Does Revelation 3:10 Teach a Pre-Tribulation Rapture? (Part 2)

Image

We now wrap up our discussion about Revelation 3:10 (see Part 1). We’ve considered (a) what this “time of testing” is, and (b) who Jesus protects. Now, we turn to the burning question—what does the apostle John mean when he says believers will be “kept from” this time of testing?

Here is the passage—what kind of protection is Jesus promising? Physical removal from the scene, or protection from danger during the time of testing?

Advocates for a pre-tribulation rapture expend much energy on what it means to be protected from the time of testing. Bible teachers crack open their Greek New Testaments (or fire up their bible software) and begin speaking about the preposition ἐκ (“from”), which in its most basic, original sense suggests an exit from some sort of relationship.6 So, pre-tribulationists may argue, the idea is that Jesus will take the church away from the coming wrath.

This doesn’t necessarily follow, for a host of nerdy reasons that I’ll try to explain without making you fall asleep.

Blurred lines and prepositions

First, while the original meaning of the preposition ἐκ does indicate motion out of something, that certainly isn’t its exclusive or even primary sense in the New Testament. By then, prepositions no longer had a rigid meaning, which means you cannot say: “it must mean ONLY THIS!” Some pre-tribulation advocates do not seem to appreciate this because they sometimes rely on an outdated understanding of Greek prepositions.7 Language changes over time, and by the New Testament era the precise distinctions of meaning between koine Greek prepositions had now blurred and overlapped.8

  • For example, the preposition εἰς, in a strict sense, means “motion into a thing”9—you pour coffee into a cup. But, the Gospel of Mark says Jesus “was sitting on (εἰς) the Mount of Olives” (Mk 13:3).
  • If you want to insist on the classical meaning for this word, you’d translate it as “Jesus was sitting into the Mount of Olives.” Of course, that’s ridiculous—is he a mole, burrowing into the soil?
  • What’s happened is that the meaning of εἰς has blurred and overlapped with that of another preposition (ἐπί), whose “basic idea is ‘upon.’”10

What happens with every word is that its original sense expands into all kinds of figurative uses, and this expanded meaning eventually moves far afield of the “original,” rigid “meaning.” This is why, in English, the original meaning for the word “ball” is “a round or roundish body or mass.”11 But, this meaning has expanded to mean a basketball, or a testicle, or a great time (“I had a ball at the park yesterday!”), or even a formal dance (“Cinderella made it to the ball!”).

With the preposition ἐκ, its basic sense of spatial movement out of something has expanded to indicate:

  • Disassociation (“Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law,” Gal 3:13).
  • Derivation (the crown was made from thorns, Mt 27:29).
  • Time (the man was blind from birth, Jn 9:1).
  • Means (a person isn’t justified by means of doing what the law requires, Gal 2:16).
  • Personal agency (people are born by the will of God, Jn 1:13).

… and more. My point is that, in Revelation 3:10, the preposition ἐκ doesn’t necessarily mean the Lord will physically remove believers out of this world, as in: “Hang on! I’m gonna get y’all outta there!”12

Second, regardless of that point, in Greek the sense of John’s phrase “protected from the time of testing” still doesn’t suggest physical motion out of a situation. When you have the construction like that in Revelation 3:10 of “stative verb (τηρήσω) + transitive preposition (ἐκ),” the stative verb swallows up the transitive force of the preposition.13 In Revelation 3:10, this suggests the idea of physical (i.e., transitive) motion—spatial exit from a situation—falls away.14 This implies we’re left with some kind of protection from the time of testing that doesn’t include physical removal from the scene.

Therefore, building on our first point, we must look beyond the original, rigid meaning of ἐκ to rightly understand the nature of Jesus’ protection—we need the context.15

What does “from” (ἐκ) mean in Revelation 3:10?

A normal Christian with a good English translation doesn’t have to do this—but here is what responsible nerds must do “behind the scenes” to figure out what, say, Revelation 3:10 is saying.16

  1. Look at the list. As we learned, every word has a range of possible meanings. Look at the preposition’s original, rigid meaning (for example,ἐκ is spatial—“out of”), then look at the range of figurative meanings common to the word. It isn’t true that a preposition has a “literal meaning.”17 Instead, it has a range of meanings, and some (depending on context) are more likely than others.18
  2. Look at the word(s) the preposition modifies. In this case, “the time of testing” (τῆς ὥρας τοῦ πειρασμοῦ) is in the genitive case, whose historical function was to depict a description or a separation.19 Usually, prepositions govern the nouns they modify.20 In Revelation 3:10, both the preposition and the genitive case of the modified noun indicate separation from this “time of testing.”
  3. Look at the context. What does the larger paragraph tell us about what the prepositional phrase means?

Using this method, the preposition in Revelation 3:10 likely means protection from Jesus’ divine wrath which, during this “time of testing,” he will unleash upon antichrist and his kingdom:

1. Look at the list.

Because (as we saw, above) a stative verb swallows up the transitive nature of the preposition, ἐκ likely doesn’t mean “physical removal outta here” in Revelation 3:10. Instead, it’s probably a preposition of separation by disassociation.21 Jesus will somehow separate us from the time of testing, and the best rendering here is “protection from the time of testing.” The most logical kind of protection from something, without involving physical motion away from it, is to be guarded and protected during the event.

Elsewhere, John uses the very same construction22 to record that Jesus prayed that the Father would “keep them from the evil one” (Jn 17:15b). That is, protect us by separating us from Satan—not isolating us from his physical presence, but protecting us from his dominating power. In a similar way, in our passage Jesus promises to protect the church from the power of this time of divine judgment upon the kingdom of evil—just as he did in Egypt before the Exodus.

2. Look at the word(s) the preposition modifies.

As we said (above), the genitive case here suggests separation from the time of testing, which pairs nicely with the preposition which conveys the idea (in this context) of a non-physical disassociation from the time of testing.

3. Look at the context.

Jesus tells this church in Philadelphia that he has set before them “an open door,” which probably means a “door” of ready access to him “because you have a little power, and have followed My word, and have not denied My name” (Rev 3:8). Despite their likely small numbers (“a little power”) and seeming impotence, they are faithful. The door to the Messianic kingdom remains open and ready for them, despite this church’s “unimpressive” nature.23 He promises to deal with a specific cabal of Jewish people in the city who hate this congregation and are persecuting it.24 These folks, Jesus declares, are not “Jews” at all—their “synagogue” actually belongs to Satan, who is tricking them (cp. Jn 8:44).

But, Jesus assures them, because they have persistently obeyed (“kept”) his message about perseverance, he will protect (“keep”) the church in Philadelphia from the time of testing—the one about to come upon the whole world to test those who dwell upon the earth (Rev 3:10). They will be protected during the time when Jesus unleashes the seven-sealed judgments onto the kingdom of evil (Rev 6-16).25 He will return soon (“quickly”), so they must hold firmly to their faith as they endure persecution from the local “synagogue” and narrow-eyed suspicion from Roman authorities—or else they may lose their crown (Rev 3:11). In other words, keep on persevering and holding on!

Jesus will make the ones who overcome all these difficulties “a pillar in the house of my God,” and he will write his name on their foreheads to mark them as his own. He will not write his own name only, but the names of the Father and of the new Jerusalem—the celestial city (Rev 3:12).

Bottom line

The bottom line is that Revelation 3:10 (by itself) likely does not support a pre-tribulation rapture. A preposition is a very slender reed upon which to hitch your wagon.26 It doesn’t mean a pre-tribulation rapture is wrong. It just means that Revelation 3:10 probably doesn’t teach it. I believe the preponderance of evidence here does not support a pre-tribulation rapture, but it would be a mistake for either side to be dogmatic.

  • In terms of weight of evidence, “preponderance of evidence” is the weakest—it means something is more likely than not true.
  • This is followed by “clear and convincing” evidence, which means what it says.
  • Finally, the strongest case is “beyond a reasonable doubt,” which you may be familiar with from bad police movies or TV shows.
  • My assessment about whether the pre-tribulation rapture is present in Revelation 3:10 is at the level of “preponderance of evidence.”

Jesus swears he is returning soon and, if the church perseveres in faith, he promises to protect this local church from the outpouring of his divine judgment that will one day come: “In this great trial, the servants of Christ shall be kept safe.”27 He doesn’t explicitly say how he will protect them. But the preponderance of evidence suggests that it will be protection from the power of the divine judgments (Rev 6-16), just as God protected the Israelites from the plagues in Egypt.

Of course, Jesus did fulfill this promise to the church in Philadelphia because they died long before the antichrist’s reign—which is still future today! He did protect them from this time of divine wrath against the kingdom of evil. But ultimately, this is a promise to the entire church—to the entire Jesus family that is alive during the great tribulation. When the Lamb who was slain cracks open the seals to open the scroll (Rev 6-16), he will protect his church from the power of this time of testing against antichrist, his people, and his kingdom of evil.

Notes

6 Murray J. Harris, Prepositions and Theology in the Greek New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012), 103.

7 Robert Thomas (Revelation 1-7, 284-86), Paul Feinberg (“Pre-tribulation,” in The Rapture, 63-68), and Craig Blaising (“Pre-tribulation,” in The Rapture, 38, note 67) rely heavily upon the arguments of Jeffrey Townsend, who in turn relied on A. T. Robertson’s assessment of the preposition at issue: “According to Robertson, ‘The word means ‘out of,’ ‘from within,’ not like ἀπό or παρά’” (Townsend, “Revelation 3:10,” 253).

But, as modern Greek grammars recognize, Robertson was incorrect to insist on precise, classical categories to distinguish koine Greek prepositions from one another. Townsend reflects this error when he states: “This is an untenable position because the idea of preservation in and through the hour of testing would normally have been expressed by ἐν or διά” (“Revelation 3:10,” 253). He is wrong.

Dan Wallace’s admonition is relevant here: “… too often prepositions are analyzed simplistically, etymologically, and without due consideration for the verb to which they are connected. Prepositions are often treated in isolation, as though their ontological meaning were still completely intact” (Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 359).

8 Wallace, GGBB, 362-63; Harris, Prepositions, 34-35; Richard Young, Intermediate New Testament Greek (Nashville: B&H, 1994), 85-86.

9 William Arndt (et al.), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000). s.v. Hereafter “BDAG.”

10 BDAG, s.v.

11 Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, s.v. “ball,” noun, sense 1 (Springfield: Merriam-Webster, 2026), 132.

12 “[I]ndeed, it is now becoming more and more clearly recognized that it is a mistake to build exegetical conclusions on the notion that classical accuracy in the use of prepositions was maintained in the Koine period” (C.F.D. Moule, An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek, 2nd ed.(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1959), 49).

13 Wallace, GGBB, 358-59. “Stative verbs override the transitive force of prepositions. Almost always, when a stative verb is used with a transitive preposition, the preposition’s natural force is neutralized; all that remains is a stative idea.” Emphasis in original.

14 This is not the case in John 17:15a, which bears a transitive verb (ἄρῃς) + a transitive preposition (our old friend ἐκ) = the sense of movement out of this world is retained. Jesus prayed: “I do not ask that you take them away from the world …” (οὐκ ἐρωτῶ ἵνα ἄρῃς αὐτοὺς ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου).

15 “It is important to remember that prepositions are extremely flexible in meaning, and careful consideration of the literary context is essential in determining the nuance of a preposition” (Andreas J. Köstenberger; Benjamin L. Merkle; Robert L. Plummer, Going Deeper with New Testament Greek: An Intermediate Study of the Grammar and Syntax of the New Testament (Nashville: B&H, 2016; Kindle ed.), KL 10481-10482).

16 I adapted this from Harris, Prepositions, 31. I left off his fourth step because it does not apply in this case.

17 Erroneously, Craig Blaising wrote: “This view depends on a ‘dynamic’ interpretation of the preposition ek …” (“A Case for the Pretribulation Rapture,” in Three Views on the Rapture: Pretribulation, Prewrath, or Posttribulation, ed. Alan Hultberg (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2010), 38). This is incorrect and does not reflect the realities of language in general, let alone koine Greek.

18 Young, Intermediate Greek, 86.

19 Young, Intermediate Greek, 23.

20 Wallace, GGBB, 360-62.

21 BDAG, s.v., sense 1c; cp. Brill Dictionary of Ancient Greek (hereafter “GE”), ed. Franco Montanari (Leiden: Brill, 2015),s.v., sense II.A.c.

22 Gk: τηρήσῃς αὐτοὺς ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ = preposition ἐκ + genitive object. “[T]he thought is quite in keeping with that of our Seer” (Charles, Revelation, 1:89-90). And, the apostle also wrote this same phrase at both John 17:15 and Revelation 3:10. This suggests it is a stylistic quirk of John’s of which we ought to take note.

23 Robert Mounce, The Book of Revelation, in NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 117.

24 Some people think this means that members of this hostile Jewish synagogue will come to believe Jesus is their Messiah. Others think Jesus refers to their eventual acknowledgment of him in a non-saving way—perhaps on the day of judgment (Rev 20). That is, “every knee will bow, and every tongue will confess …” (etc.).

25 Some pre-tribulation advocates eagerly seize upon a distinction between (a) being kept from the danger itself, and (b) being kept from the time period of this danger. The latter, they sometimes claim, suggests a physical removal from the scene. In truth, this is a de minimis argument.

26 For example, Paul Feinberg spent five pages discussing the preposition ἐκ as he supported the pre-tribulation rapture perspective at Revelation 3:10. If a preposition is the best you got, then your argument is very weak (“The Case for a Pre-tribulation Rapture Position,” in The Rapture: Pre, Mid, or Post-Tribulation, ed. Stanley Gundry and Gleason Archer (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984), 63-68).

27 Henry Alford, The New Testament for English Readers: A Critical and Explanatory Commentary, New Edition, vol. 2 (London; Oxford; Cambridge: Rivingtons; Deighton, Bell and Co., 1872), 969. Similarly, John Gill writes that: “it will be known who are his true churches, and pure members; and these he’ll keep close to himself, and preserve safe amidst all the distress and confusion the world will be in” (An Exposition of the New Testament, vol. 3 (London: Mathews and Leigh, 1809), 711).

Discussion

Tyler,

Thank you for this series. I'm not quite following what you are trying to say about the preposition. Maybe you could help me better understand what you are arguing.

When Wallace discusses the construction, he appears, at least to me, to be specifically responding to Gundry's argument, but I don't see him saying anything that would rule out the pre-trib interpretation of Rev 3:10.

You are correct in noting that John does not say anything in this verse about us as believers "moving" or "going" anywhere, so maybe that is what is intended by referring to it as a stative verb, but it is actually something that Jesus is promising to do (dynamic) that leads to a state for us, the believers. So, you are correct to say that the construction says nothing about us "going away" and the preposition probably means we are in some sense separated "from" this coming hour, but that still begs the question how exactly we are separated from it.

Based on your study of the preposition, would you see any parallels with these two passages?

1 Thess 1:10 - "Jesus, who rescues/saves us from the coming wrath" (Ἰησοῦν τὸν ῥυόμενον ἡμᾶς ἐκ τῆς ὀργῆς τῆς ἐρχομένης)

John 12:12 - "Father, save me from this hour" (πάτερ, σῶσόν με ἐκ τῆς ὥρας ταύτης)

The second one seems especially relevant since we have the same author and the same object of the preposition ("hour").

I realize that this will continue to be a thorny theological question, but I am not quite sure how a grammatical argument makes the pre-trib interpretation unlikely here.

Ryan

In a nutshell, if you think Rev 3:10 is a strong case for a pre-trib rapture, then you’re hanging your hat on the preposition (and its context) in Rev 3:10. This is a very weak argument, because the preposition is extraordinarily flexible depending on context. And, the context in Rev 3:10 just doesn’t do what people want it to do = it isn’t a strong case. Everything founders on what kind of protection is being promised, and the message to the church in Philadelphia doesn’t give you enough to make a strong case either way. This is why people continue to argue about it.

You wrote:

… the preposition probably means we are in some sense separated “from” this coming hour, but that still begs the question how exactly we are separated from it.

Exactly. And neither Rev 3:10 nor its preposition tells us how—it just says that it will happen.

Our passion for an interpretation should vary depending on the strength of the evidence in the passage. Rev 3:10 just doesn’t have enough there, by itself, to be a good case. The only way one could make it a meaningful plank for a pre-trib rapture is because of strong convictions due to a strong exegetical basis elsewhere.

Of course, great Christians believe in a pre-trib rapture. They’re welcome to it. But, they shouldn’t showcase Rev 3:10 as strong evidence. At the end, I tossed in a quick taxonomy of “strength of evidence” from my own bi-vocational context as a state investigator. I rate the strength of my position in this article as “preponderance of evidence,” which is pretty weak. I also rate the pre-trib position the same. In other words, neither side can do much with this passage by itself.

About Jn 12:27 =

  • We again have a buffet of options for the preposition, which (again) probably narrow down to spatial movement (“get me outta this time that’s coming!”) or disassociation (“don’t let this time come upon me”).
  • I think the second is most likely. But, we may be wanting the preposition to do too much.
  • Jesus is just saying: “Man, I really don’t wanna do this—but this is why I came, so I gotta do it.” My sense is that we’re making a mistake if we push for laser-like precision here.
  • I feel the same about Rev 3:10 = the preposition probably just means disassociation. It doesn’t have to mean spatial removal, and folks (like Blaising) who claim that other than that is a “dynamic” reading of the preposition are really out in left field = that isn’t how language works. If one’s case hinges on a preposition, then your overall case is pretty weak. It’s like hanging your hat for baptismal regeneration on eis in Acts 2:38 = you want to say, “Come on, bro—is that all you have?”

If you’re the Ryan Meyer from DBTS, then I’m intrigued by your argument for “generation” in Mt 24:34! If you aren’t him, then never mind!

Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.

I am in a discussion group with a group of pastors and academics, many with PhDs, and most from a Reformed Baptist background. The 1689 is revered in these circles. I am astonished at how many of these good men know almost nothing about eschatology. All they do know is that national Israel allegedly has no future. They don’t understand critical passages and don’t know what to do with Revelation or Daniel.

One man I know took Rev 4-5 and made a sermon about principles for proper worship = that is not what the passage is about! I mean that there is a bizarre mental “block” in many good pastor’s minds when it comes to prophecy and eschatology. It’s like they don’t like dispensational excesses and so deliberately never bother to study eschatology at all. It’s shocking to me.

Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.

Most people who have written commentaries on Revelation don’t know what to do with the book after chapter 3. Nothing can be what it appears to be and almost everything has a figurative meaning which no one quite knows, except that there are lots of allusions to stuff that happened in the OT.

Dispensationalists try their best to take things as they appear, but that leads to thorny interpretive issues as well.

I’m teaching through Revelation (currently on chapter 17), and many times I have to admit we don’t really know what’s going on in particular chapters.

Last time I taught/preached through Rev (which has been a while now!), I got the feeling I might be doing better if I went faster, taking larger chunks at a time and focusing on the certainties. There are some really clear themes. Global rejection of the faith, suffering of the saints, faithful preaching, surprising (given the context) conversions, the holiness and worthiness of Christ, the ultimate victory, the beauty and glory of what is eventually coming. So maybe a sermon on each of those, tracing it through the whole section from ch3 on, all in parallel.

If I get the opportunity to do it again, I might give that a try.

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.