Introduction
Today we will resume our study of end times. We have been seeking the answer to one question: Will Christians go through the tribulation period?
We have had four session on this subject. The first session focused on hermeneutics, the method we would use to interpret Scripture. In that message we examined two methods: the allegorical method and the literal method. We prefer the literal method because its interpretation is more soundly anchored in what the Bible actually says. In our second session we considered the biblical purpose of the seven-year tribulation period as an important guide for our study. Those two reasons were found to be: the outpouring of wrath on the ungodly gentile nations and the final corrections of Israel to prepare that nation to receive Messiah Jesus. In that study we analyzed Daniel 9:24-27 closely. In our third message we weighed the pros and cons of a variant of the pretribulation rapture position known as partial or split rapture. That study led to a conclusion that the rapture will probably include all members of the church living at that time. However, many in the visible church may be tares rather than wheat.i Those who have not been genuinely transformed by the grace of God will not be raptured.
Those three messages prepared us to consider the strengths and weaknesses of the three main theories by futurists on the timing of the rapture: the pretribulation, the midtribulation, and the posttribulation positions. In our last message we identified major strengths in the pretribulation theory.
We discussed 5 strengths of the pretribulation teaching:
1. It recognizes the two-fold biblical purpose of the tribulation period.
2. It organizes of the whole biblical revelation on eschatology in a logical, unified system.
3. It seems to follow the sequence in the book of Revelation.
4. It offers a meaningful explanation of the purpose for the rapture.
5. It effectively supports the biblical issue of imminence.
Today we will talk about the weaknesses of that position.
1. 2 Thessalonians 1:3-10 seems to place the rapture with the second coming of Christ.
2. The pretribulation interpretation of 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 is unconvincing.
3. The relatively recent articulation of the pretribulation position is considered a weakness by some. I will challenge that assumption, but we should consider it.
4. Additional complaints against common applications of this position will also be discussed. These concerns are not so much against the theory itself as the way it is often applied.
5. The way the New Testament uses three Greek words in reference to the coming of the Lord points toward a posttribulation position.
I. 2 THESS. :3-10 seems to place the RAPTURE WITH THE 2ND COMING OF CHRIST.
As we read that passage allow it to speak to you concerning the timing of the rapture.
“We are bound to thank God always for you, brethren, as it is fitting, because your faith grows exceedingly, and the love of every one of you all abounds toward each other, 4 so that we ourselves boast of you among the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that you endure, 5 which is manifest evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you also suffer; 6 since it is a righteous thing with God to repay with tribulation those who trouble you, 7 and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, 8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes, in that Day, to be glorified in His saints and to be admired among all those who believe, because our testimony among you was believed.”ii
Notice the first “when” in the middle of verse 7: “when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, 8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God. . . .” That is clearly a description of the 2nd Coming to earth described in Revelation 19.iii
Now look at the second “when” in verse 10: “when He comes, in that Day, to be glorified in His saints and to be admired among all those who believe. . . .” This “when” is linked with the previous “when” with the phrase “in that Day.” At the same time the Lord comes “in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God,” He also comes, in that Day, to be glorified in His saints and to be admired among all those who believe. . . .”iv We can’t say that refers to tribulation saints because Paul specifically includes the Thessalonian readers in the last part of verse 10: “because our testimony among you was believed.”
Pretribulationists might argue that the Lord will be glorified in His saints when they come back with Him having been in heaven for seven years. The argument is that this passage is not specifically dealing with the timing of the rapture but with the return of the Lord with His saints (Jude 1:14; Rev. 19:14).v While that explanation is possible, the natural reading of the text would suggest a posttribulation rapture happening in conjunction with the second coming.
The promised reward translated “rest” in verse 7 “commonly denotes relief from some type of affliction” in the New Testament. Gene Green writes, “The promise given to these believers who have suffered so much at the hands of their persecutors (see v. 4) is that God will reward them with relief at the time of the revelation of the Lord Jesus (v. 7b).vi The reward seems to come in conjunction with the destruction of their persecutors. 2 Thessalonians 1:3-10 seems to support a posttribulation position.
II. The PRETRIBULATION interpretation of 2 THESS. 2:1-12 is UNCONVINCING.
We do not have time to fully expound the passage, but we must at least deal with it enough to demonstrate the difficulty it poses for the pretribulation position.
Follow with me as we read 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2.
“Now, brethren, concerning the coming [parousia] of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, [topic is about our gathering to him which sounds like the rapture], we ask you, 2 not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. 3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, [That’s a pretty straight forward statement] 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. 5 Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? 6 And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. [the language in that verse indicates Christ’s second coming back to earth in which He destroys His enemies]. 9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, 12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”
We can only make a few comments about three elements of this passage.
(1) In verse 1 Paul introduces the subject as “the coming [parousia] of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him.”vii That seems to point to the rapture and Paul’s teaching in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.viii It is helpful that Paul states his subject explicitly.
(2) In verse 2 the concern being addressed is the misinformation that “the day of Christ had come.” The NIV says correctly, “the day of the Lord has already come.” This is difficult to interpret because we do not have the details of the error that caused the disturbance that Paul is addressing.ix The Thessalonians had that information, so it was not necessary for Paul to explain this phrase more fully.
In the light of what Paul taught in his previous letter, the logical interpretation is that the false teaching was that the rapture has already occurred, and they missed it. That would certainly be an upsetting thought.x It is easy to understand their receptivity to a message like that considering the heavy persecution they were experiencing (2 Thess. 1:4-5). It must have felt like something was wrong for their lives to be so difficult. With the limited information we have, we proceed cautiously with the assumption that they had been misled to believe the rapture had already happened and they were not counted “worthy” to be a part of that glorious event. xi
(3) Paul’s instruction in verse 3 is the key point of our current discussion. There he says, “Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition.” Of course, “the man of sin” is the Antichrist who will rise to power during the tribulation period.
That statement poses a serious problem for the pretribulation position. Here is a sign—something that must occur before the coming of the Lord. Paul then describes a falling away and the emergence of the Antichrist that will occur during the tribulation period. Then in verse 8 he follows that with a description of Christ’s coming in power destroying His enemies.
This verse weakens the insistence that imminence means there are no signs to be fulfilled before the rapture.xii And that weakens the pretribulation position. A simple reading of this passage would point to a posttribulation position.
Pretribulationists Schuyler English, and more recently Andy Woods, have tried to counter this by saying the word translated falling away [apostasia] in verse 3 “should be translated as ‘departure’ [and taken to mean ‘physical departure,’] thus signifying the same event as the ‘rapture’ in 1 Thess. 4:17, but there is no [or very little] linguistic basis for such a view.”xiii In fact, pretribulationist John Walvoord admits, “the word probably refers to doctrinal defection of the special character that will be revealed in the day of the Lord.” He acknowledges that English’s interpretation of apostasia as a reference to the rapture “has not met with general acceptance by either pretribulationists or posttribulationists.”xiv Andy Woods bases part of his argument on the fact that several older translations (Latin Vulgate, Wycliffe Bible, Tyndale, Geneva Bible, etc.) simply translated apostasia with the phrase “departure” or “departing.” But his conclusion that it was “communicating physical departure” is flawed. That could be taken either as a physical departure or a spiritual departure.xv If Paul had intended to say rapture, he could have been very clear by using the same Greek word he used in 1 Thessalonians 4:17: harpazo.
Other pretribulationist scholars translate apostasia as a falling away or rebellion but use other arguments to explain the posttribulation interpretation away.xvi For example, building on previous teaching by Charles Giblin, Craig Blaising thinks Paul’s ellipsis in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 means something like “the Day of the Lord will not have arrived” rather than the common translations like “that Day will not come.” He then contends that Paul is simply giving “the qualitative aspects of the Day of the Lord,” rather than providing chronological eschatological events.xvii However, this strains the reading of the text and the value of the word “first” (proton) in that verse. The argument is not convincing. Lewis Chafer dismisses the problem by simply saying the Day of the Lord is “that extended period of a thousand years long predicted.”xviii But surely the Thessalonians were not disturbed because they thought the Millennial had already come. Although the passage is difficult, the pretribulationists’ arguments on this passage are disappointing.
Pretribulationists also bolster their position by saying the restrainer mentioned in verse 6-7 is the Holy Spirit operating in the church. Therefore, when the church is raptured that restraining influence is removed and the Antichrist emerges. While this is an excellent guess as who the restrainer is in this passage, we are not told in Scripture who it is. Every identification of the restrainer is only an educated guess since the identity is not stated in the Bible. It has to be someone very powerful since it restrains Satan and his program. For that reason, it is most likely a reference to God the Holy Spirit since He is currently the person of the Trinity at work in the earth. I personally think it is a reference to the Holy Spirit, but it is further speculation to define the lifting of the restraint as the rapture.xix Maybe so and maybe not! We simple don’t know.
Whether you are pre-trib, mid-trib, or post-trib., building your doctrine on this passage has its limitations simply because there is so much here that we don’t know. We don’t know the details of what had these Thessalonians so disturbed. We don’t know for certain exactly what Paul meant by the phrase the day of the Lord in verse 2. We don’t know who the restrainer is in verses 6-7. Paul is relying on knowledge the Thessalonians already had from his teachings. Because of all that, we have to fill in the blanks with a lot of guesses.xx The more guessing we do, the less we should rely on our conclusions for establishing doctrine. For those reasons this passage does not establish a decisive posttribulation position. On the other hand, it tends to point in that direction.
III. Some consider the RELATIVELY RECENT ARTICULATION OF PRETRIBULATION interpretation as a weakness.
Opponents of this position are quick to say John Darby invented it in about 1830 and C. I. Scofield popularized it with the Scofield Bible beginning in 1909.xxi Therefore, it could not be true.
But there is a difference between inventing a doctrine and articulating it more clearly.
The doctrine of the Trinity was not well articulated until the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. It was in the New Testament, but it was put into a doctrinal statement 200 years later. That does not mean the Council of Nicaea invented it. They articulated it in a doctrinal statement form. That in no way diminished the biblical truth of the Trinity revealed in Scripture.
It does not surprise me that biblical truth would be lost for hundreds of years by an apostate Catholic Church. In the early 1500’s Luther articulated justification by faith. Paul had clearly taught that truth in Romans and Galatians, but a corrupt Catholic Church lost that truth and replaced it with a legalistic, ritualistic system. Do I reject justification by faith because for hundreds of years the Catholic Church did not teach it?
The Pentecostal/Charismatic truths taught by Paul in 1 Corinthians 12 came alive at the beginning of the 20th Century. Those truths were not invented in the 20th Century, but they had not been preached by very many for hundreds of years. Nevertheless, they are biblical. Millions throughout the world have experienced these supernatural realities.
While most of the early premillennialist church fathers held a posttribulation position,xxii pretribulation teaching was not absent either. Irenaeus of Lyon (120-202) was a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the apostle John. In his Against Heresies, Book 5, he “refers to the Church’s being ‘caught up’ before the tribulation.xxiii ”And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this [the tribulation], it is said, ‘There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be’ (Mat 24:21). For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.”xxiv By the fifth century Origen and Augustine had turned the established church to amillenialism and the voice of premillennialism was largely silenced.
The oldest documents we have for building our eschatology are in the New Testament. If a doctrine can be established from the inspired word of God, I don’t care if Origen or other church fathers held a different view. Much of the truth held by the early church was lost during the apostasy of the Catholic Church and had to be recovered. If a position can be supported by Scripture, it should not be dismissed because of later writing during the church age. The argument that Darby invented the pretribulation theory is not true. The fact that Darby and
Scofield popularized it in recent history does not negate its validity. The final referee on doctrine is the inspired Scripture.
IV. Some arguments against the pretribulationism are not really arguments against the position itself. Instead they are ARGUMENTS against the WAY SOME APPLY IT.
One accusation against pretribulationism is that it denies the many passages that say Christians will suffer tribulation. There are some groups who use the position to argue that way. But no scholarly pretribulationist would argue the position based on a stance that God does not want Christians to go through trials. In John 16:33 Jesus told His followers, “In the world you will have tribulation.” That is unavoidable, and we just as well brace ourselves for it. Paul said in 2 Timothy 3:12 says, “. . . all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution.” He taught the early Christians “that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God” (Acts 14:22, KJV). We could go on and on with verses that confirm this.
But the tribulation period is a distinct time in God’s program. To say Christians will not go through the tribulation period is not to say they will not go through tribulation. On the contrary, we are appointed, and Paul even says privileged, to suffer for the name of Christ (Phil. 1:29).
Another complaint against the pretribulation position is that it is simply escapism: I can’t take the hardship of life anymore, so “beam me up Scotty.”xxv Some have erroneously applied the pretribulation position with an escapist mentality. But that is not necessarily inherent in the position. One can be fully prepared to deal with the difficulties of life with joy, and at the same time be fully submitted to God’s plan if it involves a rapture before the tribulation period. A Christian’s desire is to do the will of the Father whether it involves ascending into heaven or living through the tribulation period. A pretribulation theological position and an escapist mentality are two different things.
V. The WAY the New Testament USES THREE GREEK WORDS in reference to the COMING of the Lord points toward a posttribulation position. As far as I’m concerned, this is the greatest weakness in this position. The three Greek words used are parousia, apokalupsis, and epiphaneia. Each word emphasizes a particular aspect of the Lord’s coming.
Parousia is the word most used of the Lord’s coming. Its basic meaning is “coming, arrival; presence.”xxvi In 1 Thessalonians 4:15 it is used in a passage typically attributed to the rapture.xxvii “For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming [Parousia] of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep.” But it is also used in passages referring to Christ’s second coming to the earth.xxviii For example, 2 Thessalonians 2:8 says, “And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming [parousia].” So, the same term, parousia, is used in a text referring to the rapture and a text referring to the second coming.
Apokalupsis comes from the root word kalupto meaning to cover or hide and the prefix apo meaning from or away from.xxix Thus apokalupsis is an uncovering or revelation.xxx 1 Peter 1:13 uses the term: “Therefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and rest your hope fully upon the grace that is to be brought to you at the revelation [apokalupsis] of Jesus Christ.” There apokalupsis is referring to the meeting of Christ with His church.xxxi But 2 Thessalonians 1:7-8 is a clear reference to His coming in glory at His second coming.xxxii “And to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed [apokalupsis] from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Again, the same term is used to refer to the rapture and the second coming.
The other Greek word used in reference to the Lord’s coming is epiphaneia. We get our English word epiphany from this Greek term. It is a manifestation or appearance.xxxiii 2 Timothy 4:8 uses the term in reference to the coming of the Lord for His church.xxxiv “Finally, there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give to me on that Day, and not to me only but also to all who have loved His appearing [epiphaneia].” On the other hand, the term is used earlier in 2 Timothy 4:1 in regard to His second coming.xxxv “I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing [epiphaneia] and His kingdom.” Once again, the same term is used in reference to the rapture and the second coming.
That seems to indicate the same event. The pretribulation theory makes a crucial distinction between the timing of the rapture and the second coming. But if that distinction is that important, why didn’t the New Testament writers make an effort to distinguish them in the language they used? Granted, the terms were probably being used in a general sense and were not intended to be technical terms for the coming of the Lord. But if Paul held the pretribulation position, you would expect him to make a clearer distinction between the two events. In my mind this is a very strong argument against the pretribulation position.
Conclusion:
The pretribulation position has much to recommend it. It should be taken seriously. However, there are weaknesses in the theory which should motivate us to dig deeper. Paul commended the Bereans because they did not just take what the preacher said and go with it. They looked into the Bible themselves to make sure they were getting the truth.xxxvi One reason many Christians are biblically illiterate is they just want to be told the answer right quick so they can move on to things they are more interested in. Unfortunately, those things are not often all that important. We are not all called to be theologians, but we are all called to study our Bibles. I hope this teaching will cause you to search the Scriptures for more truth on this subject.
ENDNOTES:
i Cf. Matt. 13:30.
ii All Scripture quotes are from the New King James Version unless indicated otherwise.
iii Notice the similar language in Rev. 19: 9. “These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power.”
iv Holmes writes, “All that Paul has been talking about ‘will happen when the Jesus is revealed from heaven’ (1:7b), that is, ‘when he comes . . . on that day’ (1:10, NRSV). This is the same event that Paul in his first letter referred to as Jesus’ ‘coming’ (parousia, 1 Thess. 5:15) or ‘the day of the Lord’ (5:2). Michael W. Holmes, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, The NIV Application Commentary, Terry Muck, gen. ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998215.
v For example, the explanation Wiersbe gives is essentially a statement of the differences between the rapture and the second coming based on the pretribulation theory. Warren W. Wiersbe, Be Ready (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1979) 131.
vi Gene L. Green, The Letters to the Thessalonians, The Pillar New Testament Commentary, D. A. Carson, ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 2002) 287-288.
vii It is interesting that both phrases are modified by one article. Morris writes, “The subject of his request is twofold, but the coming of the Lord and the gathering of the saints are regarded as closely connected, as the use of the single article shows. These are two parts of one great event.” Leon Morris, The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, F. F. Bruce, gen. ed., 1959 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979) 214.
viii Gordon Fee sees verse 1 as a condensed version of 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17. Gordon D. Fee, The First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, Stonehouse, Bruce, Fee, and Green, gen. eds. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009) 272.
ix Even Paul does not seem to be certain whether this misinformation came “either by spirit or by word or by letter” (2 Thess. 2:2). What Paul is correcting is difficult to know in detail because we do not have the information on it that the Thessalonians had. Since they already had that it was not necessary for Paul to go into further detail. Forged letters were common in that day. I guess fake news was around long before the internet.
x Some stop short of this and simply say they were misled to think they were in the tribulation period. But that does not adequately explain why they were so shaken and disturbed.
xi Leon Morris writes, “We must bear in mind the gaps in our knowledge, and not be too confident in our interpretations of this notoriously difficult passage.” Leon Morris, The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, F. F. Bruce, gen. ed., 1959 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979) 213. Fee agrees with A. M. G. Stephenson that the enesteken means “already come” and not just at hand or near. The translators of the NKJV and NIV seem to agree. However, Fee also states the following caution: “What this may have meant to its proponents, or how the Thessalonian believers would have understood it, lies ultimately in the realm of speculation.” Fee, The First and Second Letters to the Thessalonians, 273. In regard to the disturbance in our text, Kaiser writes, “Such a claim was unsettling and alarming for it implied that they had been excluded from the event of Christ’s return and ‘shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power’ (2 Thess 1:9).” Walter C. Kaisere, Jr., P. H. Davids, F. F. Bruce, M. T. Brauch, Hard Sayings of the Bible (Downers Grove: IL: InterVarsity Press, 1996) 662. In opposition to Gundry, Walvoord takes the position that Paul had taught the Thessalonians a pretribulation rapture, and they were disturbed because they thought the tribulation period had already begun and they had been left behind. John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question, rev. ed., 1957 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing, 1979) 240-241. The Moody Commentary on this verse says, “The false teaching apparently affirmed that the rapture had occurred and the day of the Lord had begun.”
xii We are left with a tension in the New Testament between the urgency of staying prepared for the imminent return of Christ and predictions of other events that will transpire. For example, Peter is told that he will grow old in John 21:18. Paul is shown what great things he must suffer in Acts 9:16. Jesus said, “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come” (Matt. 24:1). In 1 Timothy 3 Paul described perilous times in the last days as a warning to the church. And here in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 we’re told “that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition.” . Yet we cannot and must not dismiss or ignore the New Testament passages that tell us to stay prepared for Christ’s return for it could happen at any time. No one knows the day and hour of Christ’s return (Matt. 24:36). Referencing the Oxford English Dictionary, Douglas Moo takes the position that imminent does not mean “any moment,” but rather “impending threatenly, hanging over one’s head; ready to befall or overtake one, close at hand at its incidence; coming on shortly.” Gleason L. Archer Jr., Paul Feinberg, Douglas Moo, Richard Ritter, Three Views on the Rapture: Pre-, Mid-, or Posttribulational?, 1984 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing, 1996) 207.
xiii Michael W. Holmes, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, The NIV Application Commentary, Terry Muck, gen. ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988) 230. For English’s position see E. Schuyler English, Re-Thinking the Rapture (Travelers Rest, S. C.: Southern Bible, 1954) 65..
xiv John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question, rev. ed., 1957 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing, 1979) 240.
xv Andy Woods, The Falling Away: Spiritual Departure or Physical Departure (Taos, NM: Dispensational Publishing, 2018) 4, 38-40.
xvi Dwight Pentecost says apostasia “may be interpreted either as a departure from the faith or a departure of the saints to be with the Lord.” He does not give much attention to this passage considering the challenge it offers to his pretribulation position. J. Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology, 1958 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing, 1973) 204-205, 332.
xvii Alan Hultberg, gen. ed., Three Views on The Rapture: Pretribulation, Prewrath, or Posttribulation, Counterpoint Series, S. N. Gundry, ed, rev. ed. 1984 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishers, 2010) 56-57. Charles Giblin, The Threat to Faith: An Exegetical and Theological Re-examination of 2 Thessalonians 2 (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1967) 122-139.
xviii Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology, Vol. IV, 1948 (Dallas, TX: Dallas Seminary Press, 1974) 350.
xix Posttribulationist Robert Gundry understands the restrainer to be the Holy Spirit but does not include the concept held by most pretribulationists that it is the Holy Spirit “in the church.” Robert Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing, 1973) as summarized by Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 242-243.
xx Two things make this passage difficult to understand. (1) Paul’s objective is to comfort these Christians by quickly addressing their concern. He is not setting forth a methodical teaching on end-time events. Therefore, we must make some assumptions as we interpret the passage. . (2) Paul reminds them in verse 5 of things he has already taught them when he was with them. Since they already know these things, Paul does not repeat them. But that leaves us without that information. Therefore, the passage is somewhat obscure because of the missing information.
xxi Michael L. Brown and Craig S. Keener, Not Afraid of the Antichrist: Why We Don’t Believe in a Pre-Tribulation Rapture (Minneapolis, MN: Chosen, 2019) 60-63.
xxii Michael L. Brown and Craig S. Keener, Not Afraid of the Antichrist: Why We Don’t Believe in a Pre-Tribulation Rapture (Minneapolis, MN: Chosen, 2019) 57-58.
xxiii David Peterson, “The Rapture: A Pre-Darby Rapture,” Truth and Tidings Magazine. Accessed 1/29/21 at The Rapture: A Pre-Darby Rapture | Web Truth.
xxiv Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 5:5 as quoted by Peterson, “The Rapture: A Pre-Darby Rapture.,”
xxv This was a common line in the old TV series Star Trek.
xxvi United Bible Society Lexicon, s. v. Parousia. Accessed in electronic data base: Bibleworks, version 6.0, 2003.
xxvii See also 1 Cor. 15:23; 1 Thess. 2:19, 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:1; James 5:7-8; 1 John 2:29 and possibly 2 Pet. 3:4.
xxviii See also Matt. 24:3, 27,37, 3:9; 1 Thess. 3:13; 2 Thess. 2:8; 2 Pet. 1:16.
xxix United Bible Society Lexicon, s. v. Apo and Kalupto. Accessed in electronic data base: Bibleworks, version 6.0, 2003.
xxx Lindell-Scott Lexicon, s. v. Apokalupsis. Accessed in electronic data base: Bibleworks, version 6.0, 2003.
xxxi See also 1 C0r. 1:7; 1 Pet. 1:7.
xxxii See also Luke 17:30; 1 Pet. 4:13.
xxxiii Lindell-Scott Lexicon and United Bible Society Lexicon, s. v. Epiphaneia. Accessed in electronic data base: Bibleworks, version 6.0, 2003..
xxxiv See also 1 Tim. 6:14.
xxxv See also Titus 2:13.
xxxvi Acts 17:11: “These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.”
