The rapid changes we have experienced in 2020 has caused many of us to think more about the end times. Think about how dramatically the world has changed since March. It makes one wonder what changes are coming in the days ahead. Will the pace of change continue? Will it slow down? Will it accelerate moving rapidly toward the end of the age? I am optimistic about our future. God always takes care of His people. But I also see trends that alarm me: moral decline in society, increased governmental control, pressures toward globalization, and compromise made by the ecumenical move to one-world religion.i These developments point toward the end of the age prophesied in Scripture. They awaken in us questions that need to be answered from a reliable source. For us that source is the word of God.
Today we will explore one question. It a difficult question to answer: Will Christians go through the Tribulation Period? Or we might put it this way: Will the church go through the Tribulation Period that is prophesied in the book of Revelation? If so, will it go through the whole seven years or just the first three and a half years? Will all the church go through the tribulation or only those Christians who were not ready for the rapture? There are many complications involved in attempting an answer to the question.
The three dominate theories that offer an answer are:
(1) The pre-tribulation position which says the church will be raptured before the seven-year tribulation period begins.
(2) The post-tribulation position believes the church will be caught up at the end of that period.
(3) And the mid-tribulation rapture theory says the church will be raptured halfway through the tribulation period.
There are good, knowledgeable people in each of these camps. I respect the scholarship and sincerity of all those leaders. I don’t consider myself an expert on eschatology (the branch of theology that studies the last things), but I am a student of the Bible and this subject constitutes a large portion of Scripture. For the next couple of Sundays, we will search out an answer to our question.
Before assessing these positions and attempting an answer, we need to establish some foundational concepts. We do not have time to do this in depth. But three vital issues must be considered if we are to proceed effectively. We will address the first one today and the other two next week. Then we will explore Scripture for at least a tentative answer to the question. The three foundational concepts are:
I. The Method to Use for Interpreting Bible Prophecy.
II. God’s Purpose for the Tribulation Period.
III. The Mystery of the Church Age.
Our focus today is: The Method to Use for Interpreting Bible Prophecy.
The primary reason there are so many different opinions on this subject is that people are using different methods of interpreting Scripture, and in particular prophetic passages concerning the last days. Hermeneutics is “the discipline that deals with principles of interpretation.”ii A valid hermeneutical method must be consistently applied if we are to makes sense of what the Bible says about the last days. Hermeneutics is a huge subject in itself. Bible colleges and seminaries require at least one course in the hermeneutics. If we get the method of interpretation wrong, we will probably misinterpret biblical passages that inform our answer. It will be like building a house on a crooked, defective foundation. During the history of the church various methods have been used, yielding extremely different results.
The two prevalent methods used in interpreting prophecy are the allegorical and the literal methods. The literal method is often called grammatical-historical method.
The allegorical method minimizes the literal meaning of a passage and looks for a hidden, spiritual meaning. It is influenced by platonic thought. “Plato taught that true reality actually lay behind what appeared to the human eye.”iii What the text actually says is not nearly as important as the allegorical, spiritual meaning assigned to it by the reader. The Jewish scholar, Philo used this method in his interpretation of the Old Testament. Later, the church father, Origin popularized it in Alexandria.iv
The problem with the allegorical method is that the interpretation is open to the subjective whim or imagination of the interpreter. It abandons the common sense of the words and fails to uphold the basic authority of Scripture itself. Using this method, the interpreter can inject his own ideas, justifying them as a higher, more spiritual meaning. There is no objective way to test his interpretation.v This is not a reliable way to interpret the Bible. Therefore, we reject this approach in favor of the literal method.
In contrast to the allegorical method, the literal (grammatical-historical) method interprets Scripture according to the normal meaning of the words and grammar. Before making an application of the passage, the interpreter seeks to understand what the historical writer was saying to the historical audience in that context. In this school of thought there can be many applications of the principles being communicated, but there is only one interpretation. And that interpretation is based on what the author communicated to the listener in his day.
Ramm explains this method in the following way: “The customary, socially-acknowledged designation of a word is the literal meaning of that word. The ‘literal’ meaning of a word is the basic, customary, social designation of that word. The spiritual, or mystical meaning of a word or expression is one that arises after the literal designation and is dependent upon it for its existence. To interpret literally means nothing more or less than to interpret in terms of normal, usual, designation.”vi
Even though the emphasis is on the words, grammar, and context of the biblical author and audience, the interpreter must depend on the Holy Spirit to understand the message of a passage. Paul explains this in 1 Corinthians 2. In verse 14 he wrote, “But the natural man does not receive
the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” To understand Scripture the interpreter must be born of the Spirit (John 3:3) and yielding to the Holy Spirit (Gal. 5:25). Failure to recognize this has produced a plethora of theological errors.vii We need the objective grounding of the literal words inspired in the text by the Spirit, but we also depend on the Holy Spirit to enlighten us as to His message in the passage. This illumination is very different from attaching fanciful interpretations using the allegorical method.viii
The literal method grounds the interpretation in objective, testable data: the historical context, grammar, and the normal meaning of words.ix It leaves the authority of meaning with the Bible itself, rather than the subjective imaginations of the interpreter. Therefore, we embrace this method in interpreting Bible prophecy.
I stated these two methods in simplistic terms to highlight the basic difference between them. In all fairness, the differences are complicated by several factors. While the interpreter should use the literal method rather than the allegorical, there are specific consideration that cannot be ignored. I will mention a few of these.
The New Testament does use typology.x For example, types and shadows are prevalent in the book of Hebrews. In Hebrews 9 the author talks about the Levitical priesthood and the tabernacle. Then in verse 9 he says, “It was symbolic for the present time. . . .” So, we cannot throw out all symbolism and typology. However, just as in this example, we are often told in Scripture that it is symbolic. You will see that happening in the interpretation of dreams by Joseph and by Daniel. Dreams and visions usually have symbolism in them.
Revelation 12 portrays a “fiery red dragon having seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems on his heads.” But in verse 9 we are told that dragon is “that old serpent, called the Devil and Satan.” So, we do not understand the “fiery red dragon” to be a literal dragon. But why do we not interpret it literally? It is because the Scripture specifically tells us not to. If we are not to interpret something literally, the Bible itself will give us clues as to the symbolism being used.xi
There are various genres of literature in the Bible. There are historical narratives, letters, poetry, and parables to name a few. The type of literature being used to convey the message has to be taken into consideration. This adds another layer of complexity to the interpretation process. For example, poetry often uses figures of speech to convey its message. In Psalm 57:4 the author writes, “I am in the midst of lions; I lie among ravenous beasts-- men whose teeth are spears and arrows, whose tongues are sharp swords” (NIV). A literal object (spears and arrows) is used to highlight a figurative meaning (perhaps verbal slander). The psalmist is not saying his enemies literally have spears and arrows for teeth. In this poetic genre we first understand what literal spears and arrows are. But from that imagery, just as we do in our common speech today, we are to understand the figurative meaning along with the emotion associated with that meaning.xii So we have to be cognizant of the literary genre.
The Bible often alerts us to symbolism in the text itself. When introducing a parable, the gospels often say something like, “Another parable He put forth to them, saying: "The kingdom of heaven is like. . . .”xiii That lets us know the media being used and the metaphorical nature of the
message. The words “as” and “like” are often clues that something is being presented to represent something else.
Here is a good general rule for understanding Scripture: If a literal interpretation makes sense and is consistent with the rest of Scripture, then interpret it literally. Don’t try to attach some allegorical meaning to something that can be logically interpreted literally. The allegorical method of interpretation leaves the interpretation open to all kinds of fanciful conclusions generated in the imagination of the reader. We want to simply understand what the historical author wanted to communicate to the historical hearer. Then we can make applications to current situations. The New Testament writers used the literal method of interpreting the Old Testament even though they dealt with types and shadows and figurative language.xiv
Sometimes New Testament writers apply the underlying principle in an Old Testament text to a current situation. In doing that, they are not abandoning the literal interpretation. The original text stands, but an application of the principle is made. For example, in 1 Corinthians 9:9 Paul quotes Deuteronomy 25:4: “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain” Then he applies the principle to financial provision for ministers. The Old Testament passage tells the Israelite to not muzzle the ox. The ox must be allowed to eat from the grain he was threshing.xv The underlying principle is explained in verse 10: “. . . he who plows should plow in hope, and he who threshes in hope should be partaker of his hope.” The NIV says, “they ought to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest.” 1 Timothy 5:18 makes the same application of the passage in Deuteronomy. There the principle is stated in verse 18: “The laborer is worthy of his wages.”
We always begin with a literal interpretation of what is said before we make an application of the principle. So another rule of thumb is this: Make sure you understand what the historical author was saying to the historical audience before you make an application of the underlying principle. If we get sloppy about that we can misinterpret biblical prophecy.
Interpreting prophecy is complicated further by what is known as “the law of double reference.” “The same prophecies frequently have a double meaning, and refer to different events, the one near, the other remote. . . .”xvi There is often a partial fulfillment as a kind of earnest guarantee of the complete fulfillment in the future. For example, the promise made to David in 2 Samuel 7:12-16 was partially fulfilled in Solomon, but ultimately fulfilled in Christ (Heb. 1:5).
Those who use an allegorical method tend to be amillennialists. Millennial is another way of saying one thousand years. When the negative prefix “a” is attached, it means amillennialists do not believe in a literal thousand-year reign as stated in Revelation 20:4. They spiritualize that as merely symbolic. Augustine systemized Origin’s non-literal view of the millennium “into what is known as amillennialism.”xvii Augustine’s book, The City of God, was instrumental in that process. Augustine “taught that the church is the kingdom of God and there would be no literal fulfillment of the promises made to Israel.”xviii That thinking has a profound impact on misinterpreting Bible prophecy. For example, the Catholic Church interprets the book of Revelation as a description of the church age. Using the allegory method, they place the millennial in the past “and therefore something no longer to be anticipated in the future.”xix
Millennialists believe there will be a literal thousand-year reign of Christ on the earth immediately following the tribulation period.xx We take the statements in Revelation 20 about
the thousand-year reign of Christ at face value and accept it for what it says. For us one thousand years, stated in Revelation. 20:1-7, means one thousand years.
So here is a major divide between the results of the allegorical method versus the literal method. Those using the allegorical method attribute Old Testament promises made to Israel as fulfilled in the church. They spiritualize promises made to that nation and rob them of any literal fulfillment. Those using the literal method recognize that many promises are made to the nation of Israel and will be fulfilled exactly as stated.
We can learn something about how to interpret unfulfilled prophecy by examining how prophecy was fulfilled at Christ’s first advent. For example, the prophecy in Micah 5:2 that Messiah would come forth out of Bethlehem was literally fulfilled at the birth of Jesus. The description of events on the cross in Psalm 22 were literally fulfilled. The prediction in verse 18, “They divide My garments among them, And for My clothing they cast lots,” literally happened. The way previous prophecy was fulfilled teaches us how to interpret unfulfilled prophecy. That’s why we embrace the literal method of interpretation.
One final difficulty needs to be mentioned: the volume of prophetic material. It takes a vast knowledge of Scripture to deal with this subject holistically. It is common for people to pull out a few proof texts to defend a position. But there are often numerous passages not being considered.xxi And the text being quoted may not be understood in its literary context. Proof-texting is “quoting biblical passages to prove a doctrine or standard for Christian living without regard for the literary context.”xxii
About 27% of the Bible is prophecy according to The Encyclopedia of Bible Prophecy.xxiii For an answer to our question, we need a sound understanding of that corpus as a whole. That is no small task, especially when many of those passages are difficult to interpret.
In 2 Peter 1:20 we are told, “. . . no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation.” That means each verse must be interpreted in the context of other passages comparing scripture with scripture.xxiv If the interpretation is contrary to the meaning of those other passages, the interpretation is flawed. But to make that comparison we must know and understand what those other passages say. Pulling a few proof texts out of the Bible is altogether insufficient for dealing with the subject.
I am continuing to learn eschatology. I am not able to dot all the “i”s and cross all the “t”s on this subject. Even if a theologian thoroughly understood all the passages in Scripture, his knowledge of the future would still be limited. We currently see through a glass darkly. We all know in part according to 1 Corinthians 13:9. There were things God showed John the Revelator that he was forbidden to share. For example, after hearing a divine revelation in Revelation 10:4, John was about to write down what he heard. But he was then told to seal it up and not write it. No one alive knows that prophetic revelation.
All the theories about the timing of the rapture have unanswered questions.xxv It is a subject that must be approached with humility. The difficulties I have mentioned should not cause us to shy away from the subject. It should inspire diligence, dependence on the Holy Spirit and grace toward those who disagree with us.
You are certainly free to disagree with me on the matter. Bible scholars disagree on when the rapture will occur. There are people I respect who say the church will be caught up before the tribulation period. There are godly people who think the church will go through the whole tribulation period. Others say the rapture will occur it the midpoint of the tribulation. This should never be an issue we would break fellowship over. But it is an important subject in the New Testament. It is our blessed hope and we are to live our lives in joyful anticipation of the event.
I do have a problem with those who say the rapture has already occurred. 1 Thessalonians 4 and other passages tie the rapture with the resurrection. The resurrection is not past. In 2 Timothy 2:18 Paul said that error would spread like cancer and had overthrown the faith of some. The resurrection is not past. The rapture is not past. And it is a serious error to say that it has. Often New Testament believers are reminded to keep it in mind and live with an expectancy of it.
The rapture is not merely a spiritual event. Your physical body will be caught up into the air if you’re still alive when Jesus returns for His bride. That is made abundantly clear in 1 Corinthians 15 and 1 Thessalonians 4.
So, we have rejected the allegorical method of interpretation that attributes to the church all the promises God made to the nation of Israel. We have embraced the disciplines of the literal method of interpretation even though there are challenges in applying it.
Next week we will consider our second and third foundational concepts:
(1) God’s Purpose for the Tribulation Period and
(2) The Mystery of the Church Age.
Then we will access the dominate positions on the timing of the rapture in relation to the Tribulation Period and attempt an answer. May God help us rightly divide His word.
ENDNOTES:
i The signing of “Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together” by Pope Francis and Islamic Grand Imam Leader of Egypt Al-Azhar on February 4, 2019 is an example. See Document on “Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together” signed by His Holiness Pope Francis and the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Ahamad al-Tayyib (Abu Dhabi, 4 February 2019) | Francis (vatican.va).
ii Walter Kaiser, Jr. and Moises Silva, An Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994) 15.
iii E. R. Goodenough, An Introduction to Philo Judaeus, rev. ed. (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1963) as quoted by Klein, Blomberg, Hubbard, Jr., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, 26. Also see Kaiser and Silva, An Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics, 220. Cf.
iv Klein, Blomberg, Hubbard, Jr., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, 26.
v J. Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology, 1958 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973) 4-6.
vi Bernard Ramm, Protestant Biblical Interpretation, (Boston, MA: W. A. Wilde Company, 1950) 64 as quoted by Pentecost Things to Come, 9.
vii “A naturalist allows for nothing supernatural in the Bible or anywhere else.” 27. For an analysis of the three most influential forms of naturalistic interpretation see this text, pages 27-36. These three naturalistic approaches are: rationalism, literary criticism, and cultural relativism. “For the naturalist,” McQuillin writes, “when a clear teaching in Scripture is found to be in conflict with some human way of thinking, revelation must give way” (p. 35).
viii The aim of good interpretation is simple: to get at the ‘plain meaning of the text.’ And the most important ingredient one brings to that task is enlightened common sense.” Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth: A Guide to Understanding the Bible (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1982) 16. This book is an excellent resource for understanding how to interpret the different genres in Scripture.
ix Pentecost Things to Come,11.
x Paul’s use of allegory in Galatians 4:21-31 is particularly problematic. Dwight Pentecost explains this unusual use of allegory as follows: “It must be carefully observed that in Galatians 4:21-31 Paul is not using an allegorical method of interpreting the Old Testament, but was explaining an allegory. These are two entirely different things. Scripture abounds in allegories, whether types, symbols, or parables. These are accepted and legitimate media of communication of thought. They do not call for an allegorical method of interpretation, which would deny the literal or historical antecedent and use the allegory simply as a springboard for the interpreter’s imagination.” Pentecost, Things to Come, 7-8.
xi Revelation 1:20 is another example.
xii Klein, Blomberg, Hubbard, Jr., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, 26. Also see Kaiser and Silva, An Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics, 251.
xiii Matt. 13:24. All Scripture quotes, unless indicated otherwise, are from the New King James Version.
xiv Pentecost Things to Come, 10.
xv “The text reflects the ancient agricultural practice of driving an ox drawing a threshing-sledge over the grain to release the kernels from the stalk. Out of mercy for the laboring animal the Israelites were forbidden to muzzle the ox, so that he might have some ‘material benefit’ from his labor.” Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, The New International Commentary of the New Testament, Stone, Bruce, and Fee, eds. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987) 406-407.
xvi Thomas Hartwell Horne, Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, I, 390 as quoted by Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come, 46.
xvii Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come, 381. Quoting Walvoord, Pentecost writes, “. . . there are no acceptable exponents of amillennialism before Augustine . . . Prior to Augustine, amillennialism was associated with the heresies produced by the allegorizing and spiritualizing school of theology at Alexandria, which not only opposed premillennialism but subverted any literal exegesis of Scripture whatever. . . .” Lewis Chafer details this history: Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology, vol. IV, 1948 (Dallas, TX: Dallas Seminary Press, 1974) 270-284..
xviii Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come, 382.
xix Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology, vol. IV, 1948 (Dallas, TX: Dallas Seminary Press, 1974)
281. The reformers tended to see Revelation as “a prophecy of the history of the church,” although they identified “the Beast and the False Prophet with the papacy in its political and religious aspects.” George Eldon Ladd. A Theology of the New Testament, rev. ed., 1993 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974) 672.
xx At the conclusion of Christ’s millennial reign and the final judgment of the wicked (Rev. 20:7-15) Christ will submit Himself and the kingdom to the Father (1 Cor. 15:28) for the ushering in of the eternal kingdom.
xxi Proof texting is “quoting biblical passages to prove a doctrine or standard for Christian living without regard for the literary context.” William Klein, Craig Blomberg, and Robert Hubbard, Jr., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Nashville, TN: W Publishing Group, 1993) 160.
xxii Klein, Blomberg, Hubbard, Jr., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, 160.
xxiii J. Barton Payne, The Encyclopedia of Bible Prophecy as quoted by Jack Kelley, “How Much of the Bible is Prophecy?” Ask the Bible Teacher. Accessed 12-10-20 at How Much Of The Bible Is Prophecy? – Grace thru faith.
xxiv Since Scripture is inspired and inerrant (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:21) the passages must harmonize for there to be a correct interpretation. “Always insisting that Scripture interprets Scripture, Calvin rejected allegorical interpretation and emphasized the necessity of examining the historical and literary context while comparing Scriptures which treated common Subjects.” David A. Black and David S. Dockery, eds., New Testament Criticism and Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1991) s. v. “New Testament Interpretation: A Historical Survey” by David S. Dockery, 48.
xxv Deut. 29:29: “The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.” We do our best to put our eschatological puzzle together, but when we’re done there are always some missing pieces.
