Three Views on the Rapture: Pre; Mid; Or Post-Tribulation (Counterpoints)

137 Pages·1996·12.96 MB·English

by  Gleason L. Archer Jr.

-THREE VIEWS-
ON THE
PRE-, MID-, OR
POST-TRIBULATIONAL?
Gleason 1. ArcherJr.
Paul D. Feinberg
Douglas] Moo
Richard R. Reiter
Stanley N. Gundry
Series Editor
Previouslytitled TheRapture
~COUNTERPOINTS~
US$14.99/$22.50CAN
ISBN D-31D-212~8-7
J~~l~ll~II~IJ~~[~llllfll"lilllIllI
j
....COUNTERPOINTS...
-THREE VIEWS-
ON THE
PRE; MID; OR
POST-TRIBULATION?
~COUNTERPOINTS....
Books in the Counterpoints Series
Are Miraculous Gifts for Today?
-THREE VIEWS-
Five Views on Lawand Gospel
ON THE
Five Views on Sanctification
Four Views on Hell
FourViews on Salvation in aPluralisticWorld
FourViews on the Book ofRevelation
Three Views on Creation and Evolution
Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond
PRE; MID; OR
Three Views on the Rapture
POST-TRIBULATION?
Two Views on Women in Ministry
Gleason L. Archerfr:
Stanley N. Gundry (S.T.D.,Lutheran School ofTheology at
Chicago) isvicepresidentand editor-in-chiefatZondervan. He PaulD. Feinberg
graduatedsumma cum laudefrom boththe Los AngelesBaptist Douglas] Moo
College and TalbotTheological Seminary before receiving his
RichardR. Reiter
Masters of Sacred Theology from Union College, University
of British Columbia. With more than thirty-five years of
teaching, pastoring, and publishingexperience, heisthe author
or coauthorof numerous books and acontributorto numerous
periodicals.
PreviouslytitledTheRapture
,.
ZondervanPublishingHouse
GrandRapids, Michigan
ADivisionofHarperCollinsPublishers
CONTENTS
Three ViewsontheRapture
Copyright©1984,1996byTheZondervanCorporation,
GrandRapids,Michigan. PREFACE 7
Previouslytitled The Rapture
1 A HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF
Requests forinformationshould beaddressedto:
THE RAPTURE POSITIONS
==ZondervanPublishingHouse
RICHARD R. REITER ...................... 9
GrandRapids, Michigan 49530
2 THE CASE FOR THE PRETRIBULATION
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData RAPTURE POSITION .
Three viewsontheRapture:pre-,mid-,orpost-Tribulation?/GleasonL. PAUL D. FEINBERG ....................... 45
Archer,Jr....[etal.]. RESPONSE: DOUGLASJ. MOO 87
p. em.- (Counterpoints)
RESPONSE: GLEASON L. ARCHER 103
Rev.ed.of:TheRapture.c1984.
Includes bibliographicalreferences (p. )andindexes.
3 THE CASE FOR THE MID-SEVENTIETH-
ISBN:0-310-21298-7
1.Rapture(Christianeschatology) 2.Tribulation(Christianeschatology) WEEK RAPTURE POSITION
I.Archer,Gleason Leonard, 1916- II.Rapture. Ill.Series:Counter- GLEASON L. ARCHER ..................... 113
points (GrandRapids, Mich.)
RESPONSE: PAUL D. FEINBERG. .......... 147
BT887.R371996
236'.9-dc20 96-22775 RESPONSE: DOUGLASJ. MOO 159
CIP
4 THE CASE FOR THE POSTTRIBULATION
AllScripturequotations,unlessotherwise indicated, aretakenfrom theHoly
RAPTURE POSITION
Bible:NewInternationalVersion®.NIV®.Copyright©1973,1978,1984byInter
DOUGLASJ. MOO 169
national BibleSociety.Used bypermissionofZondervanPublishingHouse.Ali
rightsreserved. RESPONSE: GLEASON L. ARCHER........ 213
Allrightsreserved.Nopart ofthispublicationmaybereproduced,stored ina RESPONSE: PAUL D. FEINBERG. .......... 223
retrievalsystem,ortransmittedinanyform orbyanymeans-electronic,
mechanical,photocopy,recording, oranyother-exceptfor briefquotationsin
NOTES ....................................... 233
printedreviews,withoutthepriorpermission ofthepublisher.
PERSON INDEX ........ 255
Editedby BenChapman
DesignedbyLouise Bauer SUBJECT INDEX ....... 259
Printed inthe UnitedStatesofAmerica SCRIPTURE INDEX ........................... 262
01 02/.~ DH/10 9 8
PREFACE
One ofthe chiefobstacles in coming to decisions on theolog
icalissues is the lack ofinteraction among proponents ofcom
peting views. Books and articles advocating one position or
another are available, but one is often left wondering whether
strengths have been overstated and weaknesses ignored or un
derplayed. Moreover, many readers areunprepared to evaluate
the sometimes technical evidence advanced in support ofa
view. All too often such arguments appear more compelling
than they really are. Even when two excellent statements of
alternative positions are available, points made in one state
ment may not be dealt with in the other.
Such is certainly the case with respect to the issue ofthe
time ofthe Rapture in relation to the Tribulation. Many ex
cellent treatments of this theological question from various
viewpoints are available; but there is still room for a careful,
"head-to-head" discussion in which the alternative positions
are evaluated. The presentvolumeisintended to fillthat need.
The three major essays ofthis book are revised and ex
panded versions of papers presented at the January, 1981,
meeting ofthe Ministerial Association ofthe Evangelical Free
Church of America. The authors write as members of this
denomination, as colleagues on the faculty of its seminary
(Trinity Evangelical Divinity School), and as personal friends.
We write with charity and respect for one another but with
no less conviction with regard to our own views. We write
with forthrightness in exposing what we perceive to be weak
nesses in each other's arguments. For some, the advocacy of
differing positions on the Rapture among colleagues on the
same faculty may seem incongruous. All three of us are
wholeheartedly devoted to upholding the cleartruths ofScrip-
ture but we do not believe that the relative time oftheRapture
1
is one ofthese"clear truths."
The responses to the major essays have been written in
dependently. While this format makes some repetition inevi
table, it also allows greater freedom and better enables the
reader to discern the differences in the various positions. With
out intending any slight to other eschatological positions, we
A HISTORY OF THE
write from the standpoint ofa premillennial eschatology.
Evangelicals in America have frequently been divided over
the issue ofRapture. It is our hope that these essays and re DEVELOPMENT OF THE
sponses will promote an atmosphere ofunity and tolerance in
whichthe issue canbehonestly and reverently discussed. Above RAPTURE POSITIONS
all we trust that we may all be encouraged to conform our
selves to the character and conduct ofthe One whose return
we await. Richard R. Reiter
The basic confessions of Christianity testify to the biblical
t~a.ching that Jesus Christ will r~tum to earth to judge the
living and the dead. Beyond this base for unity Christians
developed diverse views on the nature and time of Christ's
return. This essay examines the debate about the Second
Comingin recentAmericanhistory. The focus ison American
Evangelicals who agreed that Christ will return before the
Millennium, but who differed on whether the Rapture ofthe
church would be before, in the middle of, or after the Great
Tribulation.
. This study covers just over one hundred years-from
1878to the present. Within thiseraIshallexaminethree shorter
periods initiated by key transitional events. The first was the
three decades from 1878 through 1909, when differences in
prophetic interpretation and related matters raised controversy
withinthe NiagaraBibleConference. Next, spanning the time
fr?m 1909 to 1952, the advocates ofpretribulationism gained
widespread popular support and built their base of scholar
ship. From 1952 to the present we have seen the resurgence
of posttribulationism through the scholarly growth of that
perspectiveand diverse challengesto the dominanceofpretrib
Richard R. Reiter is Market Data Systems Manager, Nations
ulationism among American Evangelicals.
Banc-CRT, Chicago, Illinois. He holds degrees from Michigan
State University (M.S.)and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School
(M.Div.).He has taken additional graduate study at McCormick THE NIAGARA BIBLE CONFERENCE ERA:
Theological Seminary, Regent College (Vancouver), the Uni 1878-1909
versity of Chicago, and Wheaton College (Illinois). He is
The Niagara Bible Conference popularized premillennial
A.B.D., at New York University. Mr. Reiter is a member of the
doctrinein North America. A few pastors and evangelists met
the Conference on Faith and History and the Evangelical The
privately for a quiet week ofBible study and prayer in 1875.
ological Society.
Within three years others responded to evidence of spiritual
11
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RAPTURE POSITIONS
THE RAPTURE
vitality; the annual summer conference became pu~lic. !he interpretation of article 3, then a different, and I suggest a
leaders emphasized Christian renewal throu~h pr~ct1~al BIble more plausible, conclusion follows. This conclusion is rein
study based upon literal hermeneutics, premillenmal mterpre forced by evidence that Willis Lord, a historicist premille
tation ofprophecy, and a str~ng.sense that the ~nd ofthe age narian, drafted the resolutions. Taken asawhole theyassociate
wasnear. Sharing interdenommatlOnal camaradene, they hoped the entire complexofapocalyptic events with the visible return
to avoid controversy, overcome sectarian prejudices, and fos ofChrist to earthin power and glory. Article 2 used the terms
ter unity among premillennial believers." "visiblebodily return to thisearth," "glorious Epiphany," and
This era saw a shift in premillennial eschatology. From "this blessed hope" ofthe same event referred to in article 3.
the 1790s to the mid 1870s most premillennialists advocated Article 4 listed prophetic events in a sequence that would not
historicism, believing that some events in Daniel and most of be drafted by an informed dispensationalist. It affirmed that
the Revelation refer to the church age. Spearheaded by the
only at and by His coming in power and glory will the
Niagara Bible Conference, a growing number of premillen
prophecies concerning the progress ofevil and the devel
nialists adopted the futurist view, persuaded that?aniel's se~­
opment ofAntichrist, the times ofthe Gentiles, and the
entieth week was in the future and was descnbed fully m
ingathering ofIsrael, theresurrectionofthe dead in Christ,
Revelation 6-19.2 Although most of the Niagara leaders and the transfiguration ofHis living saints, receive their
held the futurist view, they did not exclude historicists. Their fulfillment, and the period ofmillennialblessedness in[sic]
fourteen-point doctrinal statement, adopted before ~he 18~8 its inauguration.6
summer conference, urgedbelieversto be ready for their Lo~ds
return. Section 14 dealt with corporate eschatology, statmg: Two stages ofthe Second Advent were notdistinguished. And
"This personal and premillennial advent is the blessed hope yet the terni "dispensation" was used in article 2.
set before us in the Gospel for which we should be constantly It seems best to recognize that North American dispen
looking." Scripture proof texts included Luke 12:35-40 and sationalism was in its initial stage of development. Many
2 Thessalonians 2:3-8, butnot 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17.3 The premillennialists seemed to use its vocabulary without fully
statement was not specifically dispensational, for it did not set following its arguments or working out its implications. The
forth a two-stage return of Christ; rather it was ~ general point is a disputed one. Probably this statement about evan
premillennialstatementthatoutlinedanumber~fbeh~fs.about gelist D. 1. Moody applied to others:
the Second Coming and left room for all premillenmahsts.
Later in 1878 another significant statement appeared, The most that can be said is that Moody adopted the
which again showed the generally a~cepte~ view of Niaga~a concept ofan any-moment return and some ofits attend
participants. The first general Amencan BIble ~nd prophetic ant vocabulary from the dispensationalists. But that he
had a carefully thought-out and expressed dispensational
conference in New York City passed fiveresolutions that later
distinction between a pretribulational rapture and a post
prophetic conferences also adopted. Articl~3 stated:."This
tribulational coming cannot be demonstrated.7
second coming of the Lord is everywhere in the Scnptures
"4
represented as imminent, and may occur at any moment. References in the resolutions to "dispensation" could be to its
Many readers concluded that pretribulationism held by many
Reformed theological usage." Not every premillennialist used
Plymouth Brethren in Britain was adopted wholesale ~y the
it in the same way as Darby's followers at that time.
conference. The most influential promulgator of pretnbula
Also, a man on the resolutions committee provided a
tional dispensationalism was Irish Bible teacher John N. rejoinder. For the record theconferenceunanimouslypassed all
Darby." the resolutions as a "united testimony." After fifteen years,
However, if articles 2 and 4 are brought to bear on the
when differences over the Rapture were openly debated, Re-
12 13
THE RAPTURE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RAPTURE POSITIONS
formed Episcopalian minister B. B. Leacock revealed his dis meet the Lord in the air, not the later glorious return ofChrist
sent. He claimed that he never held the any-moment view to the earth, was the event that was possible any moment.14
because he believed a series ofprophetic signs had to be ful A few years after the 1878 conference Robert Cameron
filled before the Second Advent. But at the 1878 conference a Can~dian Baptis~ pastor who joined the Niagara progra~
he was drafted onto the committee to present the ready-made committee, restudied the Rapture issue. He abandoned the
resolutions. He did not protest or resign due to the press of pretribulational view for the posttribulational. Later at one of
circumstances.? He illustrates the tension that always existed the conferences the constant reiteration ofthe idea that Christ
in the conference regarding the meaning of"imminent." might appear at any moment irritated him; he now believed
Among the Niagara participants there were three different that an extended series ofprophesied events lay between the
definitions of"imminent." A. J. Gordon, pastorofClarendon present time and the Rapture.
Street (Baptist) Church in Boston, represented the earlier his While at that conference in the early 1880s, Cameron
toricist position. He affirmed: "the ever-imminent return of urgedPresbyteriantheologian Nathaniel West, achartermem
the Lordfrom heaven" promoted godliness because it fostered ber of the N~agara group and leading historical theologian
"the realization that He whose servants we are may appear at a~ong.Am~ncan pren:illennialists, to give the any-moment
any moment to reckon withus."10However, Gordonbelieved view his senous attention. West promised to do so but also
the Bible taught a long period ofapostasy separated the First declared, "If I find the Scriptures teach contrary to what is
and Second comings-a period concealed from believers in taught in this Conference, I will reverse myself and boldly
former ages but revealed to believers in modem times by the defend the truth."1s By this statement West acknowledged the
symbols and chronology ofDaniel and Revelation. Therefore, any-moment view was dominant at Niagara.
he argued that only the final generation, which knew the long Although there is evidence from an ecclesiastical dispute
interval was drawing to a close, are justified on scriptural a ~ew'years later tha~ West had the capacity for dogged deter
grounds in believing that Christ could come for them at any mination and even intransigence.w Cameron has overstated
mornent.P Second, some futurist premillenarians, defining t~e int~nsity of West's response to the Rapture issue at that
"imminent" in the context of their debate with postmillen time, FIrst, Cameronrecalled this watershedconversationabout
nialism, believedthe imminent returnofChristmeant that the fifty years lat~r,. after a lengthy and often harsh dispute in
signs could be fulfilled and that He could return "within the Whl.C~ the maJonty. ofAmerican premillennialists rejected the
lifetime ofany individual generation ofbelievers."12 And fi position he held with West. Also, the internal evidence from
nally, futurists holding to the pretribulationist view asserted West's treatment ofpremillennial themes before 1892portrays
that "imminent" required "the coming ofChristfor his saints W~st as.a.champion ofpremillennialism as over against post
as possible any hour."13 n:ill,en~lahsm,not as an ardent defender ofposttribulationism
When these three different definitions of"imminent" are Vls-a-VlS the any-moment Rapture view.
compared to the 1878 prophetic conference resolutions, it ap For example, in his massive, scholarly work, The Thou
pears that only Gordon, Lord, and other historicists could be sand Years inBoth Testaments (1889),17he introduced to Amer
completely consistent with that particular statement. But at ican premillennialiststhe historyofsalvation, or Heilsgeschichte,
that time the futurists were unaware ofthe built-in tensions perspective as developed by such noted German scholars as
that would eventually become the focus oftheir debate on the Franz Delitzsch of Erlangen and Leipzig and J. c. K. von
time ofthe Rapture. In this case the posttribulationists would Hofmann of Erlangen. West aimed to demonstrate "the or
modify the definition ofimminent aspossible at any moment ganic and genetic character ofrevelation and ofprophecy" or
and the pretribulationists would maintain that the Rapture to the "organic structure" of "sacred [salvation] history" as a
14
15