The Rapture:
Truth or Speculation?
Dennis Bratcher
With the recent popularity of the Left Behind series of books
and films, there has been a lot of renewed speculation about "end times"
prophecies and the timing of what is popularly termed "the rapture."
This is the idea that Jesus will return to the earth and secretly take
("rapture") all Christians while leaving the rest of humanity to suffer
through a long period of turmoil in which evil will prevail in the
world (called "the Great Tribulation").
But serious students of Scripture have continued to question whether
such speculation is warranted from the biblical evidence. Many
have questioned what alternatives there might be to such widespread
popular belief in a rapture of the church.
As far as alternative views to the popular concept of the rapture,
there aren't many. At least, not many that are credible from the
perspective of Scripture. The simple, and biblical, answer to the
question of end time events and their sequence is: we do not know. That is not very satisfying for many who need
to have something specific to believe about everything or who think that
having all the correct beliefs is the only way to be righteous. But I
would contend that if we are going to stick to Scripture as closely as
we Protestants claim to want to do, we need to admit that we really do
not know a lot of things. We need to come to terms with the fact
that there are a great many things that we would like to know for which
Scripture does not provide answers. Rather than trying to create our own
truth from speculation, "we do not know" is probably the best place to
leave it.
The "Agreed Statement of Belief"
of the Church of the Nazarene, for example, simply says, "¶ 26.8 That
our Lord will return, the dead will be raised, and the final judgment
will take place." It is important to note that the concise statement of
the "Agreed Statement of Belief" affirms a theology, not a description
of events. It affirms the Second Coming, which is a way (like the First
Coming) to say that God will not forever leave this world the way it is.
It also affirms the resurrection, which is the primary statement of
human hope in all of Scripture. And it affirms the judgment, which is a
way to affirm the idea of human responsibility and accountability for
actions. When all is said and done, what more do we need?
Beyond using the language of 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, the entire
Article of Faith of the Church of the Nazarene on the "Second
Coming" provides no further detail:
19. We believe that the Lord Jesus Christ will come
again; that we who are alive at His coming shall not precede them that
are asleep in Christ Jesus; but that, if we are abiding in Him, we shall
be caught up with the risen saints to meet the Lord in the air, so that
we shall ever be with the Lord.
This may imply what is popularly viewed as the "rapture," although it
totally avoids the debates about the precise sequence of events that
have dominated this topic in the United States since the millennium and
Adventist movements of the mid to late 1800s. It could be read equally
as a theological statement rather than a precise sequence of events,
which is undoubtedly how it was intended. Certainly the biblical
references can be read that way. In other words, this is a matter of
biblical interpretation, with those who have developed a detailed plan
of the rapture making large assumptions about the meaning of certain
passages.
There is nothing in the Bible that specifically requires what is
popularly called the "rapture." As the heading of this Article of
Faith says clearly, it is a statement about the
Second Coming, not about the rapture. The Second Coming is
different than what is commonly meant by the "rapture" in places like
the Left Behind movies. That concept of a "rapture" is usually a
so-called "secret" rapture, in which only Christians are taken while
non-Christians and apostates are "left behind" to suffer the torments of
the tribulation.
The traditional debates surrounding the ends times are whether the
final establishment of God's Kingdom will be before (pre-millennialism)
or after (post-millennialism) the 1,000 year reign of Christ on earth
(the millennium, Rev 20:1-10). Pre-millennialism takes two forms that
debate whether the Second Coming will come before (pre-tribulation
pre-millennialism or dispensationalism) or after (post-tribulation
pre-millennialism or historic millennialism) a period of tribulation.
Most popular beliefs in evangelical Christianity, such as the Left
Behind
series, are of the dispensationalist variety (pre-trib pre-mil) in which
the Second Coming is divided into two events, a rapture of the
saints, often called a "secret rapture" because the saints will be taken
instantly without a revelation of Jesus, and a later public revelation of Jesus at the end of the
tribulation.
As is clear in the Article of Faith, the Church of the Nazarene takes
no position on either the millennium or the rapture in dispensationalist
or pre-millennial terms. It does not define the nature of the
Second
Coming, only that it will occur using the biblical metaphors from 1
Thessalonians. Except for some historical anomalies, this has been the
position of the Church almost from its beginning.
However, in a much more general sense and totally apart from the idea
of a "secret" rapture (which is nowhere to be found in Scripture), the
idea of a "rapture" can be connected with the Second Coming, but only in
a very derived way. In 1 Thessalonians 4:17 Paul describes the Second
Coming not only in terms of the resurrection of the dead, but also that
those alive will be "caught up" with those resurrected to meet the
returned Christ in the air. In early Latin translations (the Vulgate)
the Greek word for "caught up" in this verse was translated by the Latin
rapiemur, from which we get the term "rapture." But from a single
word used in a Latin translation, and the ambiguous concept of "caught
up," to extrapolate the detailed sequence of events that are often
promoted in movies and by prophecy experts is to force the biblical text
to say far more than it doe or can.
It is important to know that the term "rapture", and most of the
popular ideas associated with it, arose out of the dispensational and
millenarian (Adventist) movements of the mid to latter 19th century.
That suggests that the idea of a "rapture," especially the idea of a
"secret" rapture, is far more historically and culturally conditioned
then it is a biblical or theological truth. The same is true for the
entire dispensational and Adventist theology, as well as some of the
more unorthodox spin-offs (e.g., H. W. Armstrong's original World
Wide Church of God). Both the disillusionment of World War I and the
Cold War of the 40s-70s, as well as the Vietnam War, allowed the
apocalyptic view of history that dominates dispensational and
millenarian theology to flourish. It also fit well with some aspects of
revivalism (scare 'em into heaven) as well as the rise of fundamentalism
in the years following World War I.
The passages given in the Manual of the Church of the Nazarene
concerning the Second Coming, which comprise most of what Scripture has
to say in any direct way about it, give a wide array of perspectives. A
brief survey of those passages will reveal how little information there
really is about the event. And most of those passages actually have
other issues in mind than even dealing directly with the Second Coming,
let alone trying to provide a detailed sequence of events.
Matthew 25:31-46 is an apocalyptic section, a specific genre or kind of
literature that uses "end of the world" language. It was a popular type
of literature even in the two centuries before Christ as the Jews were
under Greek and then Roman occupation. But most scholars understand that
this language is poetic and metaphorical (as in Revelation) used to make
theological statements, not as a "roadmap" of the end of the world.
John 14:1-3 has nothing of the rapture, but only speaks of the
Second
Coming. And here it is thoroughly theological with Christ as the "Way."
Acts 1:9-11 gives the account of Jesus' Ascension with a statement of
the Second Coming. Most have focused on "in the same way" to prove a
rapture. But it is not at all clear from the text that the reference is
to a physical and visible descent.
Philippians 3:20-21 is only indirectly about the
Second Coming,
emphasizing the transformation of human beings. It has nothing about a
rapture.
First Thessalonians 4:13-18 is apparently the most graphic description
of the Second Coming, and provides most of the imagery associated with
the idea of the rapture. But a careful reading of this passage in
context will reveal that Paul is answering questions about what would
happen to those who have already died at the Second Coming. This comes
from a time when most Christians believed that the Second Coming would
be shortly after Jesus' Ascension. Paul's whole focus in these verses is
not on describing the physical nature of the rapture, but is on the
issue of those who have already died and their relationship to the
Second Coming. To take all of this as a literal description of the
nature of the Second Coming without placing it within that primary
contextual concern easily leads to distortion. Paul's whole point here
is still an emphasis on the Second Coming. Whether people are dead or
alive will make no difference. That is his point.
Titus 2:11-14 is only incidentally about the
Second Coming, with no
hint of a rapture. Likewise Hebrews 9:26-28 has no hint of a rapture and
only incidentally refers to a judgment.
Second Peter 3:3-15 provides another apparently detailed account of the
Second Coming. But again, we need to keep in mind that the primary
concern in context is the discouragement among the early Christians over
the delay of the Second Coming (probably 60 years or so by then). This
passage reverts to the rather stereotyped apocalyptic language that
serves to emphasize the certainty of the Second Coming in the midst of
doubts. The very fact that it picks up the Old Testament concept of the
"Day of the Lord" says that the language here is archaic and
metaphorical, drawing on ancient concepts to emphasize the stability of
God's purposes as well as human accountability (see
The Day of the Lord). Again, to assume that this language can only
be read as a literal description of a rapture is to misunderstand the
nature of the material here.
Finally, both Revelation 1:7-8 and 22:7-20 also provide rather graphic
apocalyptic imagery for the Second Coming. However, a careful reading of
Revelation will reveal that most of the imagery in the book is intended
to make theological statements, not to portray literal scenes or
actions. The problem in interpretation is what criteria to use to
determine that one passage should be taken literally yet another passage
is only imagery. It is not adequate interpretation to assume that
fantastic beasts are only symbolic imagery, yet Jesus coming in clouds
must be taken as a literal description.
There are other biblical passages that are popularly used to support
the idea of a rapture. For example, is one most commonly assumed in popular imagination to
describe a rapture:
24:37 For as the days of Noah were, so will
be the coming of the Son of Man. 24:38 For as in those days before
the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in
marriage, until the day Noah entered the ark, 24:39 and they knew
nothing until the flood came and swept them all away, so too will be
the coming of the Son of Man. 24:40 Then two will be in the field;
one will be taken and one will be left. 24:41 Two women will be
grinding meal together; one will be taken and one will be left.
24:42 Keep awake therefore, for you do not know on what day your
Lord is coming. 24:43 But understand this: if the owner of the house
had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would
have stayed awake and would not have let his house be broken into.
24:44 Therefore you also must be ready, for the Son of Man is coming
at an unexpected hour.
Yet the passage itself is not really about a rapture. Once again the
focus is on the Second Coming (Gk,
parousia, "coming," vv. 3, 39; also v. 27) without any necessary
connection to the idea of a rapture. The emphasis of the passage
using the illustration of Noah is on the preoccupation of people with
their own lives and pleasures apart from God. The Noah illustration
carries with it overtones of judgment, that the people who are oblivious
to their responsibility to God will be caught unaware when God requires
accountability. The passage concludes with an appeal to live
faithfully in the present with an eye toward that accountability (24:46
ff).
In rapture theology, those who are "taken" are assumed to be the
Christians while those who are "left behind," presumably to suffer the
pains of the tribulation, are the sinners. Yet this identification
is nowhere made in this passage. In the Noah story those who were
"taken" by the flood ("swept . . . away," v. 39), used here symbolically
for the judgment of God, were the sinners while the righteous Noah and
his family were those who were "left behind." Yet popular rapture
theology rather deftly inverts what this passage says in order to fit it
with a doctrine pieced together from isolated verses all over the Bible.
Unless we start with the idea of a rapture and use it as a lens
through which to read this passage, there is really nothing in this
passage to teach a rapture. It remains a strong condemnation of
indifference and preoccupation with self-interest in light of the
promised Second Coming of Christ that will bring judgment on sinners.
But that does not require a rapture.
Along the same line, Jirair Tashjian notes (The
Second Coming):
. . . in Matthew 13:41-43, which is an interpretation of the
parable of the Wheat and Weeds, the focus is on the culmination of the
kingdom of God on earth. Jesus says, "The Son of
Man will send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom all
causes of sin and all evildoers, and they will throw them into the
furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then
the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father."
If there is going to be a rapture, it is the evildoers who are "raptured"
and thrown into the furnace of fire!
All this says that the biblical references that are most used to
support a rapture do not clearly support the idea at all. They all
firmly support a Second Coming (whatever form that might take), a
Resurrection, and a Judgment, all without giving any solid details
about any of them.
Is it possible that the biblical writers did not know any more about
the details than we do? They clearly knew the theological truth about
these three elements that also appear in the "Agreed Statement of
Belief" to which I referred earlier, and clearly communicated them in
various ways and places. But they may not have known the details. Maybe
that is why there is no clear picture of the details in Scripture, which
is what fuels the debates. For the biblical writers to know all the
details would require a particular view of the nature of Scripture and
revelation that is far more in line with modern fundamentalism than with
a Wesleyan view of plenary inspiration that is primarily "soteriological"
(concerning our salvation: "all things necessary to our salvation").
Because of the perversions of most modern end-times speculations,
especially that of the dispensationalists in which "rapture" means
something very specific, I have found it to be more helpful to stick to
the concept of a Second Coming, of which the Manual statement is
a good example, and avoid the term "rapture" and the debates about
end-time details that this idea necessarily provokes.
I think we would have our hands full if we understood from Scripture
how to live today, let alone trying to figure out what will happen in
the end times from virtually non-existent evidence. I think Jesus made
that point quite well in Matthew 6:33-34: "But strive first for the
kingdom of God and his righteousness. . . do not worry about tomorrow,
for tomorrow will bring worries of its own. Today's trouble is enough
for today."
So, again, the simple, and biblical, answer is, we do not know. We
do
know "That our Lord will return, the dead will be raised, and the final
judgment will take place." I'm perfectly happy with that.
-Dennis Bratcher, Copyright
©
2007, Dennis
Bratcher, All Rights Reserved
See Copyright and User Information Notice
|
