal as happening just after the complete shattering of the power of the holy people of God. What Jesus described as a time when all the people in the world would hate His disciples and seek to put them to death. The great tribulation that will come upon God's people in the last days.

There is nothing in the passage about how some of God's people (the church) will somehow escape this great tribulation, whereas others would not (the so-called 'tribulation saints' and the 144,000 Jewish evangelists). It just says that all these things will be accomplished once the power of the holy people has been completely shattered.

This mirrors another prophecy in Daniel in which he pictures the coming antichrist figure as a little horn who wages war on the saints of God and overcomes them.

"I was watching; and the same horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them, until the Ancient of Days came, and a judgment was made in favour of the saints of the Most High, and the time came for the saints to possess the kingdom," Dan.7:21-22.

Again, the passage gives no indication of some saints being rescued from this tribulation through a secret rapture whereas others have to go through it. No, it just says the horn was waging war against the saints and prevailing against them. Until the Ancient of Days comes and He makes a judgement in their favour.

Later in the same chapter, it says that the antichrist would persecute or wear out the saints of the Most High and that they would be given into his hand, until the time the court sat and his dominion was consumed and destroyed forever. The time when the kingdom shall be given to the saints of the Most High.

"He (the antichrist) shall speak pompous words against the Most High, shall persecute (literally: 'wear out') the saints of the Most High, and shall intend to change times and law. Then the saints shall be given into his hand for a time and times and half a time. But the court shall be seated, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and destroy it forever. Then the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people, the saints of the Most High. His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey Him," Dan.7:25-27.

The court sits at the second coming of Christ. The time when the antichrist and his kingdom is finally destroyed and the true and eternal kingdom of God is given to the saints of the Most High. The saints are given over into the hands of the antichrist until this time. The time of the second coming of Christ. No mention at all of most of God's saints escaping out of such persecution via a secret rapture.

The pre-tribulation teachers will say that the saints being persecuted here are the, 'tribulation saints.' The scripture does not say nor infer this but that's what they unilaterally say in order to fit their pre-tribulation rapture model. However, if it is really only talking about the tribulation saints here and not the church, then logically it will only be the tribulation saints (and not the church) who are then given the kingdom once the court sits and the antichrist is destroyed also. Because the passage makes no distinction between the saints of the Most High who are persecuted by the antichrist, and the saints who are then given the kingdom. Both groups are spoken about in the same vein. And we cannot unilaterally apply our own meaning to one group without it affecting the other also.




10. The focus of the Lord's second coming is Jesus Himself, not the rapture of the church. And yet, in much of the pre-tribulation rapture preaching and literature the focus is upon us and the fact that we are being raptured. The Lord's glorious coming seems to come second in importance. And the judgement seat of Christ is often bypassed, with the idea that we will all just get raptured straight into heaven.

Though not a direct scriptural argument against the pre-tribulation version of the rapture, it often seems to be a fruit of it. It turns the attention and emphasis on us, rather than upon the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Though this may speak more of some of those who promote the theory, it does seem to be a common theme in pre-tribulation teachings, which does not reflect well upon the theory. Unlike how the Bible pictures things:

"And the LORD alone will be exalted in that day," Is.2:11.

The only exaltation that anyone else will experience on that day will be for whatever the Lord has accomplished through them. Nothing more and nothing less. So, that the glory will be the Lord's. A glory they will share in, if they have been an instrument of His grace here upon the earth. The Lord is coming to be glorified in His saints. Not to glorify them apart from Himself. We share in His glory, and in His glory alone.

And so, any focus on the coming of the Lord should be about the Lord Jesus Himself. Not so much what's going to happen to us. And one thing is for sure, when the Lord Jesus returns, we're not all going to be taken into heaven immediately. No, we must all stand before His judgement seat first to see who is a true disciple and who is not. Who is a wise virgin or servant, and who is a foolish one. Who is God's sheep, and who is a goat who thinks they're a sheep.

One of the main problems with the pre-tribulation rapture theory is that it usually completely bypasses this crucial event. God's people appearing before His judgement seat. Again, this could be down to the people who are presenting the theory, but it does not reflect well on it. The fact we must appear before Christ's judgement seat should be impressed upon the minds of His people, not ignored as it usually is. Especially by people who only talk about us being raptured straight into heaven. It is probably going to be the most important day of our lives, and yet most people rarely think about it or know exactly what is going to happen on that day. I've written more about this in a separate document ("The Judgement Seat [Bema] of Christ").




11. The pre-tribulation rapture theory creates different categories of believer and introduces confusion into how people will be saved during the tribulation period.

The scriptures indicate that there are different categories of believers in the sense of Old Testament saints and New Testament saints, but that they all become one bride and one body at the return of the Lord Jesus Christ. Together they are perfected in Christ (Heb.11:39-40). So, for example, the 144,000 bond-servants of God and the great multitude who had come out of the tribulation spoken of in Revelation 7 were different perspectives of the same entity or group. They are both pictures of all the redeemed saints of God. The elect of God in their fullness or entirety. I'll look at this in more detail a little further on.

The pre-tribulation rapture theory however, creates different categories of believer that they say arise after the return of Christ for His church, who get treated differently to the church and seem to get saved differently or sort of saved depending upon how we view the word 'saved.'

The pre-tribulation rapture theory states that the 'Age of the church,' ends with the rapture. The Holy Spirit is removed from the earth along with the church. So, anyone who comes to the faith thereafter is not a part of the church or the bride of Christ. They are either the 144,000 Jewish believers who get sealed just after the rapture of the church, or the, 'tribulation saints,' who get saved as a result of the ministry of the 144,000 Jewish evangelists.

The problem with this is how exactly do these people get sealed or saved at all? Bearing in mind it is the Holy Spirit who both sanctifies and seals believers, and according to the pre-tribulation rapture teachers, He has been removed from the earth once the, 'age of grace,' is at an end? So, how could they be sanctified or sealed if the Holy Spirit is not active in the earth at that time? And another issue that arises is, why would the 144,000 Jews be sealed, but not the 'tribulation saints' who come to faith through their ministry? Is this fair or right? Considering that according to the pre-tribulation rapture model, both groups are walking with God and suffering terrible persecution for His Name's sake at that time?

"Then I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God. And he cried with a loud voice to the four angels to whom it was granted to harm the earth and the sea, saying, 'Do not harm the earth, the sea, or the trees till we have sealed the bond-servants of our God on their foreheads.' And I heard the number of those who were sealed. One hundred and forty-four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel were sealed," Rev.7:2-4.

But no mention of the, 'tribulation saints,' being sealed. So, presumably it's ok to harm them with the forthcoming judgements of God, as long as they're not of the 144,000 Jewish believers?

Later on, at the blowing of the fifth trumpet, locusts are sent upon the earth to sting and torment the inhabitants of the earth. And it specifically says that they should not harm anyone who has the seal of God upon their forehead. But if the, 'tribulation saints,' are not sealed, does this mean that they will actually be tormented along with the people of this world? Just the 144,000 Jews won't be? This does not sound like anything our God would do. These are some of the dilemmas posed by trying to fit the pre-tribulation rapture theory into the Bible.

Other dilemmas come about when considering how individuals get saved, or indeed how they live for Christ in the midst of a God-hating world where evil and selfishness is now unrestrained? We are told by the pre-tribulation rapture teachers that straight after the rapture of the church, 144,000 Jewish evangelists miraculously get saved and then embark upon a worldwide evangelism push in the midst of terrible persecution, resulting in the salvation of multitudes of, 'tribulation saints.' But how do they do that without the Holy Spirit?

If Peter, James and John and the rest of the apostles desperately needed the Holy Spirit's empowering and enabling in order to reach their neighbours in Jerusalem, let alone in Judea, Samaria and to the ends of the earth, how on earth are these 144,000 so-called 'Jewish evangelists' going to do the same thing without the Holy Spirit? And in much more difficult times than in the days when Jesus had just ascended into heaven?

The 12 disciples had spent 3 years or so with Jesus being discipled personally by the Son of God. They had seen His great miracles and heard Him teach with authority. They had even seen and spoken with Jesus after He was resurrected from the dead. And yet after all these things, they were still all huddled together in a room for fear of the Jewish leaders, until the Holy Spirit came upon them. How do we suppose these 144,000 Jewish evangelists are going to do what the early disciples failed to do without the empowering of the Holy Spirit?

And how will they be saved, with no Holy Spirit to warn, convict and reach the heart of man? We are unable to even hear God's voice unless the Holy Spirit enables us to. How on earth are these people going to hear from God in order to forsake all and follow Him, if we cannot in a time when the Holy Spirit has been poured out and we are not being hunted down by an unrestrained and evil world? How can we insist on the role of the Holy Spirit in the salvation of man now, yet seemingly ignore it when presenting the pre-tribulation rapture theory? As if they won't need the Holy Spirit during the tribulation time? Surely that would be a time when they would need the Holy Spirit more than ever?

It says of the 144,000 that they have not been defiled with women, they possess no deceit and are without fault before God and His throne (Rev.14:4-5). So, they are fully sanctified. But how can they be without the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit in their lives? It's impossible. We could not do it and nor could they. And how could evangelism have any success without the Holy Spirit's enabling and empowerment? It's just not going to happen.

The scripture does not directly call the 144,000 'Jewish evangelists,' or 'Jewish missionaries.' Those are terms we use to describe them. But the Bible does not. Instead, it calls them, "The bond-servants of our God," Rev.7:3, sealed from, "all the tribes of the children of Israel." A phrase that can be understood in different ways, both naturally and spiritually.

Most people automatically consider the 144,000 to be naturally Jewish because they are said to be from, "all the tribes of the children of Israel," and then a breakdown is given of each tribe with 12,000 being numbered in each one. At first glance, this seems like a logical progression of thought. Only, when I started really thinking about it, I found myself starting to question this type of reasoning. Firstly, as I've already pointed out, why would the Jews be sealed and protected from God's judgements, whilst the gentile 'tribulation saints' are not? That doesn't make any sense. Our God does not show favouritism.

Then the fact that there would be 12,000 numbered from each tribe. So not 12,001? Or 11,999? Exactly 12,000 from each tribe? That seemed a bit far-fetched and not really realistic if they were to be taken as actual numbers of people in each tribe. Whenever the tribes of Israel were numbered in the Old Testament, some tribes like Judah would have more whilst others like Benjamin would have quite a few less. No two tribes would ever have the same number of people in them, let alone all 12 tribes having exactly 12,000 in each. With no variation at all. Of course, God can do whatever He wants. And if He wants to save exactly 12,000 from each tribe then that's entirely His prerogative and right to do so. But on the surface of it, it looks odd and does not really fit into how things normally happen in our natural fallen world.

I thought, "the book of Revelation is full of symbolism and picture language. Is it not much more reasonable to think that these numbers were representing something more so than detailing actual physical numbers of people?" After all the book of Revelation is not like the book of Numbers where exact numerical values of physical people are important and are therefore written down. But the book of Revelation by contrast, is all about symbolism and allegory. And numbers quoted in the book can be taken both literally or as symbolic, depending upon the context. Certainly, the more I looked at it, the more it seemed reasonable to see the whole narrative of the 144,000 as a spiritual message, rather than a natural description of events taking place. With the numbers quoted having spiritual significance rather than just being physical numbers that had no spiritual meaning? Considering most Jews are unable to trace their lineage back to their original tribes these days. Of course, God knows who belongs to who. But it seemed unlikely. Far more likely in my mind was that this was symbolism, especially considering it is located within a book that is literally full of symbolism.

The number 12 in the Bible represents fullness or completeness. There were 12 tribes of Israel and 12 apostles of the Lamb. The New Jerusalem in heaven has 12 gates, each made of a single pearl that are each manned by an angel (Rev.21:12). So, 12 angels in total. And over each gate is the one of the names of the 12 tribes of Israel. The walls of the city are 144 cubits high which is 12 multiplied by itself. And the wall of the city had 12 foundation stones, and on them were written the 12 names of the 12 apostles of the Lamb (Rev.21:14). The city itself is described as being 12,000 furlongs square (Rev.21:16-17). All speaking of fullness and completeness of the tribes of Israel, the apostles of the Lamb and the New Jerusalem which is now ready to come down out of heaven from God.

So, 12 tribes of 12,000 each, totalling 144,000 seemed to represent the fullness of all the tribes of Israel, rather than being exact calculations of how many physical people will be sealed from each individual tribe of Israel. The fullness of all the tribes of Israel being another way of saying, every person who is ever going to be saved throughout history. Or everyone whom God has foreknown and predestined to be saved which might be a more theological way of putting it. The fullness of all the tribes of Israel basically implies the whole lot of them. Effectively, once the last person who is going to be saved, is saved, then each tribe of Israel has its 12,000 completed. We have the fullness of all the tribes of Israel. And once the fullness has been filled, then God seals His people and starts to pour out His judgements upon the earth. Upon those who are not sealed and who are not His people.

We see the same pattern happening in Ezekiel 9, where God commands all those who, "sigh and groan over all the abominations which are being committed in its (Jerusalem's) midst," (Ez.9:4), to be sealed with a mark on their foreheads, in order that they might be spared from the severe judgement He then unleashes upon the rest who are not sealed. Exactly the same principle and I would say, a picture of what is also being described in the book of Revelation. The sealing of God's genuine servants before His Divine wrath and great judgement is then unleashed.

And then there was the phrase, "all the tribes of Israel." It doesn't say, "the tribes of Israel," but it says, "ALL the tribes of Israel." It includes the Greek word 'pases' which translates as, 'all, the whole, every kind of.' So, all, the whole, or every kind of the tribes of Israel. All of them. Not leaving anyone out. Did that mean all the natural tribes of Israel? Or did it mean all the spiritual tribes of Israel? Surely the latter given the inclusion of the word 'pases' in the text? Considering, Paul the apostle says,

"For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, 'In Isaac your seed shall be called.' That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed," Rom.9:6-8.

Not all Israel are Israel, but the children of the promise are counted as Abraham's seed, not the natural children, the children of the flesh. So, that means that those who are in the faith are of Israel, more so than the natural descendants of Abraham. So, how can the 144,000 be just referring to the Jewish people of the flesh only, if gentiles are considered spiritual Israelites who have been grafted into God's Israel? If the 144,000 represent all the tribes of Israel, then surely they must include all believers in Christ, both Jew and Gentile?

My personal opinion is that the 144,000 who are sealed from, "All the tribes of Israel," represent the fullness of the Israel of God that is both Jew and Gentile, one in Christ.

"For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God," Rom.2:29.

I know at this point, a number of people will immediately accuse me of promoting replacement theology and brand me a heretic worthy of burning at the stake. But I do not hold to replacement theology. The church has not replaced Israel. I certainly see a place for the Jewish nation in the end-times prophetic plan of God. And I have a love for the Jewish people, bearing in mind they were the means by which Christ came for us in the first place. But it is clear from the scripture that the Israel of God is both Jew and Gentile one in Christ, and not the Jewish nation alone.

The promises of God were made to Abraham and his seed (singular), not to seeds (plural).

"Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, 'And to seeds,' as referring to many, but rather to one, 'And to your seed,' that is Christ," Gal.3:16.

So, the promises made by God were given to Abraham and to his seed (singular) who will come after him. Not to the church, but to Abraham's seed. The Son of promise who was Isaac by type, but Christ in reality. So, the promises were given to Abraham and to his Jewish seed who came after him, that is Christ.

So, Christ is the heir of the promises of God, the Jewish heir and the Archetype of the Israel of God. So, the promises were not made to the church directly. They were made to Christ. But we become partakers of the promises through being found in Christ who is the heir of the promises. As do any Jewish person who comes to the faith in their own Messiah. We all become, "Joint heirs with Christ," (Rom.8:17). And whether Jew or Gentile according to the flesh, we all become citizens of the Israel of God by virtue of being found in Christ who is the Israel of God. So, none of us have any reason or cause for boasting that we are of the Israel of God in and of ourselves (Rom.11:18). The only reason we can rejoice in God that we are of the Israel of God is by virtue of the fact that He has graciously included us in His Son Jesus, who is the Israel of God personified.

"For as many as are the promises of God, in Him they are yes; therefore also through Him is our Amen to the glory of God through us," II Cor.1:20.

So, every promise God made throughout the Bible, in Christ they are yes and amen to the glory of God. So, this includes all the blessings given to Abraham. The calling of God was and still is upon the children of Israel according to the flesh (Rom.11:29). But only Jesus as Abraham's seed has fulfilled that calling. And the Jews who become partakers of that calling will be the ones who recognise Jesus as their own Messiah. Something that God will reveal to them at Christ's second coming (Zech.12:10-13:1), when God supernaturally grafts the natural branches, the believing Jews, back into their own olive tree. An olive tree which is Christ, not the Jewish nation.

He is the true vine, the root and the offspring of David (Rev.22:16). The Jewish nation of the flesh is not the root and offspring of David. They do not possess in themselves the richness and the fatness that comes from the life that is within the root of the olive tree (Rom.11:17). No, they are the natural branches that are connected to the olive tree. The natural branches that got broken off due to their unbelief. But the natural branches that God will graft back through their faith in Him at the time of the end.

Any Gentile who is in Christ is actually a Jew spiritually speaking. A Jew of the spirit rather than a Jew of the flesh (I Cor.10:18). Not someone who 'mutilates' the flesh but the heart is untouched. Paul refers to those who just undergo a physical circumcision without experiencing a spiritual cutting in the heart by the Holy Spirit, as being of, "the mutilation," (Phil.3:2). A derogatory term referring to those who boast in the things of the flesh, but who do not have the Spirit of God in their hearts. No, those who have been circumcised in heart, literally cut in the heart by the Holy Spirit, these are the spiritual Jews, the true followers of Abraham who is the father of their faith.

"Circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ," Col.2:11.

They may be Gentiles according to the flesh but are grafted into the true vine which is Jesus (not the Jewish nation). Jesus declared that He was the true vine. We often read that and miss the significance of what He was actually saying. He was talking to men who considered Israel to be the vine of God. Yet here was a young Jewish rabbi declaring that he was in fact, the true vine of God. The true Israel of God. Not the Jewish nation according to the flesh.

The Israelite nation was called to be God's vine, but time and again they failed miserably in that calling. As the prophet Jeremiah put it:

"Yet I had planted you a noble vine, a seed of highest quality. How then have you turned before Me into the degenerate plant of an alien vine?" Jer.2:21.

Did God not realise that Israel would turn herself into the degenerate plant of an alien vine? Did He not realise that He would give His vine Israel over to punishment and ruin? Of course, He did. Because God's true vine would be the person of Jesus Christ. A Jew of the flesh, descended from Abraham, but more importantly, a Jew of the heart. A true Israelite in whom there was or is nothing false. The one who called Himself, the True Vine.

"I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser," John 15:1.

Jesus was talking to men who knew the Law. They knew that Israel was supposed to be God's vine. And yet here was Jesus declaring that actually He was the true vine, not so much the Israelite nation. Jesus said, "I am the true vine." The words He used mirror the words Jeremiah used to describe the noble vine that God had planted. As it says literally in the Hebrew, "A noble vine of true seed," (Jer.2:21) or as Jesus put it, "The true vine." He was the true and noble vine, whereas the nation of Israel turned before God into the degenerate plant of an alien vine instead. Something we all would do as well if left to our own devices.

When Jesus said that He was the true vine, He was not just painting a nice visual image for us to think about. No, He was connecting Himself to Jeremiah's prophecy and saying that choice vine of true seed was actually Him. He was the true vine of God, and as such, He was the Israel of God also. The Israel of God who also came out of Egypt (Matt.2:15) and was planted like a tender shoot in the land of Israel (Is.53:2).

Jesus is both the true vine and the true Israelite in whom the Israel of God will be found. All who are found in Christ are of the Israel of God, because Jesus is the Israel of God. As we are of Christ because we are in Christ.

The scripture says that the 144,000 who are sealed are,

"Of all the tribes of the children of Israel," Rev.7:4.

Surely that includes both the Jewish believers and the Gentile believers who are spiritual Jews through faith in Jesus Christ? All the tribes of the children of Israel surely includes all Gentile believers as well as Jewish ones? This is not saying that the church has replaced Israel of the flesh. God still has plans and purposes for the Israelite nation in the last days. He is not finished with them. They are beloved for the sake of the fathers, and the gifting and the calling of God are irrevocable (Rom.11:28-29). But I am pretty sure the 144,000 spoken of in Revelation 7 and 14 represent the entire community of the redeemed. The fullness of all of God's people throughout history. They are referred to as being,
"Redeemed from the earth," Rev.14:3,

and as having been,

"Redeemed from mankind as firstfruits for God and the Lamb," Rev.14:4.

The redeemed are most naturally interpreted to refer to all the redeemed, both Jews and Gentiles. And the church is referred to as the first-fruits to God (Jam.1:8), not so much a category of Jewish believers in the tribulation who are more like 'second fruits' than first-fruits, as the church, the 'first-fruits' has already been harvested from the earth.

The 144,000 are called, "The bond-servants of our God," Rev.7:3. Bond-servants is a phrase associated with all disciples of Jesus Christ and not just a special group of Jewish men. The word 'bond-servants' is used throughout the book of Revelation to speak of Christians, redeemed believers (Rev.1:1, 2:20, 19:2, 19:5 and 22:3) and not just an ethnic Jewish remnant. Why would it just be different in this one time? If we are a bond-servant of God than we are included in the 144,000.

In Revelation chapter 13, Satan has all his followers sealed with his seal. It would make sense that God would also seal all of His followers too, and not just a certain category of Jewish ones. Not that God copies Satan. No, God announces His sealing here in the book of Revelation 2,000 years ago, and Satan copies Him during his time during the rise of his man the antichrist.

As we have already mentioned, the image of sealing comes from Ezekiel chapter 9 where God seals those who,

"Sigh and cry over all the abominations that are done within it (Jerusalem)" Ez.9:4,

God makes a separation between those who are troubled by idolatry in their hearts from those who practice idolatry or who are unmoved by it. This seems to be a pointer towards the sealing of the 144,000 in Revelation 7, the separation of those who truly love and follow God from the heart, and those who do not. Not just a separation within a Jewish remnant but a separation between all people who sigh and cry over the abominations being committed in God's house.

Also, I see that John follows a pattern we see in previous chapters of Revelation. In chapter 5 he is told about a lion, but turns around and sees a lamb. They are described differently, but they are one and the same entity representing the same person who is Jesus Christ. And now in chapter 7, John hears the number 144,000 (Rev.7:4), but then sees a great multitude which nobody could count (Rev.7:9). They are described differently, but they are the same entity. The fullness of God's redeemed people.

Then there was the way the tribes were listed. This particular listing is unique in the Bible and does not include the tribe of Dan. Surely if it were a listing of all the natural tribes of Israel it would have to include the tribe of Dan also? The only reason it doesn't must be to send a spiritual message? Because Dan as a tribe was much associated with idol worship in the Old Testament (Judges 18:30-31 and I Kings 12:28-30), and perhaps this was God's way of showing He is coming for a pure church, not one riddled with idolatry?

Also, Judah is mentioned first rather than the first-born son of Reuben. Most likely because Jesus descended from this tribe and was the Lion of the tribe of Judah. So, He is mentioned first. Also, the fact that Judah would be the first tribe to set out in their journeying in the wilderness. Before any other tribe, the standard of the tribe of Judah would set out first (Num.10:14).

The Bible often categorises people according to certain individuals, tribes or nations mentioned in its pages. So, for example a person who hated his brother would be like Cain who murdered his brother (I John 3:12). Jesus told the Jews who were arguing with Him that they were the sons of Satan, not the sons of God as they thought, because they reflected Satan's ways in their hearts rather than God's ways (John 8:41-44). Or Nathaniel was called a, "true Israelite," because he had no guile or deceit in him (John 1:47). And a true Israelite in God's eyes was not someone just circumcised in the flesh, but someone who was circumcised in the heart.

The Bible talks about Levites being purified and offering sacrifices to God in the end times. We know that animal sacrifices and the Levitical office according to the Mosaic Law had been made obsolete through the sacrifice of Jesus. So, who are these Levites being spoken of in Malachi and Ezekiel? Isn't it reasonable to think that a person would be considered to be of the tribe of Levi spiritually speaking, if they do the things the true Levites did in the Old Testament? I believe this is what the Bible teaches.

There are two prophetic lists of the tribes of Israel given in the Old Testament that speak of their futures. One given by Jacob to his sons in Genesis 49 and one given through Moses recorded in Deuteronomy 33. And both lists are very different in content and tone. The one given by Jacob to his sons in Genesis 49 comes across as very negative in the main and seems to focus on the natural children, their natural failings and the consequences of them. Pulling no punches, describing Simeon and Levi for example as cruel brothers and cursing their anger for its fierceness, and their wrath for its cruelty.

And yet in Deuteronomy 33, Levi or the Levites are praised as those who stood for God at the testing time when they chose to obey God over the natural loyalty they had to their own families. And because of this, they are given the role to teach God's laws to His people and were set apart to minister before the Lord at the times of Moses.

It seems to me that the Genesis 49 list is referring to the natural tribes of Israel, whereas the list given in Deuteronomy 33 seems to be referring to the spiritual tribes of Israel. So, if you are one who faithfully walks with God, prioritising Him over everything, even family members, and you live as if God is your sole inheritance, then you will be a son or daughter of Levi. Of the spiritual tribe of Levi. And if you are of Reuben, you may live and not die, but you won't have much more said in your favour. More like one of those believers who make it into the kingdom as through the fire but only just (I Cor.3:15). It's an interesting perspective, one which I need to look into more to see whether this is indeed a true revelation of what God is saying to us, or not.

Other problems that arise with the pre-tribulation rapture model are how do people get saved during the tribulation period? Some people say they'll be like the Old Testament saints who put their faith in Jesus by obeying God with an attitude of faith towards Him. But they don't get born-again and remain unregenerate because the Holy Spirit has been removed from the earth. That's a possibility but unlikely. Faith is a gift of the Holy Spirit (I Cor.12:9 and Rom.12:3) so how will people be able to walk by faith if the Holy Spirit is not present helping them to do so? And God's ultimate command is to love Him and to love our neighbour. It is impossible to do this without experiencing the love of God shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit first. But again, how is this going to happen when the Holy Spirit is absent?

Other people say regarding the 'tribulation saints' that they will be judged upon the basis of how they treated the 144,000 Jewish evangelists during the tribulation time. Again, we have made the point previously that it doesn't seem to matter how they treated their own Gentile 'tribulation saints', only how they treated the 144,000 Jewish evangelists, according to the pre-tribulation rapture model. Which is not in keeping with God's law to love our neighbour as ourselves. Our Gentile neighbour as well as our Jewish neighbour.

And the Bible is clear that we are saved by faith, not by our works (Eph.2:8). So, how can we be saying that in the case of the 'tribulation saints,' actually they are saved by their works? Of course, a genuine faith produces good works. So, good works are the evidence that we have a faith that is alive and active. And such evidence will be required at the judgement in order to back up our claims to be in the faith. But as we've already said, how can the 'tribulation saints' be in faith to start with, if the Holy Spirit has been removed and they are effectively unregenerate? Unless the idea of the Holy Spirit being removed is in the sense of the reversal of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit was outpoured upon all flesh? But the Holy Spirit is still around as it was in the time before Pentecost, coming upon or inspiring certain people as God chooses from time to time? But just wasn't outpoured upon all flesh as it is today?

Other people recognise these contradictions which are normally glossed over, but they then say that during the tribulation period people will go back to offering animal sacrifices in order to obey God because the 'age of grace' is now at an end. Going back to living under the Mosaic Law. This is probably the worst of all options as the Bible makes clear that the Law acted as our tutor in order to point towards and lead us to Christ. Towards having faith in Christ. And that once this job was fulfilled and we were in faith in Christ Jesus, we had no more need of such a tutor (Gal.3:23-25).

"For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins," Heb.10:4.

The sacrifices of animals only happened up to the offering of Christ, and served as pointers towards Christ as the ultimate sacrifice all the other ones were designed to point towards. But now that Christ has been sacrificed, there is no longer any need for such sacrifices. Their purpose is complete. They are obsolete and fading away.

"When He said, 'A new covenant,' He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear," Heb.8:13.

The pre-tribulation rapture teachers unilaterally create a scenario where people have to exist under something else other than the new covenant during the period of the tribulation because they say the church age or the age of grace is now at an end. Even though Jesus has not yet begun to rule and reign as king upon the earth. So, they create a gap between the 'age of grace' and the outpouring of God's wrath at the second coming of Christ, when we see no such obvious gap indicated in the Bible. But it is clear in the Bible that once the new covenant is enacted, it will continue forever. Not be temporarily suspended for a period of 7 years during the time of the tribulation.

"I will make an everlasting covenant with them that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; and I will put the fear of Me in their hearts so that they will not turn away from Me," Jer.32:40.

And,

"Now the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, even Jesus our Lord," Heb.13:20.

The New Covenant is an everlasting covenant sealed in the blood of Jesus Christ. It is not a covenant that can be suspended for a time and then re-introduced. And nor is it even a covenant that finishes with the rapture of the church. No, it is an eternal covenant. One that will never be suspended, replaced or finished. It is God's eternal covenant with His people.