Should We Trust The Pre-trib Rapture Theory?

Take heed that no man deceive you...   - Jesus

Welcome To Our Page On The Rapture!

We will be posting articles, facts, links, and research helps that approach this matter in a truthful fashion.

The Rapture Theory Is Not An Early Doctrine

Trouble With Numbers?
The fact that the 'Second Coming' of Christ is referred to as such is in itself evidence that the rapture myth is truly a modern creation. If the early church had believed in one coming of Christ to 'rapture' them, and then another coming when he returns to rule and reign years later, they would have by nature called his 'rapture' coming the Second Coming. And his later coming to rule would of course been named the Third Coming.

The Second Is Not The Third!
Christ's return to this world will be his Second Coming and not his third! When the rapture theory came to popularity some decades ago there was no good way to deal with this pesky numbering issue because the concept of his Second Coming was so ingrained in the vernacular of the believers it could not be undone or altered. So they have to shy away from this sore spot, and act like this is a non-issue, even though it's clearly a major rebuke to their myth and causes many to question the correctness of their rapture theory, and rightly so!

A Bogus Claim
There are many who point to a handful of references in the writings of early Church fathers as proof of the rapture theory. There are three major problems with this notion:
  1. First, of this small number of quotes easily half could just as well be referring to escaping God's wrath in a post-trib resurrection. The focus of discussion there is escape not timing. These could be read either way.
  2. Second, and more importantly, if the early Church and subsequent generations had believed in a second and third coming of Christ (a rapture coming and seven years later a coming to rule and reign) this concept would be found in thousands of early writings and not just a handful. The subject would be a major focus of Christian writing down through the ages and the record of such would be overwhelming. This is not the case.
  3. Lastly, a doctrine is not validated by age but by Scriptural support (of which the rapture theory is quite lacking). There were a number of false doctrines assaulting the early Church which are still a bother today. Does the early date of these heresies somehow validate them? Of course not, and any early reference to the notion of a Pre-trib rapture is no validation either. The doctrines of our faith come from the Word of God. The rapture theory is something that has been added in by man. 
SEE ALSO: Post-Trib Quotes Down Through The Ages

SEE ALSO:  The Rapture Is Not 'The Mystery' God Revealed To Paul!

The 'Known Day' Versus The 'Unknown Day' Myth

The following is an excerpt from the new book 'The Pre-Trib Rapture: A Bucket Full of Holes! '  by Paul Benson.

Stolen Snippet:
'of that day and hour knoweth no man,'

Heisted Jargon
How many times have you heard the words 'of that day and hour knows no man' spoken in connection with the rapture theory? Unless you are living under a rock or on a remote deserted island your answer would be, “More times than I can remember.” It is one of the most common phrases used to promote that doctrine. But just what day was Jesus actually referring to?

Open And Shut Case?
Frequently cited as 'absolute proof'' the rapture and the Second Coming are two separate events is a portrayal of two days called the 'known day' and the 'unknown day'. Their story usually sounds something like this: There is a day which is absolutely known and a day which cannot be known; two separate days that cannot be the same day. The first is the day of the rapture, of which (they claim) Jesus said 'no man knows the day or hour'; this is the 'unknown day'. The second is the day of the Second Coming which (they claim) the Bible says will be 1260 days after the Antichrist begins to rule; therefor if we can figure the day of Christ's Coming by the 1260 day countdown it is a 'known day'.

Conclusion: since an unknown day and a known day cannot be the same day; and the day of the Second Coming is known whereas the day of the rapture is unknown they cannot be the same day. End of story. Case closed! Or is it really?

The Jury Deliberates
For many this sounds like a solid open and shut case. But is it, or has some deception taken place here? Having had for many years a deep interest in Bible prophesy the time-spans of 3 ½ years, forty two months, 1260 days, 1290 days, and 1335 days found through out the Scriptures have always caught my attention. There is no doubt they are given to us as a framework in which end-time events are to transpire. But as to this 'known day' and 'unknown day' theory there is a serious flaw in the reasoning of those touting this supposed 'proof' of two separate comings of Christ. Let's look at the context this snippet was pulled out of.

Evidence Of Deception
But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of Heaven, but my Father only. 37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. Matthew 24:36-37

The problem with this 'absolute proof' they're asking us to ingest is that the phrase 'of that day and hour knoweth no man' is a snippet stolen from a passage we have already proven earlier in this chapter is definitely referring to the Second Coming. Again I urge you to read the passage in your Bible and see the context. Jesus clearly labeled the day of his Return as an 'unknown day'! And that makes all the wrangling and fussing over counting 1260 (or is it 1290? or 1335?) days a moot point. I've seen some pretty *'fancy footwork' dancing around this problem with their theory, but nothing that stays on its feet after close scrutiny. Once again the context of the verse rebukes their usage of that verse.

Also who knows when the 1260 days start for sure. Is it the day Antichrist takes control, the day he announces his control, the day the abomination is set up, or maybe the day it's revealed to the world? Or maybe the day people are required to begin worship of him? A claim to know an exact day is quite presumptuous.

The Verdict Is In!
I don't care how rock solid any assumptions seem about reckoning the days from Antichrist's arrival to Jesus' Coming; we see Jesus was absolutely not referring to a prior event, but to his Return in Matthew 24:36. The day of Christ's Return is an unknown day; and this makes their 'proof'' go 'poof'! Calling the day of his Return a 'known day', and saying Jesus was speaking of the rapture theory when he said 'of that day and hour knoweth no man' are both a lie. The context in which this phrase belongs clearly makes that accusation. The portrayal of a known day versus an unknown day proving two separate comings of Jesus is a bucket full of holes.

* (I am referring here to a notion some put forth of a systematic 'dual reference' in Matthew 24 pointing to two comings of Christ in the end-times. I have read page after page of theological ramblings on this subject but nothing that is anything more than supposition forced by the rapture theory position. What amazes me is they ignore the fact that even if Matthew 24:36 was a dual reference (and it's not) it would be referring to two unknown days! It would still be declaring the Second Coming as an unknown day! What kind of 'proof' is that? More of their 'proof' that proves nothing at all!)
Case Closed!

The Antichrist Must Come Before The Rapture!

by John Little from Omegashock .com
(The following is an excerpt from Section One of Ezekiel's Fire by John Little. Sign up to receive his weekly newsletter. Very informative!)

Paul reached out to the church in Thessalonica because they were thrown into turmoil over the idea of the Rapture. It appears that someone was telling them that they had missed it. Here is what Paul says in 2 Thessalonians 2:

Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
– 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4

The Antichrist MUST come before the Rapture. There is no other way that you can interpret this verse. None.
Unfortunately, pre-tribbers seek to twist this verse by saying that ‘falling away’ is The Rapture.
Really? Apostasy is the RAPTURE?

Here’s the Greek word that Paul used for ‘falling away’:
ἀποστασία – apostasia
That is NOT – and cannot be – the word for the Rapture. In another verse, apostasia was translated as forsake in Acts 21:21, when Paul was being accused of teaching apostasy, it was because they thought that he was telling people to forsake the Law of Moses.

Apostasia is NEVER used in ANY place in the Bible in reference to the Rapture. In fact, Paul already had a word that he uses for the rapture. It’s used in this phrase:
by our gathering together unto him
The Greek word used for gathering together is:
ἐπισυναγωγῆς – episynagōgēs

It really does just mean ‘gather together’.
The word that pre-tribbers like to use – rapture – comes from the Latin – rapturo. It’s a *good word, and I use it because that’s what people understand. The Greek version of this word is:
ἁρπάζω – harpazó
It means to snatch away, or to take by force. And THAT is exactly what the Lord is going to do. He’s going to snatch us away. In fact, Paul uses much the same word in 1 Thessalonians 4:
Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
– 1 Thessalonians 4:17
The word for shall be caught up is:
ἁρπαγησόμεθα – harpagēsometha
And, the root is – you guessed it – harpazo.

So, when a pretribber comes to you and tries to tell you that The Great Apostasy in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 is actually the rapture, tell him that he’s passing on a lie. And then, tell him this:

The Antichrist Must Come Before The Rapture
To believe otherwise is to believe a lie. And, there is only one person who is the father of lies.

READ THE ENTIRE SECTION HERE:
 Section One of Ezekiel's Fire by John Little

* (I disagree the name rapture is a good word. Please see my two explanations below. P.B.)

Why We Should NOT Use The Name 'Rapture' To describe the 'Catching Away'

by Paul Benson

Guilty by Association?

I am trying to condition myself to use biblical terms instead of man-made ones. I try not to use the word 'rapture' unless I'm speaking about the pre-trib rapture theory and its components. The reason being I have developed a conviction that doing so unwittingly promotes that deception. We should refer to our hope the way the Bible does; and say we are looking forward to the Resurrection of the Just, or the Resurrection at the Last Day. Our casual usage of the word 'rapture' leaves the impression we endorse that erroneous concept. We become just another person 'waiting for the rapture'. This helps foster the 'it's only a matter of timing' falsehood and makes us a part of the problem and not the solution.

The Rapture and the Resurrection of the Just at the Return of Christ to earth are not the same thing! There are many differences between the two concepts (most notably one is Bible truth and one is a fable). And further if you believe in the rapture you must also acknowledge the reality of the Resurrection which takes place at the Second Coming. There is no way around it, it has to happen. But rapture teachers rarely mention it because it causes their theory to lose traction when they start teaching two resurrections of the dead believers when the Bible clearly states all believers are resurrected in one event at his Coming (1 Corinthians 15:21-24)

Again it's not about the timing of ONE event, it's about the deceptive introduction of a second event (a false hope of escaping the coming great persecution) into peoples belief system. Do we want to be a part of that? Let's help others realize there is a conflict going on here between truth and error, and we've chosen not to buy into the lie. If all who reject the rapture theory would boycott the use of the word 'rapture' many would become curious why, and might be stirred to critically re-examine what they believe and where these beliefs came from. Let's call it the Resurrection at the Last Day, its proper Bible name; not some catchy thing a deceived man made up to promote his falsehood.

Why The Need For A New Name - The Rapture?

by Paul Benson

For nearly two thousand years the Scriptures, the body of Christ, and even scoffers, have referred to the event that brings us the fullness of our salvation, and the redemption of our body, as the Resurrection at the Last Day. Why was there a necessity to invent a completely NEW name: The 'Rapture'? Have you ever thought about that?

Did anyone really need to rename our promise of the Resurrection? Do we need a new name for salvation? For healing? For the Cross? No! How about for Heaven? No, but how about if I came up with a new doctrine of a paradise that is a little different that what has been commonly believed for all this time, and what if I said getting there is a little easier than what we've been taught. I couldn't call it Heaven. Folks might look into what the Bible really teaches on Heaven and call me on it. I'd need a way to get them to turn loose of some long held beliefs; maybe I could use some subtle distractions.

First I would have to invent a new name for this new revelation.  CONTINUE READING

The Safeguard Of Critical Examination

by Paul Benson

I am firmly convinced the main reason so many people are hoodwinked by deceptive teachings is that they do not employ the safeguard of Critical Examination. I am talking about the practice of breaking down a doctrine into its various components, and then demanding a validation of that claimed concept expressly stated in the Bible. When put up against this standard falsehood slithers away like the serpent it is.

I met Christ in a denominational Church (C.O.G. Clev. TN) and was constantly bombarded with their Dispensational / pre-trib theory. As a new believer filled with the Holy Spirit, and a voracious appetite for the Word of God, I ran into much discrepancy between what I was hearing from the pulpit and what I was seeing plainly stated (or not stated at all) in the Scriptures. Try as I might to find a pre-trib rapture, and all its various facets, the only place I was getting that notion from was the pulpit (and not my Bible)!

After a couple of years of being told I should just trust what I was being taught was correct, and not question it, I grew quite suspicious of their claims. That didn't set very well with me. I made the decision then (some 35 years ago) I would only accept as firm doctrine what could be clearly shown to have foundation in the text of the Scriptures. I would trust without question only what was plainly stated in my Bible, and base my beliefs upon that.

And although nearly every believer I have ever met claims to hold themselves (and others) to that standard; I have realized that few actually make the effort to closely examine what they believe, or what they are taught, in light of God's Word.

Using this safeguard of critical examination, and a firm demand for Scriptural validation, set me free from the errors of the pre-trib rapture theory. Let me give you an example of this safeguard at work:

I believe only in a visible Coming of Christ where all will behold his glory. Why do I believe that? Because it is expressly stated in God's Word in multiple places: Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him...(Rev. 1:7) ...and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven (Matt. 24:30) ...this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven. (Acts 1:11)

MANY other verses could be quoted that all show a completely visible return of Christ. Because this concept is clearly stated in the Scriptures I can have a firm confidence it will be just that way. There are NO verses expressly teaching a secret non-visible coming of Christ; so I choose NOT to accept that notion. Why should I; just because a lot of people think it really is biblical? No, thank you! If you are going to suggest something is 'Bible Truth' you ought to actually have some Bible to back up your claim, and not merely a theory, don't you think?

The pre-trib rapture theory (and that is all it really is – a theory) is built upon snippets of verse pulled out of context, unsupported notions, and even outright lies. If you will take the time to examine my writings on this subject you will see what I mean.

Here is a link to an article where I show examples of the deceptive way Scripture is pulled out of context, assigned a new meaning and then misused to teach a pre-trib rapture:

https://pbenson.me/2017/01/10/stolen-snippets/

Here is a link to an article that lists many aspects of the pre-trib teaching which have absolutely no foundation in the Bible, and asks the question: Why should we believe such a thing?

https://pbenson.me/2016/06/14/unanswered-questions-about-the-rapture/

What do I believe? Here is a link to an article that shows the clear biblical support for various aspects of what I teach about the Return of Christ and our Catching Away.

https://pbenson.me/2017/01/03/why-i-believe-what-i-do-about-the-return-of-christ/

Here is a complete list of my articles on the Pre-trib rapture theory:

https://pbenson.me/category/the-rapture-theory/

A Secret Coming of Christ?

The following is a modified excerpt from the book 'Escape or Passover' by Paul Benson.

A Secret Coming?

I have heard many a speaker proclaim a secret invisible Coming of Christ to 'rapture' the Church' as an integral part of the teachings of God’s Word, but I have never heard anyone quote a passage which actually says such a thing! Try as they might to garner Scriptural support for this notion, there is none. There is not one passage in the Bible which explicitly puts forth this concept. It has to be presupposed, and then collaborated by bits of verse pulled out of context. Let's look at what the Scriptures really do have to say about the Return of Christ.    READ MORE

Two Free Books
On
The Rapture Issue!

We carry two books by Paul Benson which discuss the Return of Jesus Christ and the gathering of the Church unto him; and also address the issue of whether or not the Church will be here on earth during the time of the Great Tribulation.





'The Pre-Trib Rapture: A Bucket Full of Holes!'


and


'Escape or Passover'.

Both these books hit the issue head-on in a simple straight forward manner which encourages examining 'proof texts' in their contextual setting.
he Rapture Theory by Paul Benson
NEW for 2017! 192 pages.
Escape or Passover by Paul Benson
EZ-Read Book 72 Pages
Also focused on is the amazing number of the various elements of the Rapture Theory which have absolutely no scriptural support; they are nothing more than unfounded speculation.

These e-books are available for free download. They come in 3 different formats: PDF, E-Pub, or Kindle/AZW3.
To go to our download page click the button below.

Thy Rapture Come?

 I hear people say, “I'm praying hard for the rapture to happen soon!” But is that really how we ought to be praying? I'm pretty sure Jesus said to pray: Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.
Luke 11:2

Instead of praying, “Lord, bring your Kingdom here to us.”; rapture theorists are praying, “Lord, take us away to your Kingdom.”

Our duty as believers is to travail in prayer for the Return of Christ. Why are so many ignoring that command and instead praying for an evacuation before the final conflict. What are you praying for: 'Kingdom Come', or 'Cut and Run'?

Additional Resources

Let's Get It Right! My Blog Page.  Here is a list of my blog articles on the rapture issue:
https://pbenson.me/category/the-rapture-theory/


http://posttribrapture.org/
The website of Daniel Cox. Great articles and insight from a long time believer.

I highly recommend the writings of John Little from Omegashock.com
http://www.omegashock.com/

POST-TRIB QUOTES DOWN THROUGH THE AGES

The Church has ALWAYS believed we will face Antichrist, and the Mark of the Beast! Here is a list of quotes spanning twenty centuries of Church history. QUOTES THROUGH THE AGES

Research Assistance Needed!
APPLY HERE


Give me a hand, please?

Maybe you could help me with my research. I have been looking for years for answers to some questions the rapture theory raises in my mind. The problem is I cannot find any Bible verses that clearly teach these major facets of the rapture theory (of which I am assured are quite Scriptural).

All other major doctrines of our faith are plainly stated with multiple witnesses leaving no doubt what we are to believe. If there are 31,102 verses in the Bible surely there must be loads of passages explicitly stating these elemental truths of the rapture theory. Does anyone know where they are?
  • Where does it say Jesus will have an invisible coming to earth?
  • Where does it say the rapture takes us off to Heaven?
  • Where does it say there will be resurrected believers in Heaven before the Second Coming?
  • Where is Scripture that says the Marriage Supper of the Lamb takes place in Heaven?
  • Where does it say the Body of Christ will instantly disappear?
  • Where does Jesus say he will come back to earth twice in the end-times?
  • Where do the Scriptures say the time of the great tribulation is the 'wrath of God' being poured out?
  • What verses teach the Body of Christ is not now God's 'elect'?
  • Where does the Bible state the Fig Tree represents or symbolizes Israel?
  • Where does it say there will be no signs of Jesus' Return for us to watch for?
  • Where does it teach that the Holy Spirit restrains evil men from rising to power?
  • When did Christ's Return become imminent?
  • Where does it say the Body of Christ will not face the Mark of the Beast?
  • Where does it say the rapture takes place in a split-second?
  • Where does it say O.T. Saints will not rise in the Resurrection of the Just?
  • Where does it say that the 'Age of Grace' comes to a close before the tribulation?
  • HELP! Where are they? Does anybody know?

If I can't find any clear Bible teaching to answer these questions why in the world should you or I believe such a thing? Where is the love for the truth that God demands from his people? This rapture theory is nothing short of a man-pleasing delusion!

And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2 Thessalonians 2:10-11

The Myth of Two Comings

This is an excerpt from Chapter Four: Outright Lies from the book 'The Pre-Trib Rapture: A Bucket Full of Holes!' by Paul Benson

Outright Lie: The Coming (parousia) of Christ and his
Revelation (apokalupsis) are two separate events.


The rapture theory centers around the false notion that there are two separate returns of Jesus in the end-time events. To illustrate the difference in these two events we are explained the first is his invisible Coming (Greek-parousia) to 'rapture' the Church, and the second is his Revelation (Greek-apokalupsis) where he is revealed to the world and pours out judgment.

My question is this:1 Cor. 15:23 says we will be resurrected and caught up to meet Christ at his Coming (Greek-parousia). In 2nd Thessalonians 2:8 it says Jesus will destroy the man of sin with the brightness of his Coming (parousia). How could Christ's Coming (parousia) destroy Antichrist at the end of his reign if his Coming (parousia) is before the tribulation? It's not, it's right after!

There are a number of words used to refer to the Coming of Christ: coming (Greek-'parousia'), revelation (Greek-apokalupsis), coming (Greek-erchomai) etc., and if you compare their usage in the Bible you will see times they are used interchangeably to refer to the same event. A glaring example is to look a Jesus' reference to the days of Noah and Lot in Matthew 24 and then compare Luke's account. Matthew has Jesus using the word coming (parousia) but in Luke Jesus speaks of it as the day he will be revealed (apokalupto). Both are describing the same event!

So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming (apokalupsis) of our Lord Jesus Christ: 1 Corinthians 1:7

In this verse above we have the word 'apokalupsis' there translated as coming. The same Greek word is translated in the next example as Revelation! Are you waiting for an unbiblical rapture; or waiting for the Resurrection at the Coming/Revelation (apokalupsis) of Christ?

The Revelation (apokalupsis) of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass. Revelation 1:1

The Coming of Christ for the Church and the Revelation of Jesus Christ are one and the selfsame event! To deny that is a lie.

And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear (phaneroo), we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming (parousia). 1 John 2:28

His Appearance and his Coming are the same event! To separate into two events what the Word of God plainly shows to be one Coming of Christ is error and deception.

Jesus Is Lord! He is Coming Again.  Are you ready to meet Him?