Retractiones:
Preface
to Retractions:
In the course of my life and
studies, I have undergone some fairly drastic shifts in my own theological
paradigm. Some of these shifts occurred
slowly and other fairly rapidly. I have
decided to take a point from Saint Augustine of Hippo and put together a list
of beliefs that I wish to retract.
Sadly, at one time or another I have both espoused and taught others to
believe the points listed in these posts.
Please do not take any of critiques
personally. These posts are an exercise
in theological reflections from a more mature (and hopefully correct)
understanding. I know many people who
are far holier than I am who hold to many of the views with which I will
disagree.
The Rapture Biblically Refuted
In this post I will outline some of
the major points that led to abandon belief in a rapture. I am limiting myself to an argumentation from
the Bible alone at the request of my mom.
This is not my preferred mode of argumentation, but it is more than
adequate to discuss the rapture since it was from the Bible alone that I became
convinced to abandon belief in the rapture.
I will write another post that will address the historical evidence for
the doctrine of the rapture.
Before I can begin my critique, I
think it would be helpful to outline the doctrine of the Rapture. The rapture is generally understood to be a
distinct event that precedes the second coming of Jesus. At this event, Jesus comes part of the way to
earth and calls up his followers out of the world. This rapture takes place before, during, or
after a seven year time period of the great tribulation (depending upon whom
you speak with).
There are two primary theological
considerations that I have encountered with those who try to persuade others of
the veracity of the rapture. The first
is the place of Israel in prophecy, which I have previously addressed
here. The second is the fact that the
tribulation is a time when God pours his wrath out upon the world and because
Christians are not objects of wrath.
Therefore they must be removed prior to the experience of such divine
wrath upon the world as a whole.
The greatest difficulty (biblically
speaking) with the doctrine of the rapture is that it is not explicitly
mentioned in Scripture. Apart from an
explicit teaching, the doctrine of the rapture must be buttressed via various
passages interpreted to support this view.
I will walk through what I consider to be the best biblical arguments
and explain how I found them to be lacking.
Once I found the passages used to support the rapture were not
supportive of the rapture, I quickly abandoned belief in the rapture.
Meeting the Lord
in the Air
The best exegetical argument for the
rapture comes from 1st Thessalonians 4:13-17. I have quoted the entirety of this passage
below for the sake of context.
13 But we do not want you to be
uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as
others do who have no hope. 14
For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus,
God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. 15 For this we declare to you by a
word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the
Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord Himself will
descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and
with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise
first. 17 Then we who are
alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet
the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.
For the purposes of discussing the
rapture, the key portion is “And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be
caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so
we will always be with the Lord.” I had
been convinced that the logic of Christians going up to Jesus required that we
continue on up with him. It seemed
utterly ridiculous that Christians would go up to meet Jesus and then just turn
around and follow Jesus the rest of the way to earth. Then I read the Bible and the illogic of this
view collapsed.
What had seemed to be an illogical
action suddenly became a logical understanding when I noticed the biblical and
ancient practices for how one should meet a returning King/conqueror. The first biblical example is the tragic
story of Jephthah, who after defeating the Amorites came home. “And behold, his daughter came out to meet him with tambourines and with dances”
(Judges 11:34). Then there is the
example after David killed Goliath, “As they were coming home, when David
returned from striking down the Philistine, the women came out of all the cities
of Israel, singing and dancing, to meet King Saul, with tambourines, with songs
of joy, and with musical instruments” (1st Samuel 18:6). Both of these passages reveal that people
came out to meet and rejoice with the returning leader. Even outside of the Scriptural texts, we can
see the Roman Triumphs similarly started outside the city and entered the city
and the people of Rome would exit Rome to meet and watch the triumph (which
could take up to three days). The
conclusion from these points is that from a biblical or even a Greco/Roman
worldview, we would expect Christians to go out to meet Christ and then come
rejoicing with him at his return to earth.
Resurrection of the Dead
There is
also the issue of the resurrection of the dead.
Here in 1st Thessalonians 4:16 we read that the dead in
Christ will arise first at his second coming and then those Christians who are
alive will rise up with them and meet Christ in the air. This then leaves not only the living
unbelievers, but also the dead bodies of the unbelievers, who still await their
resurrection. This is a problem, because
it conflicts with what Jesus had to say about the resurrection in John 5:28-29:
“Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all
who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good
to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection
of judgment.”[1]
It is important to notice that Jesus spoke about “an
hour” at which both the dead and the just will be resurrected. If the just are resurrected at the rapture,
then, when are the unjust resurrected?
If one holds to a rapture and literal millennial reign, then the answer
is that the unjust will be resurrected after the end of the millennium at the
final judgement. This is problematic
because Jesus spoke about one moment in time at which the dead are raised and
not to two different events separated by his 1,000 year reign! As a basic interpretive guide, I weight clear
statements made by Jesus significantly more than speculations about eschatology
from other passages.
Wrath
Now, the issue of wrath also occurs
in 1st Thessalonians 5:9, “For God has not
destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.” From a dispensationalist point of view, this
clearly means that God will not allow Christians to undergo the tribulation
when the wrath of God is poured out upon the earth. I disagree with this position. When Paul refers to wrath, he is generally
making a reference to the final judgement.[2] Examples of Paul’s use of wrath to refer to
the final judgement can be seen in Romans 2:5-8, 3:5, 4:15, 5:9, 12:19-13:5,
Colossians 3:6, etc… If then Paul
frequently used the term “wrath” to refer to a negative outcome at the final
judgement, then the natural reading of wrath in Thessalonians 5:9 would be a
statement about how God has not destined Christians for a final judgement
resulting in the experience of wrath. Therefore this does not directly speak to the
wrath experienced in the tribulation.
Indeed,
there is a repeated call in the book of Revelation that makes it sound as though
Christians will endure suffering. An
example is this is Revelation 13:10, “If anyone is to be taken captive, to
captivity he goes; if anyone is to be slain with the sword, with the sword must
he be slain. Here is a call for the
endurance and faith of the saints” (Italics mine). It is important to note that the suffering of
Christians as described in the Book of Revelation occurs primarily at the hands
of those who oppose God (c.f. Revelation 14:12). However, it would seem more than a little
disingenuous if I did not also note that the description of plagues and or
punishments sent upon the earth would not also effect Christians. For example it would be quite odd to view a
plague or a famine upon the earth that did not afflict Christians. This is part of why there is call for the
endurance and faith of the saints.
Furthermore, the very idea that God would send a calamity upon the earth
and somehow exempt Christians from its effect would be contrary to the way God
has operated in the past. In times of
illness and famine, Christians have not magically avoided the effects of
illness and hunger. In the Early Church,
Christians were the ones caring for the sick and seeking ways to feed the
hungry, while experiencing sickness and hunger themselves.
The Promise of
Revelation 3:10
The understanding of wrath and the
suffering ties directly into a larger Biblical theme that needs to be
addressed. I will being by addressing
Revelation 3:10
“Because you
have kept my word about patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of
trial that is coming on the whole world, to try those who dwell on the earth.”
The issue that
is particularly important for this post is the promise made to the church at
Philadelphia that God would keep them from the hour of trial that is
coming. This appears to be a rather
particular promise. It is made to one
out of seven of the churches mention at the beginning of Revelation. Further, there are passages in other New
Testament books which present the idea of trials as something that should
elicit rejoicing from Christians. 1st
Peter 4:12 speaks about how Christians should not think it is strange to have a
fiery trial come upon them, but that they should rejoice. Likewise, James 1:2 encourages his reader to count
it all joy when faced with trials. These
two passages appear to speak more generally about trial(s) that the passage in
Revelation does. From this we can see
that trials should be met with rejoicing by Christians and that there was a
particular promise to the Philadelphians that they would be spared an upcoming
trial because they had already kept the word of God with patient endurance. After all, the point of trials is to produce
patience and endurance and so strengthen the faith of those Christians who
undergo trials. Indeed, there are a
plethora of verse in which Jesus and the Apostles warn us about suffering and
how we ought to prepare and receive it.
Indeed, only one of the Disciples even died a natural death after
various forms of imprisonment. The
Christian life a life that should be prepared for suffering.
As we interpret Revelation 3:10, it
is also important to reflect upon the High-priestly prayer of Jesus in John
17:14-15:
I have given
them your word, and the world has hated them because they are not of the world,
just as I am not of the world. I do not
ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil
one.
It is very
important to note that the Son of God does not pray for his followers to be
taken out of the world, which is exactly what the rapture would be. Rather, than praying for a rapture, Jesus
prays that his followers would be protected from the evil one. So then we can understand the promise to the
church in Philadelphia to be a particular promise possible tied to protection
from the effects of the evil one.
However, what is lacking from Revelation 3:10 is the idea that God will
take the Philadelphians and all other Christians up from the earth before this
coming hour of trials. Such an idea runs
contrary to the prayer of Jesus, and that is a problem. Again, I would place more emphasis upon a
clear statement from Jesus than an improbable speculation about Revelation
3:10.
The Removal of the Holy Spirit
Perhaps the most bizarre and
down-right confusing belief that I have encountered associated with belief in
the rapture is that the Holy Spirit will be removed from the earth. This belief is based upon an interpretation
of 2nd Thessalonians 2:7, “For the mystery of lawlessness is already
at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of
the way.” This verse is understood to be
speaking about the Holy Spirit who will depart when the Church is
raptured. This is not a view of the
fringe. John F. Walvoord wrote,
“The fact that
the Holy Spirit has not been taken out of the church is evidence that the Day
of the Lord has not begun. His removal,
however, will mean that the Holy Spirit will be with believers but not in
them.”[3]
This
interpretation of 2nd Thessalonians 2:7 is so replete with unintended
theological consequences that I am nearly at a loss of how to critique it.[4]
For sake of simplicity, I will start
with the one that Walvoord mentioned in his comment. That is the idea that the Spirit’s work will
somehow be different regarding believers after the rapture. Even Walvoord acknowledges the stickiness of
the issue in that he changes the prepositions used to describe how the Holy Spirit
relates to believers post-rapture. This
is compounded by his arguments that we know the Day of the Lord has not come
because the Spirit has not been taken out of the church. Well, by his later logic that the Holy Spirit
is still with believers but not in them, then there does not appear to be a
solid argument that the Spirit has not already been taken up, since the removal
of the Holy Spirit is not an actual removal, but an alteration in His relation
with believers. This is further
complicated by the lack of textual support for the idea that the Spirit’s work
in/with believers is expected to change in anyway after Pentecost. Indeed, Jesus stated the exact opposite of
this in John 14:16-17:
And I will ask the Father, and he
will give you another Helper, to be with you forever, even
the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him
nor knows him. You know him, for he
dwells with you and will be in you.
Notice, how in
this passage Jesus speak both about how the Spirit will be in his disciples and
will remain with them forever. Walvoord
interpretation attempts to divide the promise of the Spirit into two parts
instead of accepting Jesus’ promise of how the Spirit will interact as a
singular explanation. This conclusion is
further support by Jesus statement in John 7:37-39:
On the last day of the feast, the great day, Jesus stood up and cried out,
"If anyone thirsts, let him
come to me and drink. Whoever believes
in me, as the Scripture has said, 'Out of his
heart will flow rivers of living water.'" Now this he said about the Spirit,
whom those who believed in him were
to receive, for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.
Jesus is here
speaking in metaphor using water and a sign that signifies the Holy Spirit
(just as he did with the Samaritan woman at the well in John 4). We are even told this so that we would not
misunderstand the words of Jesus at this point.
Jesus spoke of the Spirit as water coming forth from the heart of a believer. This image cannot be adequately described as
the Spirit being with and not in a believer.
Therefore, once again, we are faced with a situation in which either
Jesus did not know what he was talking about, or the interpretation of another
passage has gone astray and we should not expect the Holy Spirit to be taken
away.
There is a further problem of
considering how anyone would be able to convert to Christianity if the Holy
Spirit were removed. Jesus stated, “Truly,
truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot
enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that
which is born of the Spirit is spirit” (John 3:5-6). Apart from the Holy
Spirit, entering the kingdom becomes seriously problematic. Further, the Holy Spirit bears witness about
Jesus (John 15:26) and convicts the world (John 16:8-11). Apart from these actions it is difficult to
understand how there would be conversions among people who did not convert when
the Holy Spirit was present.
In conclusion, there is no clear
scriptural mandate for a rapture from the texts of Scripture. This lack of clear support is compounded by
the problem that the biblical interpretations which support the rapture are contrary
to statements Jesus made during his incarnation. Therefore, Christians should not expect a
rapture, but should expect to meet Jesus in the air at his Second Coming as
they would greet a returning king. We Christians
should also expect to suffer and undergo trials for the strengthening of our
faith, giving thanks when they come and giving thanks when God spares us from
them.
[1] Note, Chrsystom
understands that there will be one resurrection event, Homily 39 on the Gospel
of John. The full text can be found here.
[2] This topic is
worthy of its own blog post for a complete exposition.
[3] John F. Walvoord, Understanding Christian Theology, 1267.
[4] There are
significant Trinitarian issues that I felt obliged to omit due to space
consideration and the fact that they were not necessary for a full rebuttal of
the erroneous nature of this proposition.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment