Will Christians Go Through The Tribulation Period? (Vii) Series

This is the seventh message exploring Scripture for an answer to one question: Will Christians go through the tribulation period. It is not an easy question to answer because there is no place in the Bible where we are specifically told when the rapture of the church will occur. We are certainly told that it will occur. But the timing of that event in relationship to the tribulation period is difficult to pin down. There are three suggested answers that we are examining. The pretribulation position is that the rapture will occur at the beginning of the tribulation period. Midtribulationists say it will happen somewhere near the middle of that seven-year period. And Posttribulationists place it at the end of the tribulation in conjunction with the second coming. In previous messages we have examined the strengths and weaknesses of the pretribulation and midtribulation theories. Today we will explore the POSTRIBULATION position.

I. STRENGTHS of the posttribulation position are as follows:

(1) Its identification of the rapture with the second coming best explains why a specific timing for the rapture is not stated in the New Testament. This one issue is almost decisive in favor of the posttribulation position.

We have already talked about the way New Testament writers used the Greek terms for the coming of the Lord interchangeably in reference to both the rapture and the second coming. If the timing of those two events were markedly different, we would expect them to avoid doing that or at least clarify the difference.

Let me illustrate what I’m saying this way. My daughter, Karol, lives in San Clemente, California near Los Angeles. Suppose I sent an email yesterday telling her that I have bought a flight ticket to Los Angeles and will arrive March 31st. Today I send another email saying I will pick up my baggage at the United Airlines baggage area. I don’t specify what day that will happen. What would be my daughter’s assumption about the baggage pickup? In the absence of me specifying something different, she would assume that baggage pickup happens on the same day already given, March 31st. Unless I specify a different date, she would assume that new detail happens in conjunction with my arrival on March 31st.

Jesus clearly told us that He would come back at the end of the tribulation period. In Matthew 24:29-30 He said, “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, 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.”i He clearly tells us when He is coming back to the earth. Scholars in all three camps generally agree on that.

Later we receive a letter from Paul about the coming of the Lord and in 1 Thessalonians 4, he gives details about the rapture and resurrection of Christians. He does not specify the timing. What should be our assumption about the timing? If the timing is the same as what Jesus has already told us, then there is no need to specify it. If the timing is radically different, one would tend to indicate that to avoid confusion.

There is no passage in the Bible that specifically tells us when the rapture occurs. We can point to symbols that might indicate something about that, but in the process of interpreting those symbols and metaphors we could easily be wrong. If Jesus or the apostles were pretribulationists or midtribulationists we would expect them to state the distinction between the timing of the rapture and the second coming. Instead you find no direct statement indicating a different timing for the two. On the contrary, you find them using the same terms interchangeably in reference to the rapture and the second coming.

I’m glad I saw this in my own studies before reading this argument from posttribulationists, because it leaves me more confident in its biblical importance. Forty years ago, I looked unsuccessfully for a word distinction in the New Testament that would set the rapture apart from the second coming. My assumption was that parousia was used for the rapture and apokalupsis for the second coming. But even back then I discovered that both terms were used for both the rapture and the second coming. That left me somewhat tentative about the pretribulation theory. However, there were other factors that were persuading me toward that theory.

In this study I have realized the weight of this argument. It does not conclusively lead one to a posttribulation position. But in my opinion, this is the most compelling argument in the whole debate. The default position from Scripture should be that the rapture and the second coming are descriptive of one return of the Lord Jesus Christ. To take a different position, we need at least one statement in the New Testament telling us that. I am unable to find it. I can give rationale for why the timing might be different. I can interpret symbolism to support a different timing. But the only timing that is clearly stated is the second coming at the end of the tribulation period. This is almost a conclusive argument for posttribulationism.ii