Three Questions About a “Secret” Rapture

 
February 7th, 2006 by iMonk

UPDATE: Jason Boyett’s “Pocket Guide to the Apocalypse” is a great book for anyone interested in the basics of evangelical apocalyptic eschatology.
Advocates of the rapture make much of the texts in Luke and Matthew that speak of “one taken, one left.”

Luke 17:34-35 34 I tell you, in that night there will be two in one bed. One will be taken and the other left. 35 There will be two women grinding together. One will be taken and the other left.”

When discussing texts that supposedly teach the secret rapture, it is important to have the advocate of this belief answer several questions.
1. What exactly do you mean by the rapture?
If the advocate means that when Christ returns, those who are alive will meet him in the air, that is not, in and of itself, the problematic doctrine. Scripture clearly says this.
The full dispensational teaching, however, is this:

Christ will return twice. Once secretly, with the saints, in the air to retrieve the church (both living and bodies in the grave;) and again, publicly, to judge the earth following a seven-year tribulation period.

If the advocate simply means that Christ will return once, and separate the church and the world at his appearing, and then proceed to judge and establish his kingdom, then even those of us who may have issues with the specifics of that eschatology would probably have little interest in debating the Biblical merits of the rapture.
The text above says that when Christ returns, there will be a separation. Nothing in the text implies the tribulation or a later, second, return of Christ. It is describing a single event, and is completely compatible with the idea of one return of Jesus.
But if the advocate is indicating that we must believe in two, separate comings of Jesus, with different characteristics, and a seven-year tribulation, then there will be many reasons to say this is not taught in the text in Luke or anywhere else in scripture.
The passages cited above could be applied to either interpretation, so the advocate should be clear what he/she means.
These passage do NOT prove two returns of Christ; one private, one public, separated by seven years.
(In fact, N.T. Wright has convinced me they do not refer to the traditional “Second Coming” at all, but that is another post.)
2. Where does the Bible clearly and plainly teach that Christ will return twice?

This is a key question that rapture advocates need to consider carefully. Note Paul’s words in II Thessalonians 1, regarding the very public return of Christ:

2 Thessalonians 1:9-10 9 They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might, 10 when he comes on that day to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at among all who have believed, because our testimony to you was believed.

The text is clearly telling the Thessalonians what will happen at the return of Christ. Paul is NOT talking about a secret rapture/tribulation, but a public return/judgement/reward. On “one day” there will be punishment and reward.
Even passages that are repeatedly cited as being about the two-stage rapture are not describing a “secret” event.

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 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.

How can this passage be describing a secret event? The kinds of gymnastics that must be applied to say the “cry,” “shout,” and “sound of the trumpet” are part of a secret event are simply not welcome in good interpretation. Holding on to such an interpretation instead of the plain meaning of the text proves that a presupposition is being protected from the text itself.
Nowhere does Paul tell the churches under his charge that Christ will return twice in the dispensational, two returns scenario. He teaches that Christ will return once, publicly, for judgement and reward. Advocates of the two returns scenario must construct Biblical evidence, because there is no single verse that says Christ returns twice.
Further, the idea that God would give a seven year “warning bell” to those who do not believe is an alien and bizarre notion. Consider the implications if this is indeed the case, and every preacher must say that all unbelievers have seven years of warning before the “real” day of judgement arrives.
Advocates of the rapture should admit that not a single text clearly teaches the novel idea of two returns separated by seven years. It is simply not there.
This is important in the third question:
3. Why is the two-stage rapture theory not taught by any major Bible teachers in the broad history of Christianity?
The two-stage + tribulation rapture theory is not mentioned by Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Edwards or Spurgeon. It is not taught by the Puritans or the Catholic Church. It is not part of any classic Christian confession. All believed in one return of Christ.
Why is this? The advocates of the two-stage rapture need to admit that if the great teachers of the church have not found this doctrine, it is a recent innovation.
The actual history of the two-stage return of Christ teaching has been uncovered and published by David Macpherson. The origin of this teaching in a visionary experience by Margaret Macdonald, and its subsequent acceptance into American Evangelicalism by way of Darby and the Scofield study Bible, is an interesting and necessary account to learn. The two stage rapture is an innovation without Biblical support, with a pedigree that should absolutely shock many of those who promote the rapture most vigorously. It is highly ironic that an anti-Charismatic like John Macarthur advocates a doctrine that originated in “charismatic” visions by an end-times prophetess who would be a star of TBN today.
The propagation of this idea in books, music, sermons and novels may have caused most American evangelicals to assume that the Bible teaches the entire rapture-tribulation-return scenario, but the success of the doctrine does not make up for its absence in scripture or Christian history.
Advocates of the two-stage rapture ASSUME that it is the proper interpretation of the Luke texts and other texts. It is a PRESUPPOSITION, and not a conclusion based on what scripture teaches.
I do not believe the two-stage rapture theory is a serious error or a matter of separation, but I do believe its message has many insidious effects on western Christians. They mythology of the rapture is used to promote all kinds of false and manipulative teaching in the church. It is a creation of the enthusiasts, propagated by the evangelical fringe and marketed by the booksellers and publishers for the sake of the its “exciting” story line. I have seen much bad fruit come from it, and I have serious questions about its effects on our mindset about missions and reformation.
Careful students of scripture and those who respect the views of the teachers/confessions of the church that have come before us more than the visions of the “Scottish Lass” or the notes of the questionable C.I. Scofield will take an honest, second look at this doctrine, and let scripture, not American evangelical publishers, have the final word.

Meet Our Founder

As the “Countdown Clock” on Tian’anmen Square ticked backwards toward the July 1 takeover of Hong Kong, Bob Fu and his pregnant wife, Heidi, knew their time was running out, too... Learn More >