Hello, once again, this is Dr. Phil Fernandez, the founder of the Institute of Biblical Defense and the academic dean of Farriston Theological Sermonary. Today's lecture is the second lecture in our series on eschatology, the second lecture in our series on the end times, and today I'd like to discuss the rapture. The rapture of the Church. I stated in the last lecture that I am a pre-millennialist, And so this course will be based on the pre-millennial interpretation of the scriptures, that is that Jesus Christ returns before the thousand year reign, and then he rules on the earth for a thousand years. So I believe Christ returns before the millennium, or before the kingdom of God comes to earth in a physical sense. But I also stated that I am a post-tribulationalist. In other words, I believe that Jesus Christ returns after the seven-year tribulation period, and that the second coming of Christ is synonymous with the rapture of the Church. The Church is caught up into the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and then the Lord returns. We meet the Lord in the clouds, and then the Lord returns with His Church and brings God's wrath on the earth. Now, in this lecture, I'd like to provide evidence for the post-tribulational rapture. Brief introduction. I'd like to state that this is a debate between brothers. This is a debate between brothers. You see, the rapture question is not essential to salvation. You know, the essential issues to salvation are such things as the deity of Christ, the fact that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh, and that salvation comes by God's grace alone through faith in Christ alone. and that Christ provided this salvation for us by his substitutionary death. He died on the cross as our substitute, taking our punishment for us. Now, the rapture question is not essential. You can be a pre-Tribber and be saved. You could be a mid-Tribber and be saved. You could be a post-Tribber and be saved. In fact, even if you were a amillennialist or a post-millennialist, you could be saved. However, there's so much agreement between pre-, mid-, and post-Trovers that, you know, we should not break fellowship over this. Now, though the rapture question is not essential to salvation, still the rapture question is important. You know, such topics as war, persecution, hunger, these things are not unimportant. I mean, the average American, if he misses one meal, He feels like it's the end of the world. These things are not unimportant. War, persecution, and hunger. Very important issues. So just because it's not essential, it is important and we need more dialogue on these issues. Now the pre-, mid-, or post-Tribbers, we all agree that Jesus Christ will return before his 1,000 year reign on earth. We're all pre-millennialists. And so we need to praise God for this agreement, and then as brothers in kindness and in love, discuss the issues beyond that point. But remember, though the rapture question is not essential to salvation, it is important. You're not going to walk into a supermarket some day, put some food down on the counter, and then the cash register person is going to look at you and say, I'm sorry, sir, we can't accept your money. We're on the... credit card system and you don't have the mark on your forehead or your right hand, you know, we're not going to say, oh, well, that's not important. What's important is that Jesus Christ is coming back. If you can't buy or sell, things are going to be pretty tough, especially, you know, if you're running through the woods and people are firing rounds at you. That is important. It's not essential to salvation. It is important. Now, contrary to popular belief, the pre-trib rapture view or even the mid-trib rapture view The idea that there's two separate phases to the second coming of Christ is something that is new. It's not something that's been around throughout church history. So let's look at the origin of the two-phase theory. This idea that there's a secret coming of Christ for the church before the second coming of Christ. Or two different phases to the second coming of Christ. In Scotland, in Edward Irving's church in about 1830, There was apparently a prophetic utterance of a young Scottish woman named Margaret MacDonald. Young Scottish woman named Margaret MacDonald gave a prophecy. And this is the first mention that we have up to this point. This is the first mention that we have of the two-phase theory, two phases to the second coming of Christ. Then J. M. Darby of the Plymouth Brethren accepted this view as being true and he began to promote it. Now Darbyism later became known as Dispensationalism. Between 1859 and 1874 Darby spoke very frequently in the United States and there was wide acceptance of his prophetic interpretation. So the Preacher of Rapture began to spread. due to J. N. Darby and Darbyism, which later became known as Dispensationalism, its wide acceptance between 1859 and 1874 in America. Now the turn of the century, C. I. Schofield by that point had accepted Darbyism, and Schofield came out with the Schofield Reference Bible of the early 1900s, and he publicized the pre-tribulational rapture position. And at that point, You know, it was the most widely accepted view among those of fundamentalists, those who held to the fundamentals of the faith. Bible institutes were founded about this time in the U.S. in the early 1900s to replace seminaries that had gone liberal. Many of the seminaries because of evolution, the theory of evolution promoted by Charles Darwin had gone liberal. And so Bible institutes like Moody Bible Institute were founded to replace these seminaries to train pastors. And they promoted Darbyism and the pre-tribulational rapture position. So now all of a sudden you have the pastors of the churches, all the new pastors that were being pumped out into the churches, the pastors of the churches were pre-tribbers. Then Hal Lindsey's books have sold in the millions worldwide. Great Lake Planet Earth in 1969, and he's been publishing major books, I believe, since 1969. Great Lake Planet Earth, 1980's Countdown to Armageddon, his book on the rapture, and he promotes the pre-tribulational rapture position. Now, because of it, the current situation is this. The pre-trib rapture position is so widespread that many believe that it's the historic position of the Church, despite the fact that there's no history There's no report of it in history before 1830, before Margaret MacDonald's supposed prophetic revelation in Edward Irving's church in Scotland in 1830. So many people wrongly believe it's the historic position of the church. Still many others are beginning to doubt it. And the mid and post-trib positions are on the rise. Now, the mid-tribulational position still has a secret coming of Christ for the church. The midshrub position still sees two phases to the second coming of Christ. And so I'm not trying to mean it in a mean way, but I see midshrubbers, I see midshrubbers actually as wounded pre-shrubbers. They're pre-shrubbers, they were studying the scriptures, they came up to the last trumpet in 1 Corinthians 15. They rightly equated it with the seventh trumpet of the book of Revelation in Revelation 11. But apparently they misdiagnosed it, they put it, that 7th trumpet halfway through the tribulation instead of after the tribulation where it should be. And so they're free tribbers who saw a contradiction in their view when they came to the mid-trib position, but I believe they're actually moving closer and closer to the post-trib position. But let's right now give the case, the scriptural case for the post-tribulational rapture view. A case for the post-tribulational rapture view, what we're going to try to do is refute both mid-tribulationalism and pre-tribulationalism in the fact that the scriptures teaches only one phase to the second coming of Christ, and the fact that the scriptures teach that there is no secret coming of Christ, that Christ will come and every eye will see him. As Revelation 1 verse 7 says, Behold he is coming with the clouds and every eye will see him, even those who pierce the clouds. So the burden of proof, first off, rests on the preacher of position. Look at Matthew 24, verses 29 to 31. Matthew chapter 24, verses 29 to 31. We're going to be going over this passage over and over again. Matthew 24, verses 29 to 31. But immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory. And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other. And so here we see that the Bible does teach that after the tribulation period, Jesus Christ will return and he will gather together his elect from one end of the sky to the other. Now, this no one argues with. And so what I'm getting at is that the burden of proof rests on the preacher position to show that there's another phase to this second coming of Christ somewhere in the scriptures. We already know that there's going to be a post-trib rapture. Some people try to have them gathered on the earth. That's not what this passage says. It says they'll be gathered, elect will be gathered from one end of the sky to the other. So we know that there's going to be a post-trib rapture. The question is, is there going to be a pre-trib rapture as well? The burden of proof rests on the pre-trib position because of the clear biblical teaching of Matthew 24, verses 29 to 31. Now, I'd like to state this. The same terms are used to describe both the rapture and the second coming. If they're two separate events, why then are the same terms used? The first word, parousia, parousia is the Greek word for coming or presence. The Greek word for coming or presence. Take a look at 1 Thessalonians chapter 4. 1 Thessalonians chapter 4. It'd be good to go over these verses with a Greek interlinear so you can see where parousia is used. We're also going to see apocalypsis, which means revelation, and epiphaneia, which means manifestation, are also used of the second coming of Christ, but they also refer to the rapture. The question comes up, if they're two separate events, why are the same terms used for each one of them? 1 Thessalonians 4, verses 15 to 17. And that reads, For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord shall not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ shall rise first. And we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and thus we shall always be with the Lord. Now, parousia means coming or presence. So here it's talking about the coming of the Lord. Verse 15, the coming of the Lord. Now the thing is, pre-tribbers say that this is the rapture before the tribulation period. Why do they say that? They say that because Christ is obviously coming for the church. So keeping that, we see that the parousia here is talking about the rapture. No doubt about it, it's talking about the rapture. But now let's take a look at 2 Thessalonians 2, verse 8. 2 Thessalonians 2, verse 8. And then the law, that's the Antichrist, will be revealed, whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth, and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming. Now the word there for coming or presence is parousia. So you've got the same word being used of the rapture of the church in 1 Thessalonians chapter 4, the same word is being used when Christ comes to defeat and destroy the Antichrist, which obviously is after the tribulation period. Why weren't two different words used? That's definitely a problem for the pre-tribulation opposition. By the way, the pre-tribbers used to say that some of these words refer to the second coming of Christ and some refer to the rapture. Now it's been proven false. They no longer use this argument, so now they're trying to say they're two phases to the same coming. But if they're two phases, seven years apart, two different events, why are the same terms used? Then the word apocalypsis, which means revelation, is used in 1 Corinthians 1, verse 7. Look at 1 Corinthians 1, verse 7. 1 Corinthians 1, verse 7. So that you are not lacking in any gift, awaiting eagerly the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ. Well, the Corinthians are believers, they're awaiting the revelation of Christ, so obviously this is the rapture of the church. But then look at 2 Thessalonians 1, verses 6 and 7. And that reads, for after all it is not only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to give relief to you who are afflicted, and to us as well, when the Lord Jesus Christ shall be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire. And then verse 8 goes on to say, dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. Obviously when it's saying that he's going to be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flame and fire and dealing out retribution, obviously he's talking about the second coming of Christ. Yet 1 Corinthians 1 verse 7 says that this is the rapture of the church. And so Apocalypse's revelation is used, the same term is used to describe the rapture and the second coming, just as Parousia. Then Epiphaneia, the manifestation, manifestation of Christ, is also used to describe both the rapture and the second coming. It's used for the rapture in Titus 2.13. Paul says that we should await eagerly the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, in that passage. But in 2 Thessalonians 2.8, it says, "...and then the lost one will be revealed, whom the Lord will slay with the breath of his mouth, and bring to an end by the appearance of his coming." And so in verse 8, you also have not only Parousia mentioned, but you also have Epiphaneia mentioned. And so all three of these terms, the same terms are used to describe both the rapture of the church, Christ coming for the church, and the second coming of Christ when he returns after the tribulation. The question occurs, why are the same terms used to describe both if they're two different events? Then remember the passage that we read, Matthew 24, verses 29 to 31. Jesus said that he would return for his apostles. He was speaking to his apostles. He said he would return for them immediately after the tribulation period. Now, the preachers state that the apostles represent Israel and not the church. But there's a definite problem with this view. They say that the apostles represent Israel and not the church. First question that comes up is, if Jesus returned during the lifetime of the apostles for the rapture of the church, would the apostles be raptured? And the answer is yes. Well then why didn't he tell them about the preacher of rapture? Now if you look at John 14, 16, this is something that Jesus said just two days after he spoke in Matthew 24 where he said that he would come for the apostles immediately after the tribulation of those days. By the way, Ephesians chapter 2 verses 19 to 20 states that the apostles are the foundation of the church, Christ himself being the chief cornerstone. The apostles are the foundation of the church. Obviously, when Christ speaks to the apostles, he's speaking to them as the apostles. If he had returned during their lifetime, they would have been raptured. But he said he would come for them immediately after the tribulation of those days, implying that the rapture occurs after the tribulation, not before it. John 14, 16, two days later Christ says this, and I will ask the Father and he will give you another helper that he may be with you forever. That's a prophecy of Christ baptizing the church with the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. Well, what does that mean? Well, he's saying that the apostles represent the church. Two days later they represent the church. How come two days before they represent Israel? Then look at Matthew 26 and verse 26. Two days earlier, according to pre-Sherbers, they represent Israel. But now in Matthew 26, verse 26, Christ talking to his apostles stated this. And while they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, he broke it and gave it to the disciples and said, Take ye, this is my body. You see, Jesus Christ is instituting the Lord's Supper in ordinance, not for Israel, but for the Church. Now, if they represent the Church, then two days earlier the apostles must also represent the church. You combine this with the fact that Jesus said in Matthew 24, 29 and 31 that after the tribulation he would gather his elect from the four winds from one end of the sky to the other. With Ephesians chapter 1 verse 4 it says that the church was chosen in Christ before the foundation of the earth. Well we're the chosen, we are the elect. And so I think it folds. The apostles there were not, in Matthew 24, were not referring to Israel, they were referring to the Church. In fact, take a look at Matthew 24, verses 26 to 27. Jesus states this, "...if therefore they say to you, Behold, he is in the wilderness, do not go forth, or behold, he is in the inner room, do not believe them." For just as the lightning comes from the east and flashes even to the west, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be." What is Christ saying? Christ is saying that His coming for the apostles or His coming for the church would not be secret. If anybody tells you there's a secret coming for Christ, don't believe it, because Christ's coming is going to be obvious. How obvious? Well, immediately after the tribulation, the sun will be darkened, the moon won't give its light, the stars will fall from the sky, powers of the heavens will be shaken, and then Christ will be seen coming amidst the clouds of the sky with all his angels and his power and glory. So Christ's second coming will not be secret, or Christ's coming for the church will not be secret, it will be obvious. Then when we make a comparison of Matthew 24 verses 29 to 31, which I'll read again, but immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken, and then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory. He'll send forth his angel with a great trumpet and they will gather together his elect from the four winds from one end of the sky to the other now all serious Scholars pre-millennial scholars agree that this passage is definitely talking about the second coming of Christ after the tribulation yet the pre-tribulational scholars will then turn and to 1 Thessalonians 4, verses 16 and 17, and say, well, that passage refers to the rapture before the tribulation. But take a look at 1 Thessalonians 4, verses 6 and 7, and we're going to see that it's very much in common. 1 Thessalonians 4, verses 16 and 17, with the magic 24 passage. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ shall rise first. And we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. Thus we will always be with the Lord." And so what you have in this passage You have a comparison of the two passages, one is definitely after the tribulation, and the other is 1 Thessalonians 4, which is supposed to be before the tribulation. You have this comparison. The Lord descends in the clouds, that's number one. Number two, you have angels involved. And number three, you have a trumpet involved. And number four, you have believers gathered in the air. Now that seems to be talking about the same event. not two separate events. And if preachers want to make it a separate event, again, the burden of proof rests on them. And I don't think that they give any solid evidence that would refute the fact that these two are the same event. Plus, I think we need to recognize, can a shout and a trumpet blast refer to a secret coming? You've got a shout and a trumpet blast occurring in the preacher rapture. Can that refer to secret coming? I don't think so. Then let's look at the last trumpet. Look at 1 Corinthians 15. 1 Corinthians 15 verses 51 to 52. Behold, I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall all be changed." Talking about the resurrection of believers, the resurrection of the church, the changing of the church, and the twinkling of an eye of those who are alive at the last trumpet. Well, the last trumpet is found in Revelation chapter 11. Now, preachers will state that it doesn't mean the same thing. The last trumpet, but after the last trumpet, there's going to be seven trumpets after the last trumpet. That doesn't make sense to me. If the last trumpet, there's seven trumpets after the last trumpet, why did God call the last trumpet the last trumpet? Doesn't seem to make sense at all. Look at Revelation 11 15 here We have the seventh angel sounding the seventh trumpet and the seventh angel sounded and there arose loud voices in heaven saying The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ and he will reign forever and ever You see the last trumpet is the seventh trumpet of the book of Revelation got seven trumpets That's they start in the tribulation period this one ends after the tribulation period when Jesus Christ returns and claims the planet Earth and as his kingdom, and the kingdom of earth becomes the kingdom of God. And so the question comes up, if you got seven trumpets that start in the tribulation period, if the pre-trib position is true, can seven trumpets come after the last trumpet? I don't think so. What about the mid-tribbers? Well, how could this be halfway through the tribulation period? when the seventh trumpet very clearly announces that the kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ and he will reign forever and ever. That happens after the tribulation period. This is definitely a post-tribulational passage. And so the last trumpet teaches us very clearly that the last trumpet is the seventh trumpet of Revelation which occurs after the tribulation period. Also, the first resurrection is mentioned in Revelation 20, right after Jesus Christ returns in Revelation chapter 19. Now, if there's a resurrection of believers, the question occurs, could there be a resurrection seven years before the first resurrection? Again, you've got another contradiction. See, if the pre-trib or the mid-trib position is true, then last doesn't mean last when God says last, and first doesn't mean first when God says first. And so I think we should just let scripture interpret scripture rather than reading our own interpretations into the passages. Also, look at Psalm 110, an Old Testament passage. Psalm 110, verses 1 and 2. Psalm 110, verses 1 and 2. The Lord said to my Lord, sit at my right hand until I make thine enemies a footstool for thy feet. The Lord will stretch forth thy strong scepter from Zion, saying, Rule in the midst of thine enemies. And then verses 5 and 6. The Lord is at thy right hand. He will shatter kings in the day of His wrath. He will judge among the nations. He will fill them with corpses. He will shatter the chief men over a broad country. You see, Psalm 110 teaches us that Jesus won't leave heaven. He'll sit at the Father's right hand. He won't leave heaven until it's time for Him to rule on earth. It's not that he's going to leave the Father's right hand to snatch away the church and then come back again later. He's going to leave the Father's right hand to defeat the kingdoms of earth and to set up the kingdom of God on earth. Then the day of the Lord. The day of the Lord is when Christ will gather believers. Look at 2 Thessalonians chapter 2 verses 1 to 3. 2 Thessalonians chapter 2. Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, that you may not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or by a message or a letter as if from us to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction. So the day of the Lord is referred to as the day when Christ comes and gathers the church to him. Well, when does the day of the Lord come? It comes after the tribulation. How do we know that? Look at Joel 2.31. The Old Testament book of Joel 2.31. The sun will be turned into darkness and the moon into blood before the great and awesome day of the Lord comes. The great and awesome day of the Lord is the day of the Lord. Well, it says the sun is going to be turned into darkness and the moon into blood before the day of the Lord comes. Well, Jesus put these same signs after the tribulation. So what you have is the tribulation occurs, and then after the tribulation, you have these strange occurrences in the sky, and then the day of the Lord comes. Well, if the day of the Lord is when Christ comes to gather believers, it comes after these signs, which Jesus says comes after the tribulation. So the day of the Lord comes after the tribulation, and that's when Christ will gather believers. Then many preachers say, yeah, but the Lord comes like a thief, but then he also comes and every eye sees him. And there are two separate phases. When he comes like a thief, that's before the tribulation, but when he comes... and when every eye sees him, that's after the tribulation. Well, does this hold water? The answer is no. Look at 1 Thessalonians 5, verse 2. 1 Thessalonians 5, verse 2. And that reads, 1 Thessalonians 5, verse 2, For ye yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night. And we already showed the day of the Lord is when Christ gathers believers, but it comes after the tribulation when we compare Joel 2, verse 31, with Matthew 24, 29-31. So the day of the Lord comes like a thief in the night, yet the day of the Lord refers to the second coming, not the rapture. You also see this in Matthew 24 verse 43. Remember the context of Matthew chapter 24. The context, Jesus Christ said that he would return immediately after the tribulation, talked about no secret coming before the tribulation. In fact, he even said that his coming would not be in secret. It would be as obvious as the lightning coming from the east and flashing to the west. But then in Matthew 24, 43, he says, But be sure of this, that if the head of the house had known at what time of the night the thief was coming, he would have been on the alert and would not have allowed his house to be broken into. And so what is he saying? He's saying that his return would be like the coming of a thief in the night. And what is he referring to? The whole context refers to the second coming of Christ and not a secret free trip rapture. In other words, Christ's second coming, and this is brought out in 1 Thessalonians chapter 5 if we have read further, Christ's second coming will come as a thief upon those who aren't expecting him to come, but believers who walk in the light will see the signs of the times, though they won't know the day or the hour, they will understand that Christ's coming is near. But the Lord's second coming is like a thief. That's clear from the scriptures and that does not necessitate a pre-trib rapture. The absence of the word ekklesia, which is the word for church, in Revelation chapter 4 to 18 is often shown that, well, when these chapters talk about the tribulation period, there's no mention of the church, so the church is obviously missing. Like I say, first off, the book of Revelation is the most detailed book about the end times, yet there is absolutely no mention of a pre-trib rapture. You would think that it would be mentioned on every other page if there was such a thing as a preacher of rapture. But in Revelation, the word Ekklesia always refers to a local church. Look it up in the Concordance. It always refers to a local church because it's either the Church of Laodicea, the Church of Ephesus, the Church of Sardis, the Church of Smyrna, the Church of Philadelphia, Right on down the line, the seven local churches that are mentioned there that the Book of Revelation is addressed to, or it's referred to all seven of them that addresses all seven of them together, the churches in the plural. Not once does it refer to the universal church. And remember, there's not going to be local churches during the Tribulation period. You're not going to go to Trinity Bible Fellowship in Bremerton, Washington during the Tribulation period. There's not going to be local churches. The churches are going to have to go underground and meet in secret. Now, the word church is not mentioned in Revelation 4-18. However, the word Haggion, for saints, is mentioned 13 times in Revelation. And Haggion, the word for saints is mentioned 11 of those 13 times are in Revelation 4-18. The passages that deal with the Tribulation period. Now let's do a study on the word Haggion for saints. The word Haggion, the word for saints is mentioned 46 times in the New Testament outside of the 13 times in the book of Revelation. So it's mentioned 46 times. Out of those 46 times, only once does it refer to saints outside the church. That's Matthew 27.52, the Jews who were raised during Christ's crucifixion. So 45 out of 46 times the word Haggaion for saints is used in the New Testament, 45 out of 46 times it refers to church age saints. Now in Revelation 13.7, when the Antichrist is said to make war with the saints, It's the safest thing, the highest degree of probability. We can assume it beyond all reasonable doubt that the word saints refers to the church-age saints. Revelation 13 says that the Antichrist will make war with the saints. And outside of Revelation, 45 out of 46 times in the New Testament, Haggion, the word for saints, refers to church-age saints. So I think the evidence still points to a post-trib rapture, especially when we see that the word ekklesia, the word for church, is never even mentioned once in the supposed pre-trib proof text. If we say, well, the word ekklesia for church is never mentioned in Revelation 4 to 18, the post-trib response should be big deal. The word ekklesia for church is never mentioned once, even in any pre-trib proof text, all the texts that they use as evidence for the pre-trib rapture, 1 Thessalonians chapter 4, 1 Corinthians chapter 15, right on down the line, never once, Titus 2.13, never once in these passages Is there any mention of the word Ekklesia either? So we shouldn't even expect in Revelation 4 to 18, but if you want something there, take the word Hagion, the word for saints, which 45 out of 46 times in the New Testament, outside of Revelation, it refers to church age believers. Then 2 Thessalonians 2, verses 1 to 12. Take a look at that passage. 2 Thessalonians 2, verses 1 to 12. 2 Thessalonians 2, verse 1 to 12, this is used as evidence for the preacher of rapture. Listen to this passage. Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, that you may not be quickly shaken from your composure, or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us to the effect of the day of the Lord has come. Let no one in any way deceive you for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction. opposes and exalts himself above every so-called God or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God and displaying himself as being God. Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things? And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he may be revealed. 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. And then the lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will slay with the breath of his mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of his coming. That is, the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders, and with all deception and wickedness for those who perish because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved. For this reason, God will send upon them a deluding influence, so that they might believe what is false, in order that all who may be judged, all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness." But this passage tells us that the Antichrist will not be revealed until the Restrainer is taken out of the way. I agree with preachers that the Restrainer is the Holy Spirit. Still, the Rapture is not needed. You see, all that is needed is that the Holy Spirit would come out of the mist. You've got the Antichrist and he's being revealed, and the Holy Spirit blocking the way from him being revealed. All that is necessitated is for the Holy Spirit to come out of the mist, the Holy Spirit to stop restraining the Antichrist from being revealed. And this is done by the Holy Spirit getting out of the Antichrist's way. You don't need the Holy Spirit to be removed from the earth. The Holy Spirit is omnipresent. He's everywhere present. He's going to be present during the tribulation period when people are being saved. And you need the inward persuasion of the Holy Spirit to save people, even during the tribulation period. So you don't need a pre-trib rapture. What you actually need is just the Holy Spirit to get out of the way. Then also 1 Thessalonians chapter 4, verses 13 to 18. The classical pre-Trib text. Listen to this passage. For we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as do the rest who have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus. For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord shall not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and thus we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore, comfort one another with these words." And so Paul says, don't grieve, I don't want you to grieve. Then he talks about Christ coming for believers, and then he says, therefore comfort another with these words. Now what the pre-trib argument is, pre-tribbers say there's no comfort if the coming for the saints is after the tribulation period. There's no comfort if the suffering must come first. I think we need to recognize that the comfort talk about here, why were they grieving? They were grieving over deceased loved ones. Not because times were tough. In other words, Paul is saying, hey, don't grieve over your deceased loved ones, because you'll see them again. You'll receive comfort when you see them again, when Jesus returns, because he's going to return with your loved ones. And so the comfort is not, hey, you Christians aren't going to have to go through the tribulation period. the comfort is that you will see your loved ones again. And again, the passage is twisted, taken out of context, to try to prove something that the Bible does not teach, and that is the pre-server rapture. Pre-servers also say that the Bible teaches the imminent return of Christ, which is the any-moment return of Christ. But if the Bible did not teach the any-minute return of Christ, any moment return of Christ to the apostles, then how could it teach the any minute return of Christ for believers now? What we need to realize, Christ told Peter that he would live to be an old man and that he would die. He predicted his death in John 21 verses 18 and 19. So Peter had to become an old man and die before Christ would return. Matthew 24 verses 1 to 2, Jesus said the temple had to be destroyed before he would return. That That occurred in 70 A.D. In fact, the temple even has to be rebuilt before he would return. That hasn't even occurred yet. Jesus also said before his return, Matthew 24, 14, the gospel had to reach all nations. That did not yet return. So Christ's return was not imminent. It wasn't an any moment return. The apostles weren't expecting Christ to return at any moment. In fact, even in Acts, they recognized that the Jews had to turn back to Christ before and accept him as their Messiah. The Jews as a nation would have to accept the Messiah before he would return. So They were waiting for the Jews to return first, for Peter to become an old man and die, for the temple to be destroyed and then be rebuilt, and for the gospel to reach all nations. If these things had to occur first for the apostles, then the return of Christ wasn't expected to be an any-minute return for them. Why should we expect it to be an any-minute return for us? Look at 1 Thessalonians 5, 9. The preachers say, look, God promised that we wouldn't experience His wrath. 1 Thessalonians 5.9, for God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ. This is also mentioned in Revelation 3.10, that we be kept from that hour of God's wrath. Revelation 3.10, and that reads, Because you have kept the word of my perseverance, I will also keep you from the hour of testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell upon the earth." And so, we're promised deliverance from God's wrath. And the preacher ever says, God's wrath comes in the tribulation, therefore, Therefore we're going to be delivered from God's wrath. No, the scriptures teach in Revelation very clearly that God's wrath follows the tribulation. The only time wrath is mentioned in the tribulation in Revelation is in Revelation 12, and that's the wrath of Satan. And God never promises to remove us from the wrath of Satan. But God's wrath in Revelation chapter 6 verses 16 and 17 is talking about the sixth seal, which lists the exact same signs, the sun being dark and the moon not giving its light, the stars falling from the sky, and that occurs after the tribulation period. Revelation 11.18, God's wrath is mentioned, but that occurs at the seventh trumpet, which is after the tribulation. Revelation 14.10, which talks about the eternal wrath, flames of hell for beast worshipers, those who accept the mark of the beast. Revelation 14, 19, wrath is mentioned, God's wrath is mentioned, but it's the final judgment. Revelation chapter 15, verses 1 and 7. Revelation 16, verses 1 and 19, those are the bold judgments, which I believe, and I think the Scriptures are clear, they fall simultaneously with the return of Christ. And then, God's wrath is also mentioned coming in Revelation 19, verse 15, during Christ's return. So God's wrath follows the tribulation. Everywhere God's wrath is mentioned in Revelation, if we allow scripture to interpret scripture, we see that God's wrath occurs after the tribulation when Jesus Christ returns. Now we'll cover some more evidence for the post-trib rapture in the next lecture. We're running out of time here, so we'll cover it in the next lecture. Thank you and God bless you.