9 Reasons We Can Be Confident Christians Won’t Be Raptured Before The Tribulation

Fee’s concluding comments on 1 Thess 4:13-18 from his NICNT commentary:

• “It is equally inappropriate for it [this passage] to become the basis for the kind of false teaching that one finds, for example, in the ‘Left Behind’ series of books and films that became popular in the last decade of the preceding century,” (182).

In critic’s minds, Left Behind is what many of them think of when they think of dispensationalism. Nothing else. For better or worse, dispensationalism has become synonymous with eschatology; and to make matters worse, that eschatology in the popular mind seems to be summed up in the Left Behind series.

http://www.randywhiteministries.org/2014/08/07/piper-picked-peck-piddly…

Todd, you may not have met one, but they are there and they are plentiful. Your statement is a comment on your exposure rather than on the paucity of evidence.

I attend a Reformed seminary (a very good one) as I pursue a ThM. In the few classes I have taken so far, I have run into the old saws which have been disproved, or disavowed. These are also still trotted out by P & R folks (whom I respect) in ways similar to the use of the embryo progression charts in some science books. Frankly, the more I study Cov. Theology, the more convinced I am that Dispensationalism has the better chance of understanding the nature and importance of the various biblical covenants. I realize there are those who have rejected these misunderstood or disproved aspects of Dispensationalism, but I remain surprised at the various Reformed luminaries who have not researched it, or who use LH as some sort of guide on what D actually teaches.

[TylerR]

In critic’s minds, Left Behind is what many of them think of when they think of dispensationalism. Nothing else. For better or worse, dispensationalism has become synonymous with eschatology; and to make matters worse, that eschatology in the popular mind seems to be summed up in the Left Behind series.

Tyler, you might be right about this, though I doubt the popular mind really understands dispensationalism. Even among the “Christian” popular mind, I think we just need to teach better if people in our churches are confusing fiction with theology.

And regarding critics, you are just making my point for me. If “Left Behind” is all certain critics know about or think of when considering dispensationalism, I have grave doubts about the value of either their criticism or anything else they are teaching, for that matter. It’s one thing for a layman to mix up “Left Behind” with eschatology, though I think it’s still bad if the person is a Christian, and they need better teaching. It’s completely another when someone who should know better makes that mistake.

I own and enjoy the movie “The Prince of Egypt” (haven’t seen “Noah”). However, in no sense would I confuse it as being a biblically accurate representation of the Moses account any more than I would confuse “Left Behind” with being a biblically accurate representation of the events in Revelation, or even a good representation of dispensational theology. While it might be easy for some to discount dispensationalism as “Left Behind” theology, that’s still pretty intellectually lazy thinking in my opinion.

[Paul J. Scharf]

“I find it interesting that many new church plants avoid the timing of the tribulation issue altogether in their doctrinal statements. Instead: something like … we believe in the literal 2nd coming of Christ”

So what happens when one Sunday School teacher at the church plant teaches pre-trib and another teaches pre-wrath?

Is this wisdom - or confusion in the making? Or perhaps a sign that theology is not ultimate in such a church (?)

In our church plants, as long as it’s taught as one’s understanding and not as the one and only true interpretation, there is no problem. We also don’t hold an official view on the millennium. We care greatly about theology. Because we do we allow for disagreement in some areas. It’s not confusing. It’s honest.

[Fred Moritz]

Todd, you may not have met one, but they are there and they are plentiful. Your statement is a comment on your exposure rather than on the paucity of evidence.

Dr. Moritz, you misquote me (I think). I said “rarely” because most dispensationalists that I have interacted with have read three pages about Covenant Theology (as represented in Ryrie).This is not to say that there are not well-versed dispensationalists, but that many disparage Covenant Theology as ridiculous without ever having serious interaction with it. I stated this as the counterpart to the claim that most Covenant theologians haven’t studied dispensationalism…it’s a two-way street.

[Steve Davis]

In our church plants, as long as it’s taught as one’s understanding and not as the one and only true interpretation, there is no problem. We also don’t hold an official view on the millennium. We care greatly about theology. Because we do we allow for disagreement in some areas. It’s not confusing. It’s honest.

Steve,

The millennium — OK — I guess we’ll be there one way or the other, right?

But tell me how this works with pre-trib vs. pre-wrath vs. post-trib… Pretty big differences there that would impact a whole lot of things in real life. Like whether to start building a shelter and storing up food or not.

To me, if I really believe Christ is literally coming back, I don’t see how that can just be a theoretical discussion. (It makes me wonder what Piper’s counsel would be on that question. Are we REALLY preparing to go through the trib?! And we’re excited to try to prove that the pre-trib position is not true?!!)

I’m also wondering how many here have actually read the Left Behind books versus just throwing the term around. It’s a story guys… not even a theology cloaked in a story. How exactly does one build their theology on that? It would be a bit like saying that a football coach built his playbook on Facing the Giants or Friday Night Lights.

Should we really be trembling at any CT who would stand ready to judge dispensationalism by Left Behind?!! That seems rather silly.

You can like Left Behind or dislike it — or maybe think it should have never been written. But let’s not forget someone read those multiple millions of copies that were sold and many people claim they were impacted by them. Perhaps our focus should be on reaching those people further and seeing the opportunity there…

[Paul J. Scharf]

I’m also wondering how many here have actually read the Left Behind books versus just throwing the term around. It’s a story guys… not even a theology cloaked in a story. How exactly does one build their theology on that? It would be a bit like saying that a football coach built his playbook on Facing the Giants or Friday Night Lights.

Should we really be trembling at any CT who would stand ready to judge dispensationalism by Left Behind?!! That seems rather silly.

You can like Left Behind or dislike it — or maybe think it should have never been written. But let’s not forget someone read those multiple millions of copies that were sold and many people claim they were impacted by them. Perhaps our focus should be on reaching those people further and seeing the opportunity there…

Bingo.

I probably shouldn’t admit this, given how the “Left Behind” books are held in such high regard around here, but I’ve read all 12 of them, and seen all 3 movies. Not the best fiction ever written, especially the last book, which seemed rushed, but still a fun read, especially when you remember that it IS fiction. Certainly some controversial stuff in places, but again, it wasn’t a commentary or textbook.

And I agree with using the fact that many may have read them to lead to discussion with the unsaved. I haven’t had that happen with “Left Behind,” but I had a couple of great opportunities when discussing “The Passion of the Christ” (also not a theology text on the crucifixion of Christ) with a couple of unsaved friends who had seen the movie.

[Paul J. Scharf]

Steve,

The millennium — OK — I guess we’ll be there one way or the other, right?

But tell me how this works with pre-trib vs. pre-wrath vs. post-trib… Pretty big differences there that would impact a whole lot of things in real life. Like whether to start building a shelter and storing up food or not.

To me, if I really believe Christ is literally coming back, I don’t see how that can just be a theoretical discussion. (It makes me wonder what Piper’s counsel would be on that question. Are we REALLY preparing to go through the trib?! And we’re excited to try to prove that the pre-trib position is not true?!!) ……

Paul,

You’re right about the millennium. By grace we will be where we should be regardless of our views.

As for the timing of the rapture I guess I’m not sure how it “would impact a whole lot of things in real life.” We are all looking for the literal return of Christ. There may be some building bunkers due to their rapture position but I’m not aware of any. There’s also a big question on the nature of the Great Tribulation. You have to piece together a puzzle to get to a 7 year future period with Daniel’s 70 weeks, etc. I’m not saying you can’t get there but it’s not limpid. And when you look at Jesus teaching of a future time of tribulation there are good reasons to see it as fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem. That might actually make better sense of Jesus’ use of “this generation” (Matt. 24.34). As well, when I think of how Jesus describes the tribulation as “such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, and never will be” the “never will be” seems pointless if the Great Tribulation is followed by the Millennium. All that to say that it’s not that clear, to me anyway.

Steve

My first exposure to dispensationalism, the rapture, etc. (or dispen”sensationalism “) was through the Scofield Reference Bible and Larkin’s Charts. For most of the 20th Century Scofield’s notes were the standard for the position. Thankfully over the last few decades dispensationalists have distanced themselves from Scofield, but when I hear dispensational I think Scofield. I’ve always been amused to hear strict dispensationalists dismiss Calvinism as a system popularized by a man.

BTW, I’ve seen a number of dispensationalists migrate to covenant theology or a historic pre-mill position but don’t recall anyone who went the other way.

I went the other way Ron.

[josh p]

I went the other way Ron.

Glad to hear. Tell me more.

Ron,

I was saved in a doctrinally weak church and eventually migrated into PCA church after reading a lot of Calvin, Hodge, Berkhof etc. I was really more a Reformed Baptist than anything although I was still learning. Eventually I read O. Palmer Robertson’s “Christ of the Covenant” which was highly recommended as THE book to explain covenantal theology. As I read through it I was more and more disillusioned with the author’s efforts to prove his system. Mostly I was reacting against what I felt was a nebulous hermeneutic. At that time I figured I better read what Dispensationalists actually taught instead of just how they are caricatured. At the same time a man in my church (we had left the PCA church to attend a reformed baptist church) offered to do a book study of “Things to Come”. Before we made it through the first few chapters I was impressed and by the end of the book I was convinced. We went on over several years to tackle the minor prophets and Daniel as well as Revelation. All that just confirmed all the more what I now believe to be the accurate way of interpreting scripture.

By the way the man who offered to do the study with me is now my closest friend and an incredible help to me as I pursue the ministry. Would that God would send more people in the church who take the time to patiently and lovingly disciple younger Christians.

http://thecripplegate.com/taylor-and-piper-versus-the-rapture/

Bio:

http://www.tms.edu/AlumniResume.aspx?ID=704