SOUTHEASTERN BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

A PRESENTATION OF

THE CENTRAL ARGUMENTS FOR THE IMMINENCE OF THE RAPTURE

SUBMITTED TO DR. JOHN HAMMETT IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF

THE MASTER OF THEOLOGY DEGREE

BY JASON M. WHITLOCK

APRIL 12, 2010

© 2010

Jason M. Whitlock

This Thesis was prepared and presented to the Faculty as a part of the requirements for the Master of Theology degree at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, North Carolina. All rights and privileges normally reserved by the author as copyright holder are waived for the Seminary. The Seminary Library may catalog, display, and use this Thesis in all normal ways such materials are used, for reference and for other purposes, including electronic and other means of preservation and circulation, including on-line computer access and other means by which library materials are or in the future may be made available to researchers and library users.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................... iv

ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................................................... viii

ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................... ix

DEDICATION................................................................................................................... xi

CHAPTER 1, INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................1

History and Importance of the Debate 2

Assumptions 4

Definition of Applicable Terms 5

Imminence

The Rapture, Return, and Second Coming

Overview of the Thesis 7

CHAPTER 2, HISTORICAL ARGUMENTS...................................................................10

The Ante-Nicene Fathers 11

Clement of Rome (A.D. 95-97)

Didache (prior to A.D. 100)

Constitutions of the Holy Apostles

Ignatius of Antioch (d. ca. A.D. 98/117)

The Epistle of Barnabas (A.D. 70-135)

The Shepherd of Hermas (A.D. 80-175)

v

Justin Martyr (A.D. 100-165)

Irenaeus of Lyons (A.D. 130-202)

Cyprian of Carthage (d. 258)

Summary

The Post-Nicene Fathers and the Medieval Church 28

Ephraem of Nisibis (A.D. 373), a.k.a. Pseudo-Ephraem, or Ephraem the Syrian

Codex Amiatinus (ca. 690-716)

The History of Brother Dolcino (1316)

Summary

The Reformation Church 35

Balthasar Hübmaier (c.1480-1528)

Martin Luther (1483-1546)

Hugh Latimer (c.1490-1555)

John Calvin (1509-1564)

Summary

The Post-Reformation Church 40

John Gill (1697-1771)

Morgan Edwards (1722-1795)

Conclusion 45

CHAPTER 3, BIBLICAL ARGUMENTS........................................................................46

The Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24-25; Mark 13, Luke 12:35-48; 17:22-37; 21:1-36) 48

The Upper Room Discourse (John 14:1-3) 50

The Pauline Epistles 52

vi

The General Epistles 59

The Book of Revelation 63

Conclusion 67

CHAPTER 4, THEOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS ..............................................................68

Theological Arguments Made By Imminent Posttribulationists 70

The Nature of Prophetic Fulfillment

The Nature of Prophetic Utterance

The Nature of the Prophets’ Limited Understanding

The Nature of the Interpreters’ Limited Understanding

Theological Arguments Made By Dispensational Pretribulationists 78

Logically-Prior Pretribulationism

The Mystery and Uniqueness of the Rapture

The Church is given no signs of the Rapture

Lack of Admonition, Warning or Signs given to the Church Regarding the Tribulation

The Church is not appointed to God’s Eschatological Wrath

All Signs Occur After the Parousia Has Begun

Imminence of the Day of Our Lord Jesus Christ (Who is God)

Conclusion 94

CHAPTER 5, PRACTICAL ARGUMENTS ....................................................................96

The Exhortations to the Apostolic Church Indicate an Imminent Return 97

Imminence Empowers Service And Holy Living For Christians Throughout Church History 100

The Doctrine of Imminence is a Source of Joy, Hope, Comfort, and Patience in Trial and Persecution 105

vii

Rejection of Imminence has Resulted From and Resulted In Sin and Doctrinal Error 109

Conclusion 113

CONCLUSION................................................................................................................114

Definition of Imminence 114

Summary of Arguments 115

The Central Case Most Often Made By Those Arguing For Imminence 116

The Arguments Employed By Only A Few 117

Future Studies 118

BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................................119

viii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AB = Anchor Bible ASV = American Standard Version BAGD = Bauer, W., W. F. Arndt, and F. W. Gingrich. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Chicago, 1957. BECNT = Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament BSac = Bibliotheca Sacra CTJ = Calvin Theological JournalCTR = Criswell Theological ReviewDarby = Darby Translation EBC = The Expositor's Bible Commentary ESV = English Standard Version EvQ = Evangelical QuarterlyGTJ = Grace Theological Journal HNTC = Harper’s New Testament Commentaries ICC = International Critical Commentary JBL = Journal of Biblical LiteratureJETS = Journal of the Evangelical Theology Society LCC = Library of Christian Classics. Philadelphia, 1953– LXX = Septuagint MSJ = The Master’s Seminary Journal NAC = New American Commentary NASB = New American Standard Bible: 1995 Update NKJV = New King James Version NT = New Testament OD = Olivet Discourse OT = Old Testament RSV = Revised Standard Version RTR = Reformed Theological ReviewTJ = Trinity Journal TDNT = Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by G. Kittel and G. Friedrich. Translated by G. W. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids. 1964-1976, TNTC = Tyndale New Testament Commentaries WBC = Word Biblical Commentary WW = Word and World

ix

ABSTRACT

Throughout its history the church has proclaimed the soon return of the Lord Jesus Christ

in great power and glory and this event can be shown to be an integral aspect of

Christianity. This proclamation has served as a warning to the unrighteous, who will be

judged, and has served as hope for the righteous who will receive eternal glory in the

presence of Christ (1 Thess. 1:10; 2 Thess. 1:5-10; Tit. 2:13). Various preachers and

teachers in church history have proclaimed the imminent coming of the Lord in

judgment, while others have proclaimed the imminent coming of the Lord for His saints.

The problem with both proclamations is that the Lord gave in the Olivet Discourse many

signs that would precede His coming (Matt 24:33; Luke 21:28). Though the

proclamation of the imminent coming of the Lord can appear to be inconsistent, even

contradictory to these signs, this tension nevertheless does follow the characteristic

admonition of other texts, even those in the Olivet Discourse itself (Matt 24:36; 44; 1

Thess 5:1-3).

Up until the past two hundred years a clear understanding of what is imminent

and what is preceded by signs has not been sought. During this time, scholars have

debated whether the rapture is imminent, or whether the Tribulation is imminent. Many

arguments on both sides have been revised or abandoned. For the purpose of future

discussion, this thesis seeks to clarify the debate by the presentation of the central

arguments for the imminent rapture position. This thesis will answer the questions:

“What is the current case for imminence?” “What is the central case most often made by

those arguing for it?” “What are the arguments used most often?” “Are there any

arguments that are employed by only a few?” The imminent rapture position itself will be

x

clarified due to this study since the key arguments will be determined. This work does not

seek to evaluate whether or not any or all of the arguments presented are fully persuasive

or convincing. Rather, the more limited goal here is simply a presentation of the central

arguments for this position.

I would like to dedicate this work to my wife Fran, whose supportive and sacrificial love has enabled me to complete this thesis.

1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

It is the thesis of this work that the doctrine of the imminence of the rapture can be

clarified by a presentation of the central historical, biblical, theological, and practical

arguments held by its proponents. This Th.M. thesis will present these arguments for the

view that the rapture can occur at any moment. Many of the arguments presented in the

study will have been abandoned or revised, so a key aspect of this presentation will be to

identify the current arguments to date. It is not the purpose of this thesis to make a

defense of these arguments against rebuttals; rather, the key contribution of this thesis

will be to present which arguments are the most central to the imminent rapture position,

as viewed by its proponents.

While the arguments do overlap considerably with those of the pretribulational

rapture position, it is not the purpose of this thesis to present all the arguments for that

position. Only the scriptural texts and arguments that deal specifically with the “any-

moment” aspect of the rapture will be addressed. In short, it is the goal of this thesis to

present the central arguments upon which the imminent rapture position stands.

The primary scholars represented here include Anthony A. Hoekema, Benjamin

L. Merkle, and J. Barton Payne for imminent posttribulationism, and Paul N. Benware,

Craig A. Blaising, Darrell L. Bock, Wayne A. Brindle, Lewis S. Chafer, Mal Couch,

Timothy Demy, Paul D. Feinberg, D. Edmond Hiebert, Thomas D. Ice, Grant R. Jeffrey,

John F. MacArthur, Richard Mayhue, J. Dwight Pentecost, Larry D. Pettegrew, Arthur

2

W. Pink, John A. Sproule, Gerald B. Stanton, James F. Stitzinger, Todd Strandberg, John

F. Strombeck, Henry B. Thiessen, Stanley D. Toussaint, John F. Walvoord, and Leon J.

Wood for pretribulationism.

History and Importance of the Debate

Throughout its history the church has proclaimed the soon return of the Lord Jesus Christ

in great power and glory and this event can be shown to be an integral aspect of

Christianity. Adolf Harnack writes,

In the history of Christianity three main forces are found to have acted as auxiliaries to the gospel. They have elicited the ardent enthusiasm of men whom the bare preaching of the gospel would never have made decided converts. These are a belief in the speedy return of Christ and in His glorious reign on earth. . . . First in point of time came the faith in the nearness of Christ’s second advent and the establishing of His reign of glory on the earth. Indeed it appears so early that it might be questioned whether it ought not to be regarded as an essential part of the Christian religion.1

This proclamation has served as a warning to the unrighteous, who will be judged, and

has served as hope for the righteous who will receive eternal glory in the presence of

Christ (1 Thess 1:10; 2 Thess 1:5-10; Tit 2:13). Various preachers and teachers in church

history have proclaimed the imminent coming of the Lord in judgment, while others have

proclaimed the imminent coming of the Lord for His saints.2 The problem with both

proclamations is that the Lord gave in the Olivet Discourse many signs that would

precede His coming (Matt 24:33; Luke 21:28). Though the proclamation of the imminent

coming of the Lord can appear to be inconsistent, even contradictory to these signs, this

1 Adolf Harnack, “Millennium,” Encyclopedia Britannica (ninth edition), XVI, 314.

2 J. Barton Payne, The Imminent Appearing of Christ (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962), 12-13. Cf. John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question (Grand Rapids: Dunham, 1957), 5; also Henry B. Thiessen, “Will the Church Pass Through the Tribulation?” BSac, 92 (1935), 190-196.

3

tension nevertheless does follow the characteristic admonition of other texts, even those

in the Olivet Discourse itself (Matt 24:36; 44; 1 Thess 5:1-3).

Up until the past two hundred years a clear understanding of what is imminent

and what is preceded by signs has not been needed. In this time period, however, a

theological system known as dispensationalism has had a profound influence on

eschatology, particularly the doctrine of the Tribulation.3 Dispensationalism has caused a

large measure of study and interest to be generated about eschatology.

In an attempt to maintain imminence, dispensationalism has propounded a

pretribulational rapture theology, which teaches that the church will be removed from the

earth prior to the Tribulation period.4 This view of the rapture seeks to harmonize the

doctrine of the any-moment return of Christ with the newly developed (though not newly

created) doctrine of the Tribulation, which teaches that the second coming will be

preceded by clear signs (Matt 24:15-22, 29-30; 2 Thess 2:8).

As a result, a vigorous debate has been waged regarding the timing of the rapture

and the second coming, much of it centered upon the definition of imminence and

whether Scripture teaches the imminent return of the Lord for His saints.5 The debate

itself has generated many revisions to arguments on all sides, to the point that it becomes

difficult to be sure which arguments are current and which ones have been abandoned or

3 Throughout this thesis, tribulation will be capitalized when referring to the intense time of trouble covered by Revelation 6-19 and Matthew 24-25, and prior to the second coming of Christ. The word tribulation will not be capitalized when referring to the persecutions that come upon believers of all ages, of which Paul and Peter spoke (2 Tim 3:12; 1 Pet 4:12-19).

4 It is interesting to note that recent research into church history has uncovered multiple references throughout the last two millennia to a pretribulational rapture. For a detailed study of this see James F. Stitzinger, “The Rapture in Twenty Centuries of Biblical Interpretation,” MSJ 13 (2002): 149-71.

5 Richard R. Reiter, “A History of the Development of the Rapture Positions,” in Three Views on the Rapture (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 9-44.

4

revised. In itself, this evolution of arguments is healthy and adds understanding to an

otherwise unstudied issue; however, it can lead to misunderstanding when arguments that

are no longer used are still attributed to a particular view.

It is to this issue that this thesis is geared. For the purpose of future discussion, the

imminent rapture position will be clarified by the presentation of the central arguments

for the imminent rapture position. An argument will be deemed to be central based on an

evaluation of its current usage by imminence advocates, the frequency of usage, and to a

lesser extent, its cogency.6 The arguments presented will be categorized under the

headings of historical, biblical, theological, and practical arguments. Significant revisions

or abandonment of arguments will be addressed in the appropriate areas.

This thesis will answer the questions: “What is the current case for imminence?”

“What is the central case most often made by those arguing for it?” “What are the

arguments used most often?” “Are there any arguments that are employed by only a

few?” The imminent rapture position itself will be clarified due to this study since the key

arguments will be determined. For the sake of brevity the opposing view and its

objections to the arguments will not be presented.

Assumptions

The first assumption is that Scripture is taken to be authoritative, complete, and inerrant

(2 Tim. 3:16). The second assumption is that the second coming of Christ will be visible,

bodily (Acts 1:11), and for the purpose of judgment (Matt. 25:31-46; 2 Thess. 1:6-10;

6 A full determination of the cogency of any particular argument will open up the need to address foundational issues that far exceed the scope of this thesis, and therefore, cannot be fully explored.

5

Rev. 19:11-19). The third assumption is that there will be a Tribulation period, whether

clearly identifiable or not, prior to the second coming (Matt 24:29-30; 2 Thess 2:1-8).

Definition of Applicable Terms

Imminence

Douglas J. Moo defines imminence by using the Oxford English Dictionary which says

this term denotes something that is “impending threateningly, hanging over one’s head;

ready to befall or overtake one, close at hand at its incidence; coming on shortly.”7 In

order to maintain a type of qualified imminence, or mediating position between

imminence and non-imminence, Moo’s view does not incorporate the idea of an any

moment possibility.8 In contrast to Moo, Robert Gundry completely rejects the idea that

Scripture teaches imminence. In his argument against imminence, he describes it more in

line with the traditional view. He writes, “By common consent imminence means that so

far as we know no predicted event will necessarily precede the coming of Christ. The

concept incorporates three essential elements: suddenness, unexpectedness or

incalculability, and a possibility of occurrence at any moment.”9 Despite Gundry’s

inclusion of the idea of an any moment occurrence, Robert L. Thomas takes issue with

this description due to its inclusion of the terms “necessarily precede,” and “possibility of

occurrence.”10 In keeping with other pretribulational scholars, Thomas defines

7 Douglas J. Moo, “The Case for the Mid-tribulational Rapture Position: Posttribulational Response,” in Three Views on the Rapture (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 207.

8 Ibid., 208.

9 Robert H. Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973), 29.

10 Thomas, “Imminence,” 204.

6

imminence as referring to an event in which no predicted event will occur prior to the

event in question, thus making the beginning of the event completely incalculable. An

imminent event could occur at any moment.11 While arguments presented from a

dispensational standpoint do hold to Thomas’ definition of imminence, imminent

posttribulational scholars follow Gundry’s definition. The key distinction between the

two definitions is the idea of predicted events occurring before the rapture, which is a

debate between eschatological systems on the order of events. This debate, however, is

beyond the scope of this thesis. The key aspect of imminence that is presented here is the

idea that the rapture could occur at any moment because that event is incalculable from

biblical data. While imminent posttribulationists would argue that predicted events must

transpire before the return, they would nevertheless agree with dispensationalists that the

return itself is incalculable and thus an any moment possibility. Therefore, for the

purpose of this thesis, the definition of imminence is limited to meaning only the

possibility of occurrence at any time.

The Rapture, Return, and Second Coming

For this thesis, the term ‘rapture,’ refers to the catching away of the dead and living saints

by Christ as depicted in 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 and 1 Corinthians 15:51-53. For those

scholars who view this event as synonymous with the second coming of Christ, the term

‘rapture’ would merely refer to the aspect of that coming that describes Christ’s actions

with respect toward the saints. The term ‘return (of the Lord),’ depending on context

could refer either to the return of the Lord to rapture the saints, or the return of the Lord

11 Ibid., 191.

7

to judge the unrighteous. Finally, the term second coming will refer to the physical and

visible appearing of Christ at the end of the Tribulation,12 unless otherwise noted. There

may be some instances in this thesis where a scholar uses this term to refer to all future

eschatological events, or grouping of them; however, in such cases this divergence from

the above stated definition will be noted.

Overview of the Thesis

Following this introductory chapter, chapter two will present historical arguments that

support the imminent rapture position and will present the writings of scholars throughout

church history up to the present. While ultimately not the final judge on whether a

biblical text or doctrine is correct, historical research cannot be separated from modern

development of doctrine. Payne correctly notes,

It is true that the decision reached today by any inquirer must rest ultimately upon the study of Scripture alone, and not upon the blind acceptance of human reconstructions, whether ancient or modern. But at the same time a given verse in Scripture may be taken in various ways and may have been diversely understood by sincere believers. The modern interpreter cannot divorce himself from the teachings with which he has already come in contact, and he owes it to himself to be aware of the total picture presented by past exposition. For the perspective gained from the historical orientation constitutes an essential introduction, not simply to the understanding of the crosscurrents of modern thought, but to the formulation of one’s own exegetical conclusions. The deviations from sound interpretation exhibited by church history give warning against similar pitfalls today; and the studied conclusions of the most enlightened saints of former times should not hastily be exchanged for doctrinal innovations.13

12 Paul N. Benware, Understanding End Times Prophecy (Chicago: Moody, 1995), 318. 13 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 12. Thomas Lea rightly notes, “The views of the ante-Nicene

fathers can function as a commentary to aid our formulating a theology concerning the return of Christ.” Thomas D. Lea, “A Survey of the Doctrine of the Return of Christ in the Ante-Nicene Fathers,” JETS 29 (1986), 163.

8

Chapter three will present the biblical arguments for the imminent rapture

position and will evaluate only the key passages that pertain to that position, specifically

those related to how one is to know the timing of the return of the Lord. This chapter will

be a presentation of the arguments drawn from each passage. The chapter will be divided

into five sections: 1) The Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24-25; Mark 13, Luke 12:35-48;

17:22-37; 21:1-36); 2) The Upper Room Discourse (John 14:1-3); 3) The Pauline

Epistles; 4) the General Epistles; and, 5) The Book of Revelation.

Chapter four will present the theological arguments for the imminent rapture

position, which answer this basic question: how can imminence texts (e.g. Matt 24:36) be

reconciled with sign texts (e.g. Matt 24:14)? This chapter will be divided into two

sections based on the theological systems from which these arguments arise. First,

imminent posttribulationists have argued that there will not be a clearly identifiable future

time of Tribulation on the earth. In one argument from this view, the Tribulation is seen

to consist of the entire church age.14 Broadly speaking, this view argues that the signs that

Christ gave are actually general events that have taken place throughout history, and thus

are meant as continual reminders of the imminent return of the Lord. Second,

dispensational pretribulationists generally argue that the rapture, which is imminent, is

distinct from the second coming, which is heralded by the sign texts.

Chapter five will present four practical arguments for the imminent rapture

position. First, the apostolic church was given exhortations and comfort based on the

imminent coming of the Lord for them, and thus those exhortations and words of comfort

14 Payne writes, “It is the very contemporaneity of this period which guarantees the hope of Christ’s appearing as an imminent possibility.” Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 114.

9

are intrinsically grounded upon it. Second, imminence stands as an admonition to service

and holy living. Third, imminence gives joy, hope, comfort and patience in the midst of

trial and persecution. Since the next moment could unite believers with Christ (cf. 1

Thess 4:17; 1 John 3:2-3), imminence teaches that in each passing moment Christ could

appear and take them out of their suffering. In effect, every moment brings them closer to

the time of their union to Christ (Rom 13:11). Finally, rejecting imminence of the rapture

undermines the exhortations and comfort that are based on Christ’s coming.

The conclusion will endeavor to identify the central and most current arguments

for the imminent rapture position. A list of which arguments are employed by only a few

will also be given. These arguments will have already been presented in the chapters in

which they appear, so they will only be listed in the conclusion. It will be determined

what the central arguments are upon which the view stands. Finally, a brief analysis will

be given to determine how this study will affect and aid future research in this field, and

what should be the next step to build upon this research.

10

CHAPTER 2: HISTORICAL ARGUMENTS

The purpose of this chapter is to present the historical arguments for the belief that the

rapture could occur at any moment and to determine which arguments are central to the

case for imminence. The arguments presented here have been used by imminence

advocates to show that a belief in the imminent rapture1 has been an ongoing view

throughout history.2 Gerald B. Stanton is typical among imminence scholars when he

writes, “The very fact that all generations of Christians have looked for and are exhorted

to keep looking for the coming of the Lord, gives witness to the fact that Christ may

come at any time.”3 The purpose of this study, then, is to clarify which of these historical

arguments for imminence are central. …

The primary imminence advocates represented here include J. Barton Payne for

imminent posttribulationism, and Paul Benware, Larry V. Crutchfield, Timothy Demy,

Francis Gumerlock, Thomas Ice, Grant R. Jeffrey, Frank Marotta, J. Dwight Pentecost,

Larry D. Pettegrew, James F. Stitzinger, Todd Strandberg, Henry B. Thiessen, Robert L.

Thomas, and John F. Walvoord for pretribulationism. Arguments made by these

1 Many of the texts cited in support of an imminent ‘rapture’ will not refer directly to the rapture, but to the second advent. For those writers the second advent of Christ was not distinguished from the rapture of the saints of 1 Thess 4:13-18.

2 This view was particularly dormant throughout the medieval period from roughly the time of Augustine to the Reformation, though even then there were traces still observable.

3 Gerald B. Stanton, Kept From the Hour: Biblical Evidence for the Pretribulational Return of Christ, 4th ed. (Miami Springs: Schoettle Publishing, 1991), 127.

11

advocates will be assessed based on their frequency of use among all imminence

advocates surveyed, breadth of usage by advocates, and prominence within an advocate’s

writings. An argument will be identified as central to the case for imminence if it either is

used frequently by a number of advocates, is used broadly among all eschatological

views that hold to imminence, or holds a prominent place within an advocate’s writings.

Cogency of the arguments will be addressed only if a major logical fallacy is apparent.

Arguments for imminence will be presented chronologically according to the historical

texts that are cited. It will be determined which are the most central to the case for

imminence. Arguments that fail any of the criteria will be identified. Disagreement,

abandonment, or revision of arguments will be noted when appropriate.4

This chapter will be divided into the following four sections: 1) the Ante-Nicene

Fathers; 2) the Post-Nicene Fathers and the Medieval Church; 3) the Reformation

Church; and, 4) the Post-Reformation Church.

The Ante-Nicene Fathers

The return of Christ was particularly prominent within the writings of the apostolic and

early church fathers up to generally the Council of Nicea (A.D. 325),5 and the following

4 Unlike the other chapters in this thesis the majority of the changes that have occurred in this field have not been through revisions or improvements but by new texts being discovered that support imminence. For this reason little change will be observed in the arguments, but a significant amount of new material will be presented of which many readers may not have been aware. One cause of this ongoing discovery of new texts is the continuous translation of historical texts in English, which were not previously translated. For example, the majority of Christian Apocalyptic texts after 400 A.D. are still untranslated. Cf. Bernard McGinn, Visions of the End: Apocalyptic Traditions in the Middle Ages (New York: Columbia University Press, 1979), xiii.

5 J. L. Neve wrote, “the time of the Apostolic Fathers, like that of primitive Christianity, was thoroughly eschatological in tendency. Men had the consciousness that they were living in the last times. The immediate return of Jesus was anticipated. It was this expectation which held the congregation together.” J. L. Neve, A History of Christian Thought, 2 vols (Philadelphia: The Muhlenberg Press, 1946) I, 43.

12

imminence scholars argue that there was a passionate belief in the imminent return of

Christ for his church: Crutchfield, Payne, Ice, Stitzinger, Thiessen, Thomas, and

Walvoord. All argue that many of the early church fathers support imminence.6

The modern scholar is faced with a problem, however, trying to discern what the

fathers believed regarding end time events. A brief survey will quickly reveal that a

diversity of views was held between different writers, and within the individual writers

themselves. Contradictory views of the return of Christ and the Tribulation are frequently

held with seemingly no hint that the father saw an inconsistency.7 The coming of the

Lord was frequently cited by the fathers as imminent while often in the same text there is

an admonition to be ready for the tribulation and the appearance of the Antichrist before

that coming. 8 John Walvoord, late president of Dallas Theological Seminary, writes

regarding this seeming paradox:

6 Larry V. Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” in Thomas Ice and Timothy Demy gen. ed. When The Trumpet Sounds (Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House, 1995), 85-104; Thomas Ice, “Myths of the Origins of Pretribulationism,” Pre-Trib Research Center, http://www.pre-trib.org/article-view.php?id=50; J. Barton Payne, The Imminent Appearing of Christ (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962), 11-19; Gerald B. Stanton, Kept From the Hour: Biblical Evidence for the Pretribulational Return of Christ, 4th ed. (Miami Springs: Schoettle Publishing, 1991), 124-26; James F. Stitzinger, “The Rapture in Twenty Centuries of Biblical Interpretation.” MSJ 13 (2002): 153-56; Henry C. Thiessen, “Will the Church Pass Through the Tribulation? III” BSac 92 (1935): 190-196; Robert L. Thomas, “The Doctrine of Imminence in Two Recent Eschatological Systems.” BSac 157 (2000): 452 ; Robert L. Thomas, “Imminence in the NT, Especially Paul’s Thessalonian Epistles.” MSJ 13 (2002): 191-92; Walvoord, The Rapture Question: A Comprehensive Biblical Study of the Translation of the Church (Grand Rapids: Dunham, 1957), 52-56.

7 For example, the Didache states, “Watch over your life: do not let your lamps go out, and do not be unprepared, but be ready, for you do not know the hour when our Lord is coming (Didache, 16);” yet in the same section the Didache adds that a “world-deceiver” shall come before Christ returns to bring a “fiery trial” so that “many shall be made to stumble and shall perish; but they that endure in their faith shall be saved from under the curse itself (Didache, 16:3-5).”

8 J. Barton Payne, an imminent posttribulationist, writes, “Prior to the Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325, the ancient church was characterized in general by two convictions respecting the sequence of events of Christ’s second coming. In the first place, it expected that the Lord could appear in the clouds with any day of its own contemporary life. The ante-Nicene fathers, in other words, were committed to the concept of the imminence of their Lord’s return. Their writings testify that they lived in the hope that His appearing would be soon. It must be observed at the outset, however, that imminency as herein defined does not mean that it had to be close at hand, only that it could be, that the establishment of Christ’s eschatological

13

The early church believed in a coming time of trouble, in the imminent coming of the Lord, and the millennium to follow. How the coming of the Lord could be a daily expectation as is clearly indicated by the early Fathers, and at the same time have a lengthy series of events preceding the Second Advent, was apparently not discussed or ever resolved in the early church. If major doctrines like the Trinity and the procession of the Spirit took centuries to find acceptable statement, it is hardly to be expected that the problems of Eschatology would all be settled in the early centuries. The inroads of the spiritualizing principles of Origen, which caused the downfall of Premillennialism in the third and fourth centuries along with the departure from the Scriptures which characterized the organized church until the Protestant Reformation, were hardly a climate in which an intricate problem such as Pretribulationism versus Posttribulationism could be solved.9

This lack of development has led to the modern debate over what the fathers believed.10

While imminence advocates agree that the overall view of the fathers was an

imminent return of the Lord, their arguments differ regarding how to reconcile clear

imminence texts with clear Tribulation texts. All imminence advocates mentioned in this

chapter have argued that there are within the writings of the fathers clear and direct

statements of the Lord’s imminent return. For instance, all imminence scholars who have

written concerning this period use Clement’s statement, “Of a truth, soon and suddenly

shall His will be accomplished, as the Scripture also bears witness, saying, ‘Speedily will

He come, and will not tarry’ and, ‘The Lord shall suddenly come to His temple, even the

Holy One, for whom ye look.”11 Yet, they disagree on how to understand Justin Martyr’s

kingdom was conceived of as capable of overtaking them at any time.” Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 12-13. cf. Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 5; cf. Henry B. Thiessen, “Will the church Pass?” 190-196.

9 John Walvoord, “Premillennialism and the Tribulation,” BSac 112 (1955), 296.

10 Crutchfield writes, “The cause of the confusion among modern scholars on this issue is no mystery. They are confused because the fathers were confused on the subject. Eschatology was in its infancy in the early centuries A.D. If anyone searches the fathers for a fully detailed, systematic presentation about the doctrine of last things, he searches in vain.” Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 88.

11The First Epistle of Clement, 23. The Scriptures are from Habakkuk 2:3 (Hebrews 10:37) and Malachi 3:1 respectively. Cf. Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 88; Ice, “Myths,” 2; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 13; Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 154; Thiessen, “Will The Church Pass? III,” 190; Thomas, “Imminence in the NT,” 191; Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 53.

14

comment, “He shall come from heaven with glory, when the man of apostasy, who

speaks strange things against the Most High, shall venture to do unlawful deeds on the

earth against us the Christians.”12

Payne argues that the fathers held to an imminent posttribulationism.13 Walvoord

would largely agree and add that there are some pretribulational references present.14 In

contrast, Thiessen holds a less advocated view, arguing that there are some historic texts

that are truly pretribulational.15 Crutchfield argues that the view of the fathers can best be

described as an imminent intratribulationism.16 Ice and Stitzinger follow Crutchfield and

argue that there are inferences in the fathers’ writings of both an imminent return of

Christ, and of the church enduring the Tribulation, yet are held in a loose, unreflective,

and simplistic way.17 Crutchfield argues that the early church did not significantly

develop an eschatological outline; rather, end time events such as the Tribulation,

12 Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, CX.

13 This view says that the return and rapture occur after Tribulational events, but those events are such to negate any possibility of accurately determining the timing of the end. Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 15-16.

14 Walvoord follows Payne’s view that the historical writings represent more closely an imminent posttribulationism. He adds, “The historical fact is that the early church fathers’ view on prophecy did not correspond to what is advanced by pretribulationists today except for the one important point that both subscribe to the imminency of the rapture.” Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 53-54.

15 Thiessen, “Will the Church Pass?” 196.

16 Crutchfield coins the phrase “imminent intratribulationism,” which is the view that the church is currently experiencing the Tribulation, and all predicted events have either occurred, or about to occur thus making the return of Christ imminent. Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 91, 101, 103.

17 Responding to Erickson’s statement that “it is difficult to find in them an unequivocal statement of the type of imminency usually believed in by pretribulationists,” Crutchfield correctly notes that “this in essence is all that we are arguing for. We do not say that the early fathers were pretribulationists in the modern sense, only that the seeds were indeed there but were crushed under the allegorist’s foot before they could sprout and bear early fruit.” Millard Erickson, Contemporary Options in Eschatology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1977), 131; Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 454 n. 77. Contra the thesis of Thiessen, who stated, “If they held to the imminence of the Lord’s return, they must of necessity have held to a Rapture before the Tribulation.” Thiessen, “Will the Church Pass?” 193.

15

Antichrist, and the return were all seen as possible at any-moment.18 Finally, and much in

line with Crutchfield, Thomas argues that the fathers’ views could be classified as dual

imminence of both the return and beginning of the Tribulation. He argues that this view

was a direct result of a straightforward reading of Scripture, which also can seem to

produce a paradox. Furthermore, he argues that the fathers merely transmitted the

Scriptural teaching of dual imminence of the rapture and the day of the Lord without

developing it.19

The dual imminence argument is slightly different than imminent

intratribulationism, though compatible because they are two perspectives of the same

argument. Thomas’ argument seems to be motivated by Scripture’s own apparent

paradoxical presentation of these events rather than trying to explain why the fathers hold

a paradox. It is argued that Scripture itself presents both the rapture and the Tribulation as

imminent; therefore, it should not be surprising that the first generation readers after the

apostles would have merely conveyed the paradox into their own writings rather than

resolve it. Crutchfield focuses on the neglect of the fathers to systematize their beliefs

whereas Thomas focuses on the confusing effect that Scripture’s prophetic teaching

would have on the early church. The following texts from the apostolic fathers have been

used by a number of imminence advocates to argue for historical imminence.

18 Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 101-102.

19 The biblical basis for this argument will be expanded in the following chapters on Biblical Arguments and Theological Arguments. Robert L. Thomas, “Imminence in the NT, Especially Paul’s Thessalonian Epistles,” MSJ 13 (2002): 191-214.

16

Clement of Rome (A.D. 95-9720)

All imminence advocates surveyed have used this text in support of arguing for a

historical belief in imminence.21 First Clement says, “Of a truth, soon and suddenly shall

His will be accomplished, as the Scripture also bears witness, saying, ‘Speedily will He

come, and will not tarry’ and, ‘The Lord shall suddenly come to His temple, even the

Holy One, for whom ye look.”22 Crutchfield argues that “Clement’s sole reason for

quoting Malachi 3:1 was to “set forth the suddenness of Christ’s second coming.”23 A

possible problem for using Clement as an imminence text is his statement, “Ye perceive

how little time the fruit of a tree comes to maturity.”24 It is possible that this could show

Clement’s belief in a measure of delay before Christ’s return.25 Rather than showing that

there must be the maturing of the tree yet to occur, however, Clement is comparing the

coming to the maturing of the fruit. Just as fruit matures seemingly overnight and cannot

20 1 Clement, 23. All quotations from the apostolic fathers are from Michael W. Holmes ed., The Apostolic Fathers (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1999).

21 Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 88; Ice, “Myths,” 2; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 13; Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 154; Thiessen, “Will The Church Pass? III,” 190; Thomas, “Imminence,” 191; Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 53.

22 1 Clement, 23. The Scripture are from Habakkuk 2:3 (Hebrews 10:37) and Malachi 3:1 respectively.

23 Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 89.

24 1 Clement, 23.

25 Non-imminence scholars, such as Lea and Gundry, have used this passage to show that Clement did not intend imminence; however, this conclusion ignores the context of the passage. Robert H. Gundry, The Church and Tribulation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973), 173; Thomas D. Lea, “A Survey of the Return of Christ in the Ante-Nicene Fathers,” JETS 29 (1986): 171.

17

be predicted when it will occur, so also will be Christ’s coming. 26 Since it is widely used,

Clement’s statement can be considered central to the historical imminence argument.

Didache (prior to A.D. 10027)

Crutchfield, Ice, Payne, Stitzinger, Thiessen, and Walvoord have also used the Didache

in their arguments for imminence.28 In the Didache, Crutchfield notes that imminence is

one of the “chief eschatological concepts” found.29 The Didache states, “Watch over your

life: do not let your lamps go out, and do not be unprepared, but be ready, for you do not

know the hour when our Lord is coming. Gather together frequently, seeking the things

that benefit your souls, for all the time you have believed will be of no use to you if you

are not found perfect in the last time.”30 Advocates have used this text to argue for

26 He writes, “Clement’s point is that just as it takes a short time for a tree to pass from bud to fruit state, so in reality it takes a short time for the accomplishment of God’s will When Christ does come, and that could be at any moment, it will result in the sudden accomplishment of His will. Gundry seems to assume that the whole process of budding to ripened fruit must yet take place. But it can be argued that his message to these “old men,” who have waited in vain for Christ’s coming, is that they have seen and are presently part of the budding and putting forth of leaves stages, while only the appearance of ripened fruit remains. Some time is necessary for the accomplishment of God’s plan for mankind, just as it is for a tree to bear fruit. How much time is necessary, no one knows. All of that necessary time could be spent at any moment. Then suddenly, as fruit appears on a tree, Christ will return to accomplish His will.” Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 89.

27 Holmes writes, “The Didache may have been put into its present form as late as 150, though a date considerably closer to the end of the first century seems more probable. The materials from which it was composed, however, reflect the state of the church at an even earlier time.” Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers, 247.

28 Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 88; Ice, “Myths,” 2; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 13; Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 154; Thiessen, “Will The Church Pass? III,” 190; Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 53.

29 Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 90. Crutchfield sees the doxology of the Eucharistic prayer in the Didache also connoting imminence: “Let grace come, and let this world pass away. Hosanna to the God (Son) of David! If any one is holy, let him come; if any one is not so, let him repent. Maranatha. Amen.”Didache, 10.6. Cf. 1 Corinthians 16:22 and Revelation 22:20, texts which both illustrate the attitude of hope in the soon coming of the Lord, and the possibility of that soon advent. No other advocate has noted this text within the Didache in support of imminence because its too vague to be persuasive.

30 Didache, 16.

18

historic imminence; however, only Crutchfield attempts to deal with the problems raised

within the text of a possible reference to the church in the Tribulation and signs preceding

the return.31

As was common among early church writers, there was the unresolved tension

between the imminent coming and preceding signs. There does seem to be a place where

the Didachist believes that there are signs preceding the rapture of the saints. The

Didachist says that the “world-deceiver” shall come to bring a “fiery trial” so that “many

shall be made to stumble and shall perish; but they that endure in their faith shall be

saved from under the curse itself.”32 He further writes that after the appearance of the

world-deceiver there will be three “signs of the truth,” which culminate in the Lord

coming “upon the clouds of heaven” and will be witnessed by the world.

Crutchfield presents two solutions: first, there was a widespread belief from the

time of the persecution of Nero in A.D. 64 to the Edict of Milan by Constantine in A.D.

313 that the Roman Empire was the fourth beast of Daniel 7:7-8 and the Antichrist.33

Early Christians believed that they were or could be living during the prophesied

persecution of the Antichrist, due to the proliferation of persecution that was then present.

To them, it was a distinct possibility that the persecutions that they were experiencing

were the very persecutions of the Antichrist and the tribulation, thus making the coming

31 Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 88-89. Payne solves the problem by simply affirming that it supports his view of imminent posttribulationism. As already noted this creates a problem for those who believe the signs will be identifiable. Payne, Imminence, 14-16.

32 Didache, 16:3-5.

33 Epistle of Barnabas, 4. Cf. Didache, 16:1-3 which shows a strong parallel between the current empire and the ‘deceiver of the world.’ For further verification of the connection that early Christians made between the Roman Empire, the emperors and the prophesied Antichrist see Victorinus of Petau, Commentary on the Apocalypse 17.10-11; Commodian, the Instructions of Commodianus 41, Lactantius, Of the Manner in Which the Persecutors Died 2. Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 88-89.

19

of the Lord to rapture the church an imminent possibility. 34 Second, the identities of

those who undergo the fiery trial are unnamed. While it is true that in 16.5 the Didache

states, “Then all humankind will come to the fiery test, and ‘many will fall away’ and

perish; but ‘those who endure’ in their faith ‘will be saved,’ ” the reader is left to infer

their identity.

Crutchfield argues that since this entire last section is drawn heavily from the

Olivet Discourse it is necessary that believers would be in this fiery test that has come

upon all humanity. This fact does not negate imminence. Neither the Didache nor

Matthew 24 require that the identity of those believers who undergo that test be the

church.35 Since the material of the Olivet Discourse is largely repeated, rather than

interpreted, it would be best to conclude that the Didachist is not reflective about who

they are, only that there will be those who must go through the test. A similar case could

be made that those who go through the fiery trial are the same ones who let their “lamps

go out,” were “unprepared” and were “not found perfect in the last time.”36 Their identity

could just as easily be the saints who were saved after the rapture. Both

posttribulationism and pretribulationism could see their position consistent with the

language here. Regardless, the Didachist writes this passage to exhort his readers to “not

let your lamps go out, and do not be unprepared,” because they “do not know the hour

34 The Epistle of Barnabas states “let us hate the deception of the present age,” and “The last stumbling block is at hand, concerning which the Scriptures speak, as Enoch says. For the Master has cut short the times and the days for this reason, that his beloved might make haste and come into his inheritance.” Epistle of Barnabas, 4.1, 3.

35 Crutchfield notes, “The writer makes no direct statement that it is the church which is in view here. Rather, in early patristic fashion, he simply repeats the language of the inspired text with little amplification or interpretation.” Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 93.

36 Didache, 16.1-2.

20

when our Lord is coming.”37 Crutchfield argues that the point is not to give a detailed

outline but to exhort obedience because no one knows when the Lord is coming. The

argument from the Didache should be considered central since it is frequently and widely

used by advocates from different theological positions, and is prominent within the

imminence argument made by Crutchfield.

Constitutions of the Holy Apostles

Thiessen and Walvoord38 argue that the following text from the Constitutions of the Holy

Apostles support imminence: “let your loins be girded about, and your lights burning, and

ye like unto men who wait for their Lord, when He will come, at even, or in the morning,

or at cock-crowing, or at midnight. For at what hour they think not, the Lord will come;

and if they open to Him, blessed are those servants, because they are found watching.”39

While the text itself does point to an imminent return of the Lord, the next section implies

that the rapture will occur after the Antichrist is revealed.40 Since this text is not widely

used, it cannot be considered a central argument for historical imminence.

37 Ibid., 16.1.

38 Thiessen, “Will The Church Pass? III,” 193-94; Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 54.

39 Ante-Nicene Fathers, VII, 382. “Constitutions of the Holy Apostles,” Book VII, Sec. ii, xxxi.

40 “Constitutions,” Book VII, Sec. ii, xxxii.

21

Ignatius of Antioch (d. ca. A.D. 98/11741)

Crutchfield, Ice, Payne, Stitzinger, Thiessen, and Thomas42 use the following from

Ignatius’ letter to the Ephesians: “The last times are come upon us. Let us therefore be of

a reverent spirit, and fear the long-suffering of God, that it tend not to our condemnation.

For let us either stand in awe of the wrath to come, or show regard for the grace which is

at present displayed – one of two things.”43 Ignatius wrote to Polycarp, “Be watchful,

possessing a sleepless spirit,” and “Be ever more becoming more zealous than what thou

art. Weigh carefully the times. Look for Him who is above all time . . . .”44 The quotes

imply an imminent return, but do not require it. Though this text does not require an

imminent return, it is used broadly and frequently, therefore, it should be considered

central to the argument for imminence.

The Epistle of Barnabas (A.D. 70-13545)

Crutchfield, Ice, Payne, and Stitzinger46 use the following from the Epistle of Barnabas:

“The Lord has cut short the times and the days that His Beloved may hasten,” and “for

the day is at hand on which all things shall perish with the evil [one]. The Lord is near

41 Holmes, “The Letters of Ignatius,” 131.

42 Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 89-90; Ice, “Myths,” 2; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 13; Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 154-55; Thiessen, “Will The Church Pass? III,” 190-91; Thomas, “Imminence,” 191-92.

43 Ignatius, The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians, 11.

44 Ignatius, The Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarp, 1.3.

45 “It appears to have been written after the destruction of the Templin in Jerusalem in A.D. 70(16.3-5) but before the city was rebuilt by Hadrian following the revolt of A.D. 132-135. Within these limits it is not possible to be more precise.” Homes, “The Epistle of Barnabas,” The Apostolic Fathers, 272.

46 Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 94-95; Ice, “Myths,” 2; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 13-14; Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 155.

22

and His reward.”47 In regard to the coming Tribulation he writes in chapter 4, “The last

stumbling block is at hand, concerning which the Scriptures speak, as Enoch says, ‘For

the Master has cut short the times and the days for this reason, that his beloved might

make haste and come into his inheritance.’ And so also speaks the prophet: ‘Ten

kingdoms will reign over the earth, and after them a little king will arise, who will subdue

three of the kings with a single blow.’”48

Crutchfield argues that Barnabas expects that the ten kingdoms are prior to the

coming of the Lord,49 which would support Payne’s view. Barnabas is careful to say that

the “last stumbling block is at hand.” Barnabas is simply citing texts to show that it is “at

hand.” Furthermore, Barnabas does not say that the persecution will get worse before the

end. He seems to affirm that the persecution that was then present was the Tribulation

that would precede the Lord’s coming.50 Crutchfield argues that there is nothing in the

epistle that would prevent an any-moment view of the rapture.51 This text is broadly and

frequently used; therefore, it should be considered central to the historical argument for

imminence.

47 The Epistle of Barnabas, 4 and 20.

48 Ibid., 4.

49 Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 95.

50 Crutchfield writes, “For some of these fathers, it seems that the difference between the persecution which they were undergoing and that which was to precede the second advent, was not a difference in kind, and perhaps, not even a difference in degree of severity.” Ibid., 95, 96.

51 Ibid., 94. Patristic scholar J. N. D. Kelly that “Barnabas is satisfied that the scandal of the last days is actually upon us. . . .” J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (2d ed.; New York: Harper & Row, 1960), 462. Quoted in Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 95.

23

The Shepherd of Hermas (A.D. 80-175)52

Crutchfield, Ice, Payne, Stitzinger, and Thiessen have used this text in support of arguing

for a historical belief in imminence.53 Two separate visions are cited in The Shepherd to

support the imminent rapture: the vision of a beast which can be avoided, and the vision

of a tower being built whose master will come unexpectedly. The vision of the beast is

said to be “a type of the Great Tribulation that is coming.” The text continues, “If then ye

prepare yourselves, and repent with all your heart, and turn to the Lord, it will be possible

for you to escape it,”54 which has led Thiessen to argued that it depicts a pretribulational

rapture. He writes, “Though on the whole the testimony of the Fathers is somewhat

inconsistent, we seem to have in The Shepherd of Hermas a fairly clear indication of the

fact that there were those who believed that the church would be taken away before that

period of judgment begins.”55 The second vision depicts a sudden return of the Lord to

His tower that is under construction:

52 Holmes notes various inconsistencies within the text that point to a composite document. Holmes, Apostolic Fathers, 330-331.

53 Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 96-101; Ice, “Myths,” 2; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 15; Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 155; Thiessen, “Will The Church Pass? III,” 191.

54 Shepherd of Hermas, Vision Fourth, Ch. II.

55 Thiessen, “Will the Church?” 196. It is the view of Bell that a “protection” view rather than a “removal” view is the best alternative. He writes, “He (Hermas) was never removed from the presence of the beast but found that the beast was muzzled, as it were, and thus unable to harm him. One has difficulty in avoiding the likelihood that Daniel’s deliverance in the lions’ den was also in the writer’s mind.” William E. Bell, Jr. “A Critical Evaluation of the Pretribulation Rapture Doctrine in Christian Eschatology” (Ph.D. Diss. New York University, 1967), 31. However, Crutchfield notes that “the virgin and the tower both represent the church; Hermas does not. Hermas represents only an individual, ‘a saint under construction’ (a stone), being made fit through trial and testing for inclusion into the tower.” Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 98. The point is that neither the tower nor the virgin are seen to endure persecution or Tribulation, but explain that “Hermas escaped the Tribulation completely unscathed” and anyone else can escape, “if [their] heart be pure and spotless, and [they] spend the rest of the days of [their lives] serving the Lord blamelessly.” Shepherd, 1.4.2.

24

Let us go, and after two days let us come and clean these stones, and cast them into the building; for all things around the tower must be cleaned, lest the Master come suddenly and find the places about the tower dirty, and be displeased, and these stones be not returned for the building of the tower, and I also shall seem to be neglectful towards the Master.56

Within these two visions there is a virgin, representing the church, who appears to

Hermas to answer the questions regarding the visions.

Crutchfield disagrees with Thiessen’s view that the church is seen to be taken

away before judgment begins, and states that it is difficult to defend.57 However, he does

agree with Thiessen in that he captures the essence of Hermas’ position; that it

emphasizes the imminence of Christ’s return and the believer’s escape from the coming

Tribulation.58 Crutchfield writes, “Hermas presents Tribulation as a continuum. . . .

Furthermore, he makes no reference to the chronology of Daniel 9, nor does he in any

way posit an estimate of duration for the Great Tribulation. In fact, the whole encounter

with the beast is depicted as rather brief and imminent.”59 He continues, “Any attempt to

fully understand this peculiar allegory, and to reconcile it with Scripture is doomed. We

must concede that Hermas held to a type of condensed, imminent, posttribulationism (or

56Shepherd of Hermas, Book III, Similitude Ninth, Ch VII.

57 Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 98, 99. He continues, “Hermas is definitely pictured in the presence of the beast, though fully protected. Elsewhere, we read in the Shepherd, “Happy ye who endure the great tribulation that is coming on, and happy they who shall not deny their own life.”

58 Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 99. Though not in complete agreement with Thiessen, he views the posttribulationists’ position more problematic for three reasons: first, Hermas comes away from the encounter unscathed, which is not the case for those who endure the Tribulation (cf. Rev. 6:9-11; 13:5-8); second, Hermas is said to have already “endured great personal tribulation” because of his own “wicked transactions” and “the transgressions of [his] house . . . ;” third, due to the process of selecting stones, which go into the tower, the fiery test is not necessary for every stone. Stones have been placed and will continue to be placed into the tower without the necessity of going through the fiery trial. Cf. Lea, “A Survey,” 169. Though Lea does not think that the fathers taught imminence, he does write, “The fathers believed that moral obedience among Christians would prevent their sharing in the judgment and punishment that would come on the rest of the world.”

59 Crutchfield, “The Blessed Hope,” 100.

25

‘intratribulationism’) unlike that previously encountered. He lives in constant expectation

of the Master’s sudden return to the tower.”60 This text is broadly and frequently used by

advocates to argue for an imminent view of the Lord’s return; therefore, it should be

considered central to the historical imminence argument.

Justin Martyr (A.D. 100-165)

Only Payne and Thiessen have argued that Justin Martyr held to imminence.61 They cite

the following from Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho: “For those out of all the

nations who are pious and righteous through the faith of Christ, look for His future

appearance.”62 Later in this work, however, Justin writes, “but the other, in which He

shall come from heaven with glory, when the man of apostasy, who speaks strange things

against the Most High, shall venture to do unlawful deeds on the earth against us the

Christians.”63 The text is not used frequently, nor can it conclusively be said to be

imminent. Rather, it is more likely to view it as requiring preceding signs. For these

reasons, Justin Martyr should not be considered central to the historical argument for

imminence.

60 Ibid., 101.

61 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 14-15; Thiessen, “Will The Church Pass? III,” 192.

62 Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, LII.

63 Ibid., CX.

26

Irenaeus of Lyons (A.D. 130-202)

Only Thomas and Thiessen have argued that Irenaeus of Lyons held to imminence.64

They cite the following text from Against Heresies: “And therefore, when in the end the

Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, ‘There shall be tribulation such

as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.’ For this is the last contest of the

righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.”65 Thomas

argues that Irenaeus believed that both the return of Christ for the church and the return

of Christ to inflict wrath in the tribulation were imminent, thus arguing for dual

imminence, while Thiessen argues that Irenaeus believed that the rapture would occur

during the Tribulation. In contrast to Thomas and Thiessen, Payne identifies Irenaeus as

an exception to the widely held view of imminent posttribulationism among the fathers.

He states that Irenaeus was solidly against imminence since he required a time period of

three and a half years66 in which the Roman Empire would be divided into ten kings.67

Since Irenaeus of Lyons is not frequently used, and is considered an exception by at least

one advocate,68 he should not be considered central to the historical argument.

64 Thiessen, “Will The Church Pass? III,” 191; Thomas, “Imminence,” 192.

65 Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 5.29.1, cf. 5.35.1.

66 Ibid., 5.25.3, 4.

67 Ibid., 5.26.1; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 17-18.

68 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 17-18.

27

Cyprian of Carthage (d. 258)

Only Payne and Thiessen have used Cyprian of Carthage in support of arguing for a

historical belief in imminence.69 They quote the following from his Epistle:

. . . the end of the world comes suddenly. The apostle says: ‘The day of the Lord shall so come as a thief in the night. When they shall say, Peace and security, then on them shall come sudden destruction.’ Also in the Acts of the Apostles: ‘No one can know the times or the seasons which the Father has placed in His own power.’70

Payne quotes other statements that would affirm Cyprian’s view that the Tribulation was

presently occurring: “For you ought to know and to believe, and hold it for certain, that

the day of affliction has begun to hang over our heads, and the end of the world and the

time of Antichrist to draw near, so that we must all stand prepared for the battle.”71 Again

he quotes, “The enemy (Antichrist) goeth about and rageth, but immediately the Lord

follows to avenge our sufferings and our wounds.”72 Payne argues, “The ante-Nicene

fathers believed that the persecutions they were enduring at the hands of imperial Rome

could be those of the final tribulation, and that therefore the Lord’s appearing to rule

could be imminent.”73

Both Payne and Thiessen argue extensively in their writings that this text supports

imminence, which must be weighed heavily in its classification of centrality. While not

used frequently among all advocates, it does occupy a prominent place within two

69 Ibid., 16; Thiessen, “Will The Church Pass? III,” 192-93.

70 Ibid., Cyprian, Epistle, 12.3.89.

71 Cyprian, Epistle, 55.1.

72 Ibid., 55.7.

73 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 17.

28

advocates’ writings. For these reasons, Cyprian of Carthage should be considered central

to the historical argument for imminence.

Summary

The arguments based on the following historical texts and writers have been found to be

central to the historical argument for imminence: Clement of Rome, the Didache,

Ignatius of Antioch, The Epistle of Barnabas, The Shepherd of Hermas, and Cyprian of

Carthage. The arguments based on the following historical texts and writers have been

found to not be central to the historical argument for imminence: The Constitutions of the

Holy Apostles, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus of Lyons.

The Post-Nicene Fathers and the Medieval Church

It is commonly accepted by imminence scholars that there is very little teaching in the

Post-Nicene Fathers and Medieval Church regarding the imminent return of Christ. It is

argued that the primary reason for its neglect is the rise of the Alexandrian allegorical

hermeneutic made popular by Origen, and applied to eschatology by Augustine.74 John

Hannah writes that the time period between Augustine and the Renaissance was largely

dominated by “Augustine’s understanding of the church, and its spiritualization of the

Millennium as the reign of Christ in the saints.”75 In this environment, it was difficult to

develop any eschatological doctrine including the events concerning the second coming

since many of the events spoken of by Christ of His second coming, such as the binding

74 Ibid., 19-21.

75 John D. Hannah, Our Legacy: The History of Christian Doctrine (Colorado Springs: NavPress, 2001), 315. cf. Robert E. Lerner, “The Medieval Return to the Thousand Year Sabbath,” in The Apocalypse in the Middle Ages (eds. Richard K. Emerson and Bernard McGuinn; Ithica, N.Y.: Cornell University, 1992), 51-53 and Stitzinger “The Rapture,” 149-71.

29

of Satan and the first resurrection, were believed to have already taken place. Ice and

Stitzinger76 quote Dorothy deF. Abrahamse’s observation regarding the lack of

eschatological reflection during the medieval period:

By medieval times the belief in an imminent apocalypse had officially been relegated to the role of symbolic theory by the Church; as early as the fourth century, Augustine had declared that the Revelation of John was to be interpreted symbolically rather than literally, and for most of the Middle Ages Church councils and theologians considered only abstract eschatology to be acceptable speculation. Since the nineteenth century, however, historians have recognized that literal apocalypses did continue to circulate in the medieval world and that they played a fundamental role in the creation of important strains of thought and legend.77

Nevertheless, there have been groups throughout the Catholic hegemony that were drawn

to a premillennial view, which is the foundation for both pretribulationism and

imminence. Yet, it was not until the Reformation that premillennialism began to again

take hold in the church.78

Ephraem of Nisibis (A.D. 373)79 a.k.a. Pseudo-Ephraem, or Ephraem the Syrian

Despite this poor environment, there were various statements and teaching made

regarding imminence, and particularly a pretribulational rapture. One particular sermon

76 Ice, “Myths,” 4; Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 157.

77 Dorothy deF. Abrahamse, “Introduction” to The Byzantine Apocalyptic Tradition, by Paul J. Alexander (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985), 1-2.

78 Ice, “Myths,” 4. Ice lists three major reasons for this. First, the Reformers returned to the sources of Scripture and the early church fathers in which premillennialism was dominant. Second, they rejected the allegorical approach in favor of a more literal hermeneutic. Third, they came into contact with many Jews and learned Hebrew. These three combined led the Reformers to question the place of national Israel in prophecy and whether they should continue to interpret these OT texts as allegorical. Cf. Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 160.

79 Ephraem was a major theologian of the Syrian Church. Bernard McGinn writes, “Ephraem is the most important and prolific of the Syrian Church Fathers, though there is still a good deal of uncertainty regarding the authenticity of much that has been ascribed to him. His numerous treatises, homilies, and hymns, many in metrical form, were soon translated into Greek and Armenian. Later Translations in Latin, Slavonic, and other Eastern languages also exist.” McGinn, Visions of the End, 60.

30

was attributed to Ephraem of Nisibis (A.D. 306-373) of the Eastern Church called “On

the Last Times, the Antichrist and the End of the World (373).” Grant Jeffrey was one of

the first to use the text by Ephraem as part of an argument for a historical pretribulational

rapture.80 The work has been used by Paul N. Benware, Francis Gumerlock, Timothy

Demy, Thomas Ice, James Stitzinger and Todd Strandberg in their arguments for

imminence.81

In the text Ephraem declares the imminent return of Christ for his church by an

early form of the pretribulational rapture doctrine. Ephraem states, “All the saints and

elect of the Lord are gathered together before the tribulation which is to come and are

taken to the Lord, in order that they may not see at any time the confusion which

overwhelms the world because of our sins.”82 Included in this sermon is a well

developed eschatological outline of end time events, which closely resembles modern

dispensationalism and most importantly included the imminent return of Christ. The

sermon continues, “We ought to understand thoroughly therefore, my brothers, what is

imminent or overhanging.”83 Ephraem affirms his belief in the imminent rapture of the

80 Grant R. Jeffrey, “A Pretrib Rapture Statement in the Early Medieval Church” When The Trumpet Sounds (ed. Thomas Ice and Timothy Demy; Eugene: Harvest House Publishers, 1995), 110-111.

81 Paul N. Benware, Understanding End Times Prophecy (Chicago: Moody, 1995), 198; Francis Gumerlock, “A Rapture Citation in the Fourteenth Century,” BSac 159 (2002): 351-52; Timothy J. Demy and Thomas D. Ice, “The Rapture and an Early Medieval Citation,” BSac 152 (1995): 306-317; Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 157-58; Todd Strandberg, “Imminency: The Rapture of the Church is an Imminent Event,” n.p. [cited Mar 23, 2010]. Online: http://raptureready.com/rr-imminency.html.

82 Pseudo-Ephraem, On the Last Times, 2. Full sermon found in Jeffrey, “A Pretrib Rapture Statement,” 110-111. Interestingly, the sermon includes a parenthesis between the 69th and 70th week of Daniel and a parenthesis between the Rapture and the Second Coming in which 3 ½ years of Great Tribulation occur and the Antichrist appears to rule the earth. Cf. Demy and Ice, “The Rapture and an Early Medieval Citation,” 306-317.

83 Pseudo-Ephraem, On the Last Times, 2.

31

saints by both explicit statements and by his pretribulational teachings. For him, no event

is left to occur before the rapture.84 Despite its infrequent use, which can be explained by

its relatively recent discovery, the text itself is a clear example of a detailed presentation

by a historical writer of the imminent rapture. This is thus a cogent argument for

imminence. By its acceptance by scholars from both Dallas Theological Seminary and

The Master’s Seminary, it seems likely that this text will become central in future

presentations of the historical case for imminence, and it will be deemed as such here.

Codex Amiatinus (ca. 690-716)

Only Stitzinger has been found to use this text as part of his argument for imminence.85

He writes that Abbot Ceolfrid from the monasteries in Jarrow and Wearmouth in

Northumberland, England commissioned this Latin manuscript as a gift to the Pope.86 In

the title for Psalm 22 it is written, “Psalm of David, the voice of the Church after being

raptured.”87 Of the two definitions possible for the Latin phrase post raptismum, either

“to snatch, hurry away,” or “to plunder, take by assault,”88 Stitzinger believes the former

84 Noted authority on the early Byzantine church, Paul Alexander, concluded that Ephraem meant to teach that the Lord would remove the saints from the earth supernaturally just “prior to the tribulation that is to come.” He continues, “Pseudo-Ephraem does not refer to the shortening of time. This author, however, mentions another measure taken by God in order to alleviate the period of tribulation for his saints and for the Elect. . . . It is probably no accident that Pseudo-Ephraem does not mention the shortening of the time intervals for the Antichrist’s persecution, for if prior to it the Elect are ‘taken to the Lord,’ i.e., participate at least in some measure in beatitude, there is no need for further mitigating action on their behalf. The Gathering of the Elect according to Pseudo-Ephraem is an alternative to the shortening of the time intervals.” Alexander, The Byzantine Apocalyptic Tradition, 210-211.

85 Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 157-158.

86 Ibid., 158.

87 Ernst Wurthwein, The Text of the Old Testament (trans. Erroll F. Rhodes; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979), 206. Quoted in Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 158.

88 Charlton T. Lewis and Charles Short, A New Latin Dictionary (New York: American Book Company, 1907), 1523.

32

definition is appropriate for two reasons. First, there was no evidence of persecution in

Coelfrid’s life that would have given him comfort in thus naming the Psalm. Second,

Coelfrid writes in a letter regarding Christ’s return, “[W]e show that we rejoice in the

most certain hope of our own resurrection, which we believe will take place on the Lord’s

Day.”89 Though not conclusive without further study, Stitzinger believes that Coelfrid

viewed the coming of the Lord to rapture the saints as soon and sudden, and

representative of pretribulational thought.90

At the present time, this has not been considered a significant argument in favor

of imminence since only Stitzinger uses it; nor is the text itself clearly pretribulational or

imminent. While the root of the word used in the Latin manuscript could be considered

synonymous with the modern word ‘rapture,’ the text presented by Stitzinger does not

unambiguously present an imminent rapture of the church. At most it would just say that

the church would be raptured at some time in the future. For these reasons, this text

should not be considered central to imminence.

The History of Brother Dolcino (1316)

Marjorie Reeves was the first to argue a pretribulational understanding and imminence of

this text.91 Francis Gumerlock has recently evaluated and developed it as part of his

89 “Ceolfrid’s letter to Nechtan,” in Venerable Bede, A History of the English Church and People,(trans. with an introduction by Leo Sherley-Price, rev. by R.E. Latham; New York: Dorset Press, 1968) 323. Quoted in Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 158.

90 Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 158.

91 Reeves notes, “When Antichrist appeared Dolcino and his followers would be removed to Paradise, while Enoch and Elijah descended to dispose of him. After the death of Antichrist, they would descend again to convert all nations, while Frederick of Sicily ruled over the last world empire.” Reeves, Joachim of Fiore and the Prophetic Future, 49, cited in Gumerlock, “A Rapture Citation in the Fourteenth Century,” 357, n. 24; Marjorie Reeves, The Influence of Prophecy in the Later Middle Ages: A Study in

33

historical argument for the pretribulational rapture and imminence.92 The text has also

been used by Stitzinger.93 The History of Brother Dolcino is a text written in 1316 by an

anonymous source who was documenting a splinter group called the Apostolic

Brethren.94 Founded in 1260, the Brethren were under severe persecution by the Catholic

Church until its eventual demise. Brother Dolcino became leader of the group in 1300

after their leader was burned at the stake. Dolcino and the group resided in northern Italy

until they were largely massacred by a papal army in 1306.95 The section of the text

pertaining to imminence follows:

Again [Dolcino believed and preached and taught] that within those three years Dolcino himself and his followers will preach the coming of the Antichrist. And that the Antichrist was coming into this world within the bounds of the said three and a half years, and after he had come, then he [Dolcino] and his followers would be transferred into Paradise, in which are Enoch and Elijah. And in this way they will be preserved unharmed from the persecution of the Antichrist. And that then Enoch and Elijah themselves would descend on the earth for the purpose of preaching [against] Antichrist. Then they would be killed by him or by his servants, and thus Antichrist would reign for a long time. But when the Antichrist is dead, Dolcino himself, who then would be the holy pope, and his preserved followers, will descend on the earth, and will preach the right faith of Christ to all, and will convert those who will be living then to the true faith of Jesus Christ.96

Joachimism (Notre Dame, Ind: University of Notre Dame Press, 1993), 243; and idem, Joachim of Fiore and the Prophetic Future (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1976), 49.

92 Gumerlock, “A Rapture Citation,” 349-62.

93 Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 159.

94 Gumerlock, “A Rapture Citation,” 355.

95 For a detailed history of the group and its beliefs see Gumerlock, “A Rapture Citation,” 349-62.

96 Historia Fratris Dulcini, Arnoldo Segarizzi, 8-9, in Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, Tomo IX-Parte V (ed. L. A. Muratori; Cittá di Castello, Italy: Coi Tipi Della Casa Editrice S. Lapi, 1907). Pius Memorial Library at Saint Louis University has a copy. Due to the scarcity of this text, it is quoted from Gumerlock. His article also includes the Latin version. Cf. Gumerlock, “A Rapture Citation,” 354-355.

34

Gumerlock and Stitzinger argue that The History of Brother Dolcino affirms that

the Apostolic Brethren believed in the imminent and pretribulational rapture of the

Church.97 Gumerlock writes, “The History of Brother Dolcino reveals that the

eschatology of the Apostolic Brethren included an expectation of the imminent rapture of

the church.”98 He continues, “examination of the ecclesiology of the Apostolic Brethren,

however, reveals that their view of the rapture was not a partial rapture theory, but a

rapture of the entire church.”99 The coming of the Antichrist was imminent, and thus the

rapture of the church was imminent. Though this text is not frequently cited, it holds a

prominent place in the writings of two advocates; therefore, it should be considered

central to the historical argument for imminence.

Summary

Though both the Ephraem of Nisibis text and The History of Brother Dolcino texts are

newly discovered, and they have only been used in a few imminence arguments, it should

be noted that they have quickly come to prominence among imminence scholars. Two

major pretribulational works have included them,100 and Bibliotheca Sacra, a prominent

dispensational journal,101 has published them. Furthermore, due to their explicit teaching

of a pretribulational rapture, they may soon become central to the historical argument for

97 Gumerlock, “A Rapture Citation,” 349-62; Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 158.

98 Gumerlock, “A Rapture Citation,” 356.

99 Ibid., 357.

100 Thomas Ice, and Timothy Demy, ed., When The Trumpet Sounds (Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House, 1995), 109-115; Thomas Ice, and Timothy Demy, ed., The Return: Understanding Christ's Second Coming and the End Times (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1999), 55-66.

101 Gumerlock, “A Rapture Citation,” 354-355.

35

the imminent rapture. Codex Amiatinus should be considered a secondary or a non-

central argument, as it is in need of more thorough research.

The Reformation Church

As with the medieval period, there is little development of eschatology during the

Reformation. Stitzinger argues that the Reformation Church in many ways follows

closely the Medieval Church in its lack of reflection and systematization of eschatology.

He notes that the lack of commentaries and books written on the subject proves this

point.102 Even Calvin wrote commentaries on many books of the Bible, and almost all

the books of the NT, but not Revelation.103 He also wrote only one chapter on

eschatology in The Institutes of the Christian Religion.104 Despite both the lack of

doctrinal development and their Augustinian influenced eschatology, four major

Reformers from different Protestant traditions have been used to argue for historical

imminence: Balthasar Hübmaier, Martin Luther, Hugh Latimer, and John Calvin.

Balthasar Hübmaier (c.1480-1528)

Stitzinger argues that a segment of the Anabaptists known as the Taufer was the strongest

in their affirmation of imminence.105 Stitzinger singles out Anabaptist writer Balthasar

Hübmaier in his argument for historical imminence.106 Despite rejecting radical chiliasm

102 Timothy George, Theology of the Reformers (Nashville: Broadman, 1988), 323.

103 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 24; cf. Heinrich Quistorp, Calvin’s Doctrine of the Last Things (trans. Harold Knight; London: Lutterworth, 1955), 113.

104 John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book III, Ch XXV.

105 Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 159.

106 Ibid., 159-160.

36

he nevertheless wrote in support of imminence, “[A]lthough Christ gave us many signs

whereby we can tell how near at hand the day of his coming is, nevertheless, no one but

God knows the exact day. . . . Take heed, watch and pray; for you know neither the day

nor the hour. . . . [T]he judge is already standing at the door. . . .”107 While the statements

coincide with typical statements on imminency, it does also state that there are “Many

signs” to indicate how close the coming is.

At this time, Stitzinger is the only advocate to cite Hübmaier, which indicates that

it is not widely viewed as a central text for imminence. Because of its infrequent use by

advocates, arguments from this historical writer should not be considered central for the

historical argument for imminence.

Martin Luther (1483-1546)

Payne, Pentecost, Stanton, and Stitzinger108 have argued that Martin Luther believed in

the imminent return of the Lord based on the following statements: “I think the last day is

not far away”109 and “the world runs and hastens so diligently to its end that it often

occurs to me forcibly that the last day will break before we can completely turn the Holy

Scriptures into German. For it is certain from the Holy Scriptures that we have no more

107 Balthasar Hübmaier, “Apologia,” Balthasar Hübmaier, Theologian of Anabaptism (trans. and eds. H. Wayne Pipkin and John H. Yoder; Scottdale, Pa.: Herald, 1989), 541-543.

108 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 23-24; J. Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1964), 203; Gerald B. Stanton, “The Doctrine of Imminency: Is It Biblical?” in When The Trumpet Sounds, 230; Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 160.

109 Martin Luther, Table Talk, Luther’s Works (Hagerstown, Md: Christian Heritage, 2003), 54:427.

37

temporal things to expect. All is done and fulfilled.”110 In a sermon entitled “The Signs of

Christ’s Coming” Luther wrote,

I would compel no man to believe me, and yet in this matter I will not yield up my judgment to any other, namely, that the Last Day is not far off. . . . Let us not therefore be wanting to ourselves, disregarding the most diligent premonition and prophesie of Christ our Saviour; but seeing in our Age the Signs foretold by him, do often come to pass, let us not think that the coming of Christ is far off.111

Luther further writes, “I believe that all the signs which are to precede the last days have

already appeared. Let us not think that the Coming of Christ is far off; let us look up with

heads lifted up; let us expect our Redeemer’s coming with longing and cheerful mind.”112

Since Luther is used broadly and frequently by imminence advocates, arguments based

on his teaching can be seen as central to the historical argument for imminence.

Hugh Latimer (c.1490-1555)

Payne argues that Hugh Latimer taught the imminent return of Christ.113 In preaching to

Edward VI in 1549 he stated, “The end of the world is near at hand. For there is lack of

faith now. Also the defection is come and swerving through the faith. Antichrist the man

of sin the son of iniquity is revealed, and the latter day is at hand.”114 In prison in Oxford

in 1555 Latimer wrote to “unfeigned lovers of God’s truth” and directed them to the day

110 Hugh Thomson Kerr, Jr., ed., A Compend of Luther’s Theology (Whitefish, Mt: Kessinger, 2008), 245.

111 Bryan W. Ball, A Great Expectation: Eschatological Thought in English Protestantism to 1660 (Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1975), 15; cf. Luther, “The Signs of Christ’s Coming, and Of the Last Day (1661),” Luther’s Works, 4, 28.

112 Pentecost, Things to Come, 204.

113 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 25.

114 Ball, A Great Expectation, 17. cf. Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 25.

38

“when our Christ shall come in his glory, which I trust will be shortly.”115 While there are

clear indications that Latimer believed that Christ would return soon, it could be argued

from these citations that he still believed in preceding signs to occur that would reject an

any-moment view of the return. However, it seems clear from the texts that this view is

unlikely since the two clear signs given by Scripture to precede the coming of Christ, the

apostasy and the man of sin (2 Thess 2:3), have both been stated to have occurred. No

other signs are left either in Scripture or in Latimer’s writing that would indicate that the

Lord’s arrival would be delayed. For this reason, this argument is possibly cogent; since,

however, it is not frequently cited by imminence advocates, it should not be considered a

central historical argument for imminence.

John Calvin (1509-1564)

Payne, Pentecost, Stanton, and Stitzinger have also cited Calvin in their historical

arguments for imminence.116 These scholars have cited the following from Calvin:

We must always remember the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. For were it not for this, we should faint every minute of an hour . . . there is no other means to confirm us to stand steadfastly, and to follow the right way, but only to know, that our Lord Jesus Christ will come and restore all things that are now out of square. . . . True it is, that according to our fleshly senses, it cannot sink into our heads that the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ is at hand. . . . And though our flesh be not able to reach unto it, yet we must behold it with the eyes of faith . . . let us love this coming of the Son of God.117

115 Ball, A Great Expectation, 17.

116 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 24; Pentecost, Things to Come, 203-204; Stanton, “The Doctrine of Imminency,” 230; Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 160.

117 Ball, A Great Expectation, 16; cf. John Calvin, Sermons of M. John Calvin on the Epistles of S. Paule to Timothie and Titus (trans. Laurence Tomson, n.p. 1579), 994-96; trans. of Sermons de Iean Calvin sur les deux Epistres Sainct Paul à Timothee, & sur l’Epistre a Tite (Genèva, 1563), 502, 503.

39

Stitzinger further cites Calvin concerning Christ’s teaching in the Gospels, “[Jesus]

wishes [the disciples] to be uncertain as to his coming, but to be prepared to expect him .

. . every moment,” 118 and, “[Jesus] wished [the disciples] to be uncertain as to his

coming, but yet to be prepared to expect Him every day, or rather every moment.”119

Calvin also writes, “It behooves us to comfort ourselves at this day, and to see by faith

the near advent of Christ . . . nothing more now remained but that Christ should appear

for the redemption of the world.”120 Commenting on Matthew 24:42 Calvin writes,

It ought to be observed, that the uncertainty as to the time of Christ’s coming—which almost all treat as an encouragement to sloth—ought to be felt by us to be an excitement to attention and watchfulness. God intended that it should be hidden from us, for the express purpose that we may keep diligent watch without the relaxation of a single hour. For what would be the trial of faith and patience, if believers, after spending their whole life in ease, and indolence, and pleasure, were to prepare themselves within the space of three days for meeting Christ?121

Advocates have frequently argued that Calvin believed that the return of the Lord was

imminent.122 All signs given were considered to have already occurred such that there

was nothing further prior to that coming. Based on the frequency with which advocates

cite statements from Calvin as supporting imminence, along with the intrinsic value of

118 Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 160; J. Graham Miller, Calvin’s Wisdom: An Anthology Arranged Alphabetically by a Grateful Reader (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1992), 336-38.

119 John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries (22 vols.; trans. William Pringle; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999), 17:156. Calvin’s phrase “every day, or rather every moment,” which has been translated from the original Latin is collated with the author’s French version in the footnote: “De jour en jour, ou plustost d’heure en heure;” – “from day to day, or rather from hour to hour.”

120 Ibid., 22:189

121 Ibid., 17:160-61.

122 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 24; Pentecost, Things to Come, 203-204; Stanton, “The Doctrine of Imminency,” 230; Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 160.

40

support from someone of the stature of Calvin, these arguments claiming support from

Calvin may be considered central to the historical argument for imminence.

Summary

Imminence advocates cite Luther and Calvin more often than any of the other Reformers

for at least two reasons. First, their writings have been reviewed and respected by more

Protestants than those of any of the other Reformers. Second, they both affirm that the

signs are such as to prevent absolute identification of the time of the Lord’s return, and

that in spite of signs the nature and purpose of the teaching itself was to ensure that

believers were ready at every moment. Luther and Calvin are thus most broadly and

frequently used, and most exegetically supported. For these reasons, the arguments based

on Luther and Calvin can be considered central from the Reformation Church for the

historical imminence argument.

The Post-Reformation Church

Benware, Boyer, Ice, Jeffrey, Marotta, Stitzinger, and Strandberg have argued that early

development of pretribulationism began during the Post-Reformation period as seen in

the writings of Joseph Mede (1586-1639), Increase Mather (1639-1723), Morgan

Edwards (1722-1795), Peter Jurieu (1637-1713), Philip Doddridge (1702-1751), John

Gill (1697-1771), and James MacKnight (1721-1800).123 This has been a particularly

123 Paul N. Benware, Understanding End Times Prophecy: A Comprehensive Approach (Chicago: Moody, 1995) 197-98; Paul Boyer, When Time Shall Be No More: Prophecy Belief in Modern American Culture (Cambridge, MA: Belknap, 1992), 75; Thomas Ice, “Myths of the Origins of Pretribulationism,” n.p. [cited Mar 23, 2010]. Online: http://www.pre-trib.org/article-view.php?id=50; Jeffrey, “A Pretrib Rapture Statement,” 119; Frank Marotta, Morgan Edwards: An Eighteenth Century Pretribulationist(Morganville, N.J.: Present Truth Publishers, 1995), 10-12; Todd Strandberg, “Imminency: The Rapture of the Church is an Imminent Event;” Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 160-64.

41

intense area of research since it has been frequently argued by non-pretribulationists that

there is no hint of pretribulationism prior to John Nelson Darby.124 This section will

present these early pretribulational texts which have been used by imminence advocates

to argue for a historical belief of imminence via a pretribulational rapture. Unfortunately,

the primary sources for Joseph Mede, Increase Mather, Peter Jurieu, Philip Doddridge,

and James MacKnight are currently unavailable and not directly cited by these advocates;

therefore, they cannot be presented here nor considered central for the historical

argument for imminence. The two remaining writers of this time that have been used

include Morgan Edwards (1722-1795) and John Gill (1697-1771). They will be presented

below.

John Gill (1697-1771)

Benware, Jeffrey, and Stitzinger argue that John Gill taught the imminence of the

rapture.125 Gill was a Baptist minister at Horsleydown, Southwark for more than fifty

years, and a Calvinist theologian and scholar.126 He wrote his NT commentary, An

Exposition of the New Testament, in three volumes between 1746-48. The following is a

section of Gill’s commentary on 1 Thess 4:17 argued as supporting imminence:

Suddenly, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, . . . which rapture will contribute agility, which the bodies of the raised and changed saints will have; and this rapture of the living saints will be together with them; with the dead in

124 William Everett Bell, Jr. writes, “No trace of the doctrine is to be found in church history after the Ante-Nicene fathers until the nineteenth century.” Bell, “A Critical Evaluation,” 27; John L. Bray, The Origin of the Pretribulation Rapture Teaching (Lakeland, FL: John L. Bray Ministry, 1982), 18-20; Gundry, The Church and Tribulation, 185; George E. Ladd, The Blessed Hope (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), 31; Dave MacPherson, The Great Rapture Hoax (Fletcher, NC: New Puritan Library, 1983).

125 Benware, Understanding End Times Prophecy, 198; Jeffrey, “A Pretrib Rapture Statement,” 119-22; Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 163.

126 Robert G. Clouse, “John Gill,” The New Dictionary, 413.

42

Christ, that will be raised, . . . and be rapt up together; in the clouds; the same clouds perhaps in which Christ will come will be let down to take them up; . . . so at this time will all the saints ride up in the clouds of Heaven: to meet the Lord in the air; . . . as yet He will not descend on earth, because it is not fit to receive Him; but when that and its works are burnt up, and it is purged and purified by fire, and become a new earth, He’ll descend upon it, and dwell with His saints in it: and this suggests another reason why He’ll stay in the air, and His saints shall meet Him there, and whom He’ll take up with Him into the third heaven, till the general conflagration and burning of the world is over, and to preserve them from it: and then shall all the elect of God descend from heaven as a bride adorned for her husband, and He with them . . . then they shall be with Him, wherever He is; first in the air, where they shall meet Him; then in the third heaven, where they shall go up with Him; then on earth, where they shall descend and reign with Him a thousand years; and then in the ultimate glory to all eternity.127

Benware argues,

Philip Doddridge’s commentary on the New Testament (1738)128 and John Gill’s commentary on the New Testament (1748) each use the term rapture and speak of it as imminent. It is clear that these men believed that this coming will precede Christ’s descent to the earth and the time of judgment. The purpose was to preserve believers from the time of judgment.129

Jeffrey argues that “Gill’s commentary on the Thessalonian passage affirms that first, the

saints are raptured to the air in order that they would not go through judgment. Second,

the Lord will not descend to the earth, but take the church to heaven.”130 Furthermore,

Jeffrey argues concerning John Gill’s commentary on 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17, “Dr. Gill

points out that Paul is delivering teaching that is “something new and extraordinary.’

Gill calls the translation of the saints ‘the rapture,’ and he calls for watchfulness because

127 Due to the limited availability of John Gill’s commentary, this text is quoted from Jeffrey, “A Pretrib Rapture Statement,” 120-21. John Gill, Commentary On The New Testament (1748).

128 Doddridge’s commentary is currently unavailable, nor does Benware directly cite it; therefore, his text will not be included in this presentation.

129 Benware, Understanding End Times Prophecy, 198.

130 Jeffrey, “A Pretrib Rapture Statement,” 120-121. John Gill, Commentary on 1 Thess 4:17,(1748).

43

‘it will be sudden, and unknown before-hand, and when least thought of and

expected.’”131 Commenting on 1 Thessalonians 4:15, Gill wrote, “It was a well known

thing that it would be sudden, and at an unawares, like the coming of a thief in the

night.”132

Because of its frequent use by advocates, this text should be considered central to

the historical argument for imminence.

Morgan Edwards (1722-1795)

Thomas Ice, Frank Marotta, James Stitzinger, and Todd Strandberg argue that Morgan

Edwards, the founder of Brown University, taught the imminence of the rapture in his

work, Two Academical Exercises on Subjects Bearing the Following Titles: Millennium,

Last-Novelties (1744).133 It is claimed that in this text Edwards taught that the rapture

would be three-and-a-half years before the beginning of the millennium. The following

text is used by advocates:

II. The distance between the first and second resurrection will be somewhat more than a thousand years.

I say, somewhat more -- because the dead saints will be raised, and the living changed at Christ's "appearing in the air" (I Thes. iv. 17); and this will be about three years and a half before the millennium, as we shall see hereafter: but will he and they abide in the air all that time? No: they will ascend to paradise, or to some one of those many "mansions in the father's house" (John xiv. 2), and so disappear during the foresaid period of time. The design of this retreat and disappearing will

131 Ibid., 119.

132 Ibid.

133 Thomas Ice, “Morgan Edwards: Another Pre-Darby Rapturist,” n.p. [cited Mar 19, 2010]. Online: http://www.according2prophecy.org/apredarby.html; Marotta, Morgan Edwards, 10-12; cf. Frank Marotta, “Dave MacPherson’s the Rapture Plot: Weighed and Found Wanting,” n.p. [cited Mar 19, 2010]. Online: http://www.according2prophecy.org/macphers.html; Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 163; Strandberg, “Imminency.”

44

be to judge the risen and changed saints; for "now the time is come that judgment must begin," and that will be "at the house of God" (I Pet. iv. 17).134

Noting its significance for the pretribulational argument, in that Edwards is one of the

first to make a time separation between the rapture and the second coming,

posttribulationist John Bray comments, “It would be interesting to know what, in those

early years at the Academy, led Edwards to his concept of a pre-tribulation rapture. One

could almost think he had been studying at one of our modern dispensational-entrenched

schools, the teaching is so similar to that which is being taught today.”135

Because of its frequency of use, and its recognition of importance by a leading

opponent to the pretribulational view, this text should be considered central to the historic

argument for imminence.

Summary

While a number of writers were referenced by advocates to show a belief in imminence,

only Morgan Edwards and John Gill were sufficiently cited to provide a basis on which

to examine the advocates’ claims. These two writers, however, have been used frequently

to argue for the imminent rapture; therefore, their writings should be considered as

sources that should become central to the historical argument for imminence.

134 The spelling of all Edwards’ quotes has been modernized. Ice, “Morgan Edwards;” Taken from Morgan Edwards, Two Academical Exercises on Subjects Bearing the following Titles; Millennium, Last-Novelties (Philadelphia: n.p., 1788). Entire copy of this work is available online: http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/two-academical-exercises-on-subjects-bearing-following-titles-millennium-last-novelties.

135 John L. Bray, Morgan Edwards & the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Teaching (1788) (Lakeland, Fla: John L. Bray Ministries, 1995): 8.

45

Conclusion

In the era of church history known as the Ante-Nicene Fathers, the arguments based on

the following historical texts and writers have been found to be central to the historical

argument for imminence: Clement of Rome, the Didache, Ignatius of Antioch, The

Epistle of Barnabas, The Shepherd of Hermas, and Cyprian of Carthage. Within this

same period the arguments based on the following historical texts and writers have been

found to not be central to the historical argument for imminence: The Constitutions of the

Holy Apostles, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus of Lyons. During the Post-Nicene Fathers and

the Medieval Church era, both the Ephraem of Nisibis and The History of Brother

Dolcino texts were found to be central to the historical argument for imminence, while

the Codex Amiatinus text was found to not be central. During the Reformation church era,

arguments based on the writings of Martin Luther and John Calvin were found to be

central, while those based on Balthasar Hübmaier and Hugh Latimer were not. Finally,

during the post-Reformation church era, only arguments based on the writings of John

Gill and Morgan Edwards were found to be central, while those based on the writings of

Joseph Mede, Increase Mather, Peter Jurieu, Philip Doddridge, and James MacKnight

were found to not be central.

46

CHAPTER 3: BIBLICAL ARGUMENTS FOR IMMINENCE

The purpose of this chapter is to present the biblical arguments for the belief that the

rapture could occur at any moment and to determine which arguments are central to the

case for imminence. As opposed to the theological arguments presented in the next

chapter, biblical arguments, for the purpose of this thesis, are those arguments that

present positive textual data to argue for imminence. Theological arguments, on the other

hand, include those arguments that argue the imminence texts presented in this chapter

are not negated by texts that teach preceding signs. The biblical arguments presented here

have been used by imminence advocates to show that a belief in the imminent rapture, or

return of Christ for His church, is exegetically grounded in scripture.

The primary imminence advocates represented here include Anthony A. Hoekema

(amillennialist),1 Benjamin L. Merkle (amillennialist), and J. Barton Payne

1 While Hoekema is an amillennialist (p. 223), he is considered an imminence advocate for two reasons: first, he argues that it is impossible to calculate the time of Christ’s coming for the church Hoekema (pp. 135-36), and second, he argues that this incalculability should result in constant readiness (p. 135). He writes, “The Bible does indeed point to such a final culmination of the signs of the times. To say therefore that no predicted event need to happen before Christ returns is to say too much. We must be prepared for the possibility that the Parousia may yet be a long way off . . . . On the other hand, to affirm with certainty that the Parousia is still a long way off is also to say too much. The exact time of the Parousia is unknown to us. Neither do we know exactly how the signs of the times will intensify. . . . It is certain to come, but we do not know exactly when it will come. We must therefore live in constant expectation of and readiness for the Lord’s return. The words of the following motto put it well: “Live as though Christ died yesterday, arose this morning, and is coming again tomorrow.” Because he affirms a constant expectation of the Parousia, and because he affirms that there is no way to say with preciseness that the signs have not already occurred, Hoekema will for the purposes of this thesis, be considered an imminence advocate. Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 136. cf. 134-35.

This evaluation of Hoekema is affirmed by Merkle, who cites him five times in his article arguing for the imminent return of Christ.. Benjamin L. Merkle, "Could Jesus Return At Any Moment? Rethinking the Imminence of the Second Coming," Trinity Journal 26 (2005): 279, 280, 287, 290; It should be noted

47

(premillennialist) for imminent posttribulationism,2 and Craig A. Blaising, Darrell L.

Bock, Wayne A. Brindle, Lewis S. Chafer, Timothy Demy, Keith H. Essex, Paul D.

Feinberg, William K. Harrison, D. Edmond Hiebert, John F. MacArthur, Richard

Mayhue, Arthur W. Pink, John A. Sproule, Gerald B. Stanton, John F. Strombeck, Robert

L. Thomas, Stanley D. Toussaint, John F. Walvoord, and Leon J. Wood for

Dispensational pretribulationism (premillennialist).3 Arguments made by these advocates

will be assessed based on their frequency of use among all imminence advocates

surveyed, breadth of usage by advocates, and prominence within an advocate’s writings.

An argument will be identified as central to the case for imminence if it is used frequently

by a number of advocates, is used broadly among all eschatological views that hold to

imminence, or is prominent within an advocate’s writings. Cogency of the arguments will

be addressed only if a major logical fallacy is apparent. Arguments that do not have any

that while both Hoekema and Merkle are amillennialists their views on the imminent return of Christ and corresponding imminent rapture of the church closely parallels premillennialist J. Barton Payne. Cf. J. Barton Payne, The Imminent Appearing of Christ (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962).

2 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 109; Merkle, "Could Jesus Return At Any Moment? 279-292; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 86, 95-98.

3 Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Progressive Dispensationalism (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1993), 262-64; Wayne A. Brindle, “Biblical Evidence for the Imminence of the Rapture,” BSac 158 (2001): 139; Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology (8 vols.; Dallas, Tex.; Dallas Theological Seminary, 1976; repr., Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1993), 4:360-78, 385-401; Keith H. Essex “The Rapture and the Book of Revelation.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 13 (2002): 215-39William K. Harrison, “The Time of the Rapture as indicated in certain Scriptures,” BSac 114-115 (1957); Richard L. Mayhue, “Why a Pretribulational Rapture,” MSJ 13 (2002): 241-53; Arthur W. Pink, The Redeemer’s Return (Ashland, K.Y.: Calvary Baptist Church Book Store, 1918); 132-54; Gerald B. Stanton, Kept From the Hour: Biblical Evidence for the Pretribulational Return of Christ (4th ed.; Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle Publishing, 1991), 51-69; Gerald B. Stanton, “The Doctrine of Imminency: Is It Biblical?” in When the Trumpet Sounds (ed. Thomas Ice and Timothy Demy; Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House, 1995), 221-33; J. F. Strombeck, First the Rapture: The Church’s Blessed Hope (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1950); Robert L. Thomas, “Imminence in the NT, Especially Paul’s Thessalonian Epistles,” MSJ 13 (2002): 191-92; Stanley D. Toussaint, “Are the Church and the Rapture in Matthew 24?” in When the Trumpet Sounds (ed. Thomas Ice and Timothy Demy; Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House, 1995), 235-250; John F. Walvoord, Matthew: Thy Kingdom Come (Chicago: Moody, 1974, c1998), 182; Leon J. Wood, Is the Rapture Next? (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1956), 29-31; Leon J. Wood, The Bible and Future Events: An Introductory Survey of Last Day Events (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973), 47-48,

48

of the criteria will be identified as non-central. Abandonment or revision of arguments

will be noted when appropriate.

This chapter will be divided into five sections: 1) the Olivet Discourse and related

texts; 2) the Upper Room Discourse; 3) the Pauline epistles; 4) the general epistles; 5) the

book of Revelation. Specific texts from each of these text groupings will be listed with

their corresponding arguments and advocates.

The Olivet Discourse and Related Texts

The key text from the Olivet Discourse, which is repeated in slightly varying forms in

related texts, is: “Therefore be on the alert, for you do not know which day your Lord is

coming. . . . For this reason you also must be ready; for the Son of Man is coming at an

hour when you do not think He will” (Matthew 24:42, 44; cf. 24:36-25:13; Mark 13:33-

37; Luke 12:3, 40, 43; 17:22-37; 21:34-36). Chafer, Hoekema, MacArthur, Merkle,

Payne, Pink, Stanton, Thomas and Wood cite one or all of these texts in their arguments

for imminence.4 Hoekema, an amillennialist, argues, “If these words mean anything at

all, they mean that Christ himself did not know the day or the hour of his return. . . . If

then, Christ Himself did not know the hour of his return, no other statements of his can be

interpreted as indicating the exact time of that return.”5 Payne, a premillennialist, notes

that this warning is not related mainly to the unsaved, but the saved. He said to His

disciples, “You do not know which day your Lord is coming (emphasis added).”

4 Chafer, Systematic Theology 4:367-71; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 109; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 11-12, 14; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 288-89; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 86, 95-98; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 133-40; Stanton, “The Doctrine of Imminency,” 223; Thomas, “Imminence,” 192-96; Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 29-31, 88-105; Wood, Bible and Future Events, 47-48, 80-81.

5 Hoekema, The Bible and the Future, 113.

49

Stanton and Thomas, both from a dispensational premillennial position, also use

the Olivet Discourse and related texts to argue for imminence. Stanton argues that “we

are all exhorted to watch, but no one can know the day nor the hour when the Bridegroom

will come (Matt 25:13) (emphasis original).”6 Commenting on Jesus’ statement in Matt

24:36 that “concerning that day and hour no one knows,” Thomas argues that in this and

related texts7 Jesus is teaching the imminence of the return and associated events.8 “Jesus

is saying that no one has the faintest idea about when—in the broadest sense of the term

‘when’—the Son of Man will return. Here He indicates the complete unexpectedness of

what will overtake the world at the time of His second advent.”9 Furthermore, Thomas

argues that all NT teaching on imminence is derived from Jesus’ teaching in these texts

concerning the imminent coming of both the master and thief.10 Thomas argues,

“Imminence of these two future happenings11 interweaves itself into NT teaching from

beginning to end, raising the strong probability that the origin of the teaching was none

other than Jesus Himself.”12

6 Stanton, “The Doctrine of Imminency,” 223.

7 Texts depicting the imminence of the beginning of all series of events related to the return of Christ: Matt 24:36, 42; 25:13. cf. Matt 24:37, 44. This argument will be expanded in Chapter 4: Theological Arguments.

8 Thomas, “Imminence,” 193-96.

9 Ibid., 194.

10 Teaching on the imminent return of the Master, or Bridegroom: Matt 24:45-51; 25:1-13, 14-30; Mark 13:33-37; Luke 12:35-38; 42-48. cf. Matt 24:33, which references the coming master, who is “right at the door.” Teaching on the imminent return of the thief: Matt 24:43-44; Luke 12:39.

11 i.e., the return of Christ for His church as depicted by the coming master, and the coming wrath of God on the unbelieving world as depicted by the coming thief.

12 Thomas, “Imminence,” 192.

50

Since this argument is frequently used by a number of advocates from multiple

eschatological perspectives, it should be considered a central biblical argument for

imminence.

Upper Room Discourse

The key verses from the Upper Room Discourse are: “Do not let your heart be troubled;

believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father’s house are many dwelling places; if it

were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. If I go and prepare

a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you

may be also” (John 14:1-3). Brindle, Chafer, Hoekema, MacArthur, Mayhue, Stanton,

Thomas, and Walvoord cite this text in their arguments for imminence.13 This text has

particular import for a discussion on imminence since it is commonly accepted by both

modern posttribulationists and pretribulationists to refer to the rapture.14 Though only

mentioned once by Hoekema, He nevertheless directly connects it to Christ’s imminent

coming for His saints “at an unexpected hour (Matt 24:42, 44; Luke 12:40).”15

Due to its long standing position among pretribulationists, the imminence

argument based on John 14:1-3 has become virtually unanimous among

dispensationalists. For this reason it is only necessary to summarize the argument. First,

13 Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 139-42; Chafer, Systematic Theology 4:367; Couch, “Major Rapture Terms,” 25-56; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 109; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 8; Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 131-32; Thomas, “Imminence,” 196, 98; Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 29-31.

14 Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 139; Douglas J. Moo, “The Case for the Posttribulational Rapture Position,” in Three Views on the Rapture (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 178.

15 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 109.

51

pretribulationists argue that the text does in fact speak only of the Rapture.16 Richard

Mayhue argues that it parallels the rapture passage in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.17 Second,

when Christ returns He will take believers to be with Himself permanently (vs. 3). Third,

Christ will immediately take them to heaven, which is critical to the argument (vs. 2).18

Fourth, Christ spoke of the rapture as the antidote of their fears, and as great hope and

encouragement in light of his departure (vs. 1).19 Fifth, Jesus made no mention of

suffering or judgment from which the rapture might rescue them. Judgment is completely

foreign to this text, which is odd if it refers to the same events as the Olivet Discourse.

Saints in the Olivet Discourse are repetitively warned about distress, persecution, and

deception, whereas in this Discourse only hope and comfort is given. It is argued that this

passage is alien to what the saints suffering the events of the Olivet Discourse would be

experiencing. Sixth, He did not mention any signs that must precede the rapture. Seventh,

in the second coming passages there is no hint of anyone going from earth to heaven, and

16 Brindle notes, “The idea that Christ ‘comes’ to believers at the time of their deaths is not found in Scripture at all.” Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 139. “If I go” He was not speaking only of His death, but His entire departure, which included and culminated with “to the Father” (Acts 1:9-11). Therefore the statement, “I come again” must also refer to a complete return.” Douglas J. Moo notes, that this cannot mean come to the individual at time of death or in the person of the Holy Spirit; it must then refer to the rapture as taught in 1 Thess 4. cf. Moo, “The Case for the Posttribulation Rapture,” 178.

17 Mayhue, “Why a Pretribulational Rapture?” 246.

18 Mayhue writes, “The phrase “wherever I am,” while implying continued presence in general, here means presence in heaven in particular. The Lord told the Pharisees in John 7:34, ‘Where I am you cannot come.” He was not talking about His then-present abode on earth but rather His resurrected presence at the right hand of the Father. In John 14:3 “where I am” must mean “in heaven” or the intent of 14:1-3 would be wasted and worthless.” Mayhue, Why a Pretrib Rapture? 246. It should also be noted that “Father’s house” also can refer to the Temple (Jn. 2:16); however, it cannot refer to the earthly temple because Jesus is going there to prepare a place for them and will return from there to get them, and the place He is going is heaven, not the earthly Temple.

19 Gromacki writes, “The choice of the present tense rather than the future in a prophetic context probably implies an ever-present possibility of fulfillment, or imminence.” Robert Gromacki, “The Imminent Return of Jesus Christ,” GTJ 6 (Fall 1965):18. Brindle notes, “the statement ‘I am coming again’ ( v “ is a futuristic present meaning ‘I will come again’) cf. Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 140.

52

in this passage there is no mention of anyone going from heaven to earth. All are going to

heaven with Jesus to be with the Father in His house. No intervening event such as the

Tribulation or the Millennium is mentioned, which again separates it from the events

given in the Olivet Discourse.20 Eighth, imminence is strongly implied by the verb form

“I will come” in vs. 3. Thomas writes, “Imminence is part of the verb form “I will come,”

the Greek word (erchomai). Used in 14:3 in parallel with the future indicative

(paralēmpsomai), which means “I will receive,” the present tense of erchomai is clearly a

futuristic use of the present tense.”21

Since this text is frequently used by a number of advocates from at least two

eschatological views it should be considered central for the biblical argument for

imminence.

The Pauline Epistles

A number of texts from Pauline epistles have been claimed to support imminence. The

following texts were used by imminence advocates surveyed in this chapter: “For the

anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. . . . and

not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves

groan within ourselves waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our

body. . . . But if we hope for what we do not see, with perseverance we wait eagerly for

it” (Romans 8:19, 23, 25). Payne notes that Romans 8 speaks of both an expectation of a

soon fulfillment (vs. 19, 23) and a possibility of a distant fulfillment (vs. 25); both key

20 Ibid., 141-142.

21 Thomas, “Imminence,” 196. cf. Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 139-142.

53

aspects of biblical imminence;22 however, since this text is used by only one advocate, it

should not be considered central.

“Do this, knowing the time, that it is already the hour for you to awaken from

sleep; for now salvation is nearer to us that when we believed. The night is almost gone,

and the day is near. Therefore let us lay aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor

of light” (Romans 13:11, 12). MacArthur, Merkle, Pink, and Wood cite this text in their

arguments for imminence.23 Particularly, MacArthur focuses heavily on the phrases

“Wake Up,” “throw off,” and “put on!” Wood argues that “salvation” here refers to the

heaven-going of believers, which could occur at any hour.24 Since this text is used by

advocates from at least two eschatological perspectives, it should be considered central

for the biblical argument for imminence.

“So that you are not lacking in any gift, awaiting eagerly the revelation of our

Lord Jesus Christ, who will also confirm you to the end, blameless in the day of our Lord

Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 1:7). Blaising, Bock, Brindle, Payne, Pink, and Walvoord cite this

text in their arguments for imminence.25 Blaising and Bock write that the day of the Lord

coincides with the revelation (apokalupsis) of Christ in this text, which incorporates all

elements from the rapture to the appearing.26 Brindle argues that the phrase “eager

22 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 99.

23 MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 13-18; Merkle, "Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 289; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 140; Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 31; Wood, Bible and Future Events, 79-80.

24 Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 31.

25 Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 146-48; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 99; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 140-41; Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 80-81.

26 Blaising and Bock. Progressive Dispensationalism, 262.

54

anticipation” may suggest an imminent coming. Payne argues that the word

apekdechomai (“expect, eagerly await, look for”) is the intensive form of the verb

(ekdechomai, “wait for, expect”) should not be discounted as including “a potential

brevity in its fulfillment.”27 He further writes, “While it is granted that a “not today but

very soon” interpretation remains theoretically possible for one’s understanding of these

words, the lack of evidence for any postponement seems to suggest the “perhaps today”

possibility, which is all that a cautious imminency really seeks to maintain.”28 Since this

argument is frequently used by a number of advocates from at least two eschatological

perspectives, it should be considered central for the biblical argument for imminence.

“Behold, I tell you a mystery, we will not all sleep, but we will 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 will be changed” (1 Cor 15:51-52). Blaising,

Bock, Brindle, Chafer, MacArthur, Merkle, Payne, Pink, Strombeck, Stanton, Thomas,

and Wood cite this text in their arguments for imminence.29 As with the 1 Thessalonians

4:15-17 text, here these advocates argue that since Paul used the term ‘we’ to denote

those who would be alive at the rapture, Paul believed that he would be present. Since

this argument is frequently used by a number of advocates from at least two

eschatological perspectives, it should be considered central for the biblical argument for

imminence.

27 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 99.

28 Ibid.

29 Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 264; Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 148-49; Chafer, Systematic Theology 4:368; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?”8; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 289; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 90; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 142; Stanton, Kept from the Hour, 124; Thomas, “Imminence in the NT,” 203; Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 34.

55

“For our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we eagerly wait for a Savior,

the Lord Jesus Christ” (Phil 3:20). Payne, Pink, Stanton, and Thomas cite this text in their

arguments for imminence.30 Payne notes that this text uses apekdechomai (“expect,

eagerly await, look for”) and refers to expecting Christ with “a hope that is not subject to

postponement in time.”31 Payne’s remark about the hope not being subject to

postponement in time raises some logical difficulties since it has already been postponed

for some 2000 years; however, Payne does not attempt to elaborate further on this point.

Thomas argues that it references the personal hope that Paul had of still being alive at the

time of the return, and that this hope “characterized him throughout his days.”32 Since

this argument is used by advocates from at least two eschatological perspectives, it

should be considered central for the biblical argument for imminence.

“Let your gentle spirit be known to all men. The Lord is near” (Phil 4:5).

Hoekema and Payne cite this text in their arguments for imminence.33 Payne notes that

the word eggus (“near”) points to the soon and unhindered coming of the Lord.34 Since

this text is used by only two advocates, it should not be considered central.

“When Christ, who is our life, is revealed, then you also will be revealed with

Him in glory” (Col 3:4). Blaising, Bock, and MacArthur cite this text in their arguments

30 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 99; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 141; Stanton, Kept from the Hour, 124; Robert L. Thomas, “1 Thessalonians,” EBC, (ed. Frank E. Gaebelein: Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978), 278. cf. Thomas, “Imminence,” 203.

31 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 99; Robert L. Thomas, “1 Thessalonians,” 278. cf. Thomas, “Imminence,” 203.

32 Thomas, “1 Thessalonians,” 278. cf. Thomas, “Imminence,” 203.

33 Hoekema, The Bible, 110; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 99.

34 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 99.

56

for imminence.35 While these scholars use this text, it is only referenced and not used as a

primary text for discussion. Since this text is used by only three advocates, in which it is

only referenced, it should not be considered central.

“[A]nd to wait for [anameno] His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the

dead, that is Jesus, who rescues us from the wrath to come” (1 Thess 1:10). Blaising,

Bock, Brindle, Chafer, Payne, Stanton, Thomas, and Walvoord cite this text in their

arguments for imminence.36 Brindle argues that the phrase “rescued from the wrath to

come” speaks specifically of the temporal wrath of the Tribulation from which saints will

be rescued beforehand. He writes, “It serves as a summary of the eschatological teaching

Paul had given, which finds its expansion and further explanation in 4:13-5:11.”37 Payne

notes that the Thessalonians’ understanding of the imminence of the coming of the Lord

was such “that some of them seem to have given up their ordinary pursuits, the better to

“wait for” His immediate return (2 Thess 3:10).” He continues to argue that “their

excessive eagerness is felt to have been a major factor in Paul’s writing II Thessalonians

shortly after this (cf. 2:2), but its very presence witnesses to the vital contemporaneity of

the apostolic preaching of the blessed hope.”38

35 Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 264; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 8.

36 Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 263; Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 142; Chafer, Systematic Theology 4:367-68; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 99-100; Stanton, Kept from the Hour, 125; Thomas, “Imminence,” 212-13; Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 80.

37 Brindle, “Imminence,” 144; Brindle draws from Wallace, who also affirms that this verse is a type of summary statement. Cf. Wallace, “A Textual Problem in 1 Thessalonians 1:10,” 479.

38 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 100.

57

Since this argument is frequently used by a number of advocates from at least two

eschatological perspectives, it should be considered central for the biblical argument for

imminence.

Blaising, Bock, Chafer, Hoekema, MacArthur, Merkle, Pink, Thomas, and Wood

cite the following text from 1 Thess 4:13-18 in their arguments for imminence.39

But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, so that you will 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, will 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 will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words.

These scholars argue that since Paul used the term ‘we’ to denote those who would be

alive at the rapture, Paul believed that he would be present. Since this argument is

frequently used by a number of advocates from at least two eschatological perspectives, it

should be considered central for the biblical argument for imminence.

“[S]o then let us not sleep as others do, but let us be alert and sober. For those

who sleep do their sleeping at night, and those who get drunk get drunk at night. But

since we are of the day, let us be sober, having put on the breastplate of faith and love,

and as a helmet, the hope of salvation” (1 Thess 5:6-8). Brindle, Chafer, Hoekema,

MacArthur, Strombeck, Thomas, Walvoord, and Wood cite this text in their arguments

39 Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 264; Chafer, Systematic Theology 4:368; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 122-25; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?”8; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 289; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 141-42; Thomas, “Imminence,” 202-206; Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 34; Wood, Bible and Future Events, 84-85.

58

for imminence.40 Advocates argue that believers and unbelievers are contrasted using the

terms “day” and “night,” where unbelievers who are of the night will be caught in the

eschatological outpouring of God’s wrath and believers who are of the day will be

rescued from it. Brindle further argues, “to say that the Day of the Lord will come on the

church, which is of the day, in the same way and at the same time that it will come on

unbelievers, who are ‘in the night,’ would seem to contradict Paul’s specific declaration

that it will come ‘like a thief in the night’ and to make worthless his counsel to stay alert,

watchful, and sober.”41

Since this text is frequently used by a number of advocates from at least two

eschatological perspectives, it should be considered central for the biblical argument for

imminence.

“Looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and

Savior, Christ Jesus” (Titus 2:13 Blaising, Bock, Brindle, Chafer, MacArthur, Payne,

Pink, and Wood cite this text in their arguments for imminence.42 Brindle argues that Paul

leaves out any mention of signs that believers were to expect in their waiting for the

40 Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 144-46; Chafer, Systematic Theology 4:367; William K. Harrison, “The Time of the Rapture as Indicated in Certain Scriptures—Part I,” BSac 114 (1957): 316-25; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 110; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?”18; Strombeck, First the Rapture,74-75; Thomas, “Imminence,” 206-208; Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 31; Wood, Bible and Future Events, 85-86

41 Brindle, “Imminence,” 145-46; cf. Harrison, “The Time of the Rapture,” 320-21.

42 Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 262; Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 148-49; Chafer, Systematic Theology 4:367; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 8; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 100; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 147; Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 33; Wood, Bible and Future Events, 81.

59

blessed hope. MacArthur argues that this imminent hope is one of the godly attitudes

which divine grace teaches all believers.43 Wood argues,

If the Christian were already in the seven-year period of suffering, then the expectancy of Christ’s coming, when deliverance would be realized, would indeed be a reason for joyful hope. But these to whom Paul was writing were not in that time: yet he writes as if this coming should be just as great a cause for rejoicing on their part. Moreover, Paul makes no mention whatever of any factor dimming that hope. But if the Tribulation is to occur first would he not at least refer to it with corresponding solace extended in view of it?44

Payne objects to modern posttribulational interpretation of this text. On the one hand, he

agrees that the glorious appearing refers to the second coming at the end of the

Tribulation, but he disagrees that this negates imminence. He writes, “Whether or not the

great tribulation has yet run its course seems to be an open question. . . . the Titus context

suggests that the blessed hope of Christ’s appearing is as much an ‘ever-present

possibility’ as is the life of sobriety, righteousness, and godliness.”45 He notes that

modern posttribulationists are quick to bring in sign texts and negate the clear imminence

teaching of this text.

Due to its frequency of use by a wide range of advocates, it should be considered

central for the biblical argument for imminence.

The General Epistles

A number of texts from the general epistles have been claimed to support imminence.

The following texts were used by imminence advocates surveyed in this chapter: “So

Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time

43 MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 8.

44 Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 34.

45 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 100.

60

for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him” (Heb 9:28).

Hoekema is alone in citing this text for imminence.46 Since this text is used by only

advocate, it should not be considered central.

“[A]nd let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, not

forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one

another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near. . . . FOR YET IN A VERY

LITTLE WHILE, HE WHO IS COMING WILL COME, AND WILL NOT DELAY”

(Heb 10:24-25, 37). MacArthur, Merkle, and Pink cite this text in their arguments for

imminence.47 Since this text is used by advocates from at least two eschatological

perspectives, it should be considered central for the biblical argument for imminence.

“Therefore be patient, brethren, until the coming of the Lord. The farmer waits for

the precious produce of the soil, being patient about it, until it gets the early and late

rains. You too be patient: strengthen your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is near. Do

not complain, brethren, against one another, so that you yourselves may not be judged;

behold, the Judge is standing right at the door” (Jas 5:7-9). Blaising, Bock, MacArthur,

Merkle, Payne, Pink, Thomas, and Wood cite this text in their arguments for

imminence.48 Thomas expands the section to include all of verses 1 through 11

emphasizing imminence for both unbelievers and believers. Wood argues,

46 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 110.

47 MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?”8; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 289, n. 21; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 132, 141.

48 Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 263; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 7-8; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 289, n. 21; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 100; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 142; Thomas, “Imminence,” 199; Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 33-35; Wood, Bible and Future Events, 81-82.

61

Here the admonition to have patience is given with the afflictions of the readers in view. The ground given for having this patience is their hope of Christ’s soon coming, which coming would be the occasion of their deliverance from this suffering. Thus Christ’s coming promised a release from affliction, and a freedom from persecution. But on the post-tribulation basis, would such a condition be true? Rather, would they not have to expect still worse affliction before the promised deliverance?49

Payne argues that the use of the perfect tense of eggizo (“approach, draw near”) can be

rendered, “The coming of the Lord has come near,” so that the question of “how near” is

implied. The following verse (v. 9) answers the question: “the Judge is standing right at

the door.” The implication from this text is clearly that the Judge could open the door at

any time.50

Since this argument is frequently used by a number of advocates from at least two

eschatological perspectives, it should be considered central for the biblical argument for

imminence.

“The end of all things is near; therefore, be of sound judgment and sober spirit for

the purpose of prayer” (1 Pet 4:7). MacArthur, Merkle, Pink, and Wood cite this text in

their arguments for imminence.51 While Merkle cites this text, he does so only in a

footnote as additional possible texts on imminence. Other advocates only mention the

text briefly in their arguments. Since this text has limited usage by advocates, it should

not be considered central.

49 Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 33-35.

50 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 100-101.

51 Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 149-50; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 8; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 289, n. 21; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 142; Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 81; Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 32-33.

62

“And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of

glory” (1 Pet 5:4). MacArthur is alone among the scholars surveyed in citing this text in

their arguments for imminence.52 MacArthur argues that the “appearing” is imminent.

Since this text is used by only advocate, it should not be considered central.

“But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass

away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and

its works will be burned up” (2 Pet 3:10). Chafer, Hoekema, and Thomas cite this text in

their arguments for imminence.53 Since this argument is used by advocates from at least

two eschatological perspectives, it should be considered central for the biblical argument

for imminence.

“Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even

now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour” (1 John

2:18). MacArthur and Pink are alone among the scholars surveyed in citing this text in

their arguments for imminence.54 MacArthur argues that the phrase “the last hour” is

indicative of imminent. Since this text is used by only two advocates, both from the same

theological perspective, it should not be considered central.

“Now, little children, abide in Him, so that when He appears, we may have

confidence and not shrink away from Him in shame at His coming.” “Beloved, now we

are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when

He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see him just as He is. And everyone

52 MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 8.

53 Chafer, Systematic Theology 4:367; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 110; Thomas, “Imminence,” 199.

54 MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 8; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 143.

63

who has this hope fixed on Him purifies himself, just as He is pure” (1 John 2:28; 3:2-3).

Brindle, Essex, Hoekema, MacArthur, Pink, and Walvoord cite this text in their

arguments for imminence.55 Brindle and Walvoord focus on 3:2-3 in their argument,

saying that only an imminent hope is a purifying hope. Since this argument is frequently

used by advocates from at least two eschatological perspectives, it should be considered a

central biblical argument for imminence.

“Keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord

Jesus Christ to eternal life” (Jude 21). Payne is alone is citing this text for imminence. He

argues that this text seems to indicate that “the advent-mercy of Christ seems to be as

much an ever present possibility as is the love of God itself.”56 Since this text is used by

only advocate, it should not be considered central.

The Book Of Revelation

A number of texts from the book of Revelation have been claimed to support imminence.

The following texts were used by imminence advocates surveyed in this chapter: “The

Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things

which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-

servant John” (Rev 1:1). MacArthur, Merkle, Thomas, and Walvoord cite this text in

their arguments for imminence.57 Thomas argues that the phrase evn ta,cei (en tachei,

55 Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 149-50; Essex, “The Rapture and the Book of Revelation,” 217-18; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 110; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 8; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 147; Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 81.

56 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 101.

57 MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 8; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 289, n. 21; Thomas, “The Doctrine of Imminence in Two Recent Eschatological Systems,” BSac (2000), 453.

64

“soon”) in the first verse “offers encouragement to the faithful among the readers that

their predicted deliverance is very close.”58 Furthermore, he argues that all the events that

have been identified by opponents of imminence were sufficiently fulfilled by the time of

the writing of Revelation. He writes, “Opponents of imminence have cited the necessity

of intervening events such as the death of Peter, the plan and content of Paul’s ministry,

and the destruction of Jerusalem. . . . However, all those lay in the past by the time the

book of Revelation was written and so were no obstacle to understanding the book’s

emphasis on imminence.”59

Since this text is frequently used by advocates from at least two eschatological

perspectives, it should be considered central for the biblical argument for imminence.

“So remember what you have received and heard; and keep it, and repent.

Therefore if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what

hour I will come to you.” “Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My

voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he with Me”

(Rev 3:3; 3:20. cf. Rev 2-3). Thomas uses these two texts of the thief and the master at

the door in combination to argue a dual imminence.60 Thomas also cites 2:5, 16; 3:3, 10,

11, 20. From these texts Thomas argues:

Six of the seven messages of Christ in Rev 2-3 contain references to His coming. In three instances He promises to come and deliver His faithful from persecution, and in three He threatens to come and judge the unfaithful. In all six His coming is imminent, whether for deliverance or for judgment. The only way this can

58 Thomas, “The Doctrine of Imminence,” 453; cf. Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 1-7: An Exegetical Commentary (Chicago: Moody, 1992), 54-56.

59 Ibid., n. 7.

60 Robert L. Thomas, “The ‘Comings’ of Christ in Revelation 2-3” MSJ 7 (1996): 153-81; Thomas, Revelation 1-7, 123-328; Thomas, “Imminence,” 199.

65

happen is for the deliverance—the rapture of the church—and the judgment—the beginning of Daniel's seventieth week—to occur simultaneously. The two chapters provide three more passages that refer to His coming indirectly. The forecast in these too is for His return at any moment.61

While this argument has been made by only one advocate, it holds a prominent position

within his work. For this reason it should be considered central for the biblical argument

for imminence.

“Because you have kept the word of My perseverance, I also will keep you from

the hour of testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those

who dwell on the earth. I am coming quickly; hold fast what you have, so that no one will

take your crown” (Rev 3:10-11). Brindle, Essex, Hoekema, MacArthur, Merkle,

Pentecost, Stanton, Thomas, and Walvoord cite this text in their arguments for

imminence.62 Though not arguing for a pretribulational understanding of these verses,

Hoekema argues that it argues for a sense of expectancy, which is prevalent throughout

the book.63 Essex and Thomas, however, have taken verse 11 in close connection with an

exposition of verse 10 to argue that imminence is spoken of in direct relation to the

pretribulational rapture of the church.64

61 Thomas, “The ‘Comings,’ ” 153. Rev 3:10 is a major text that pretribulationists argue from, and several other works could be referenced for a thorough presentation of its use; however, for the purpose of this study on imminence, this presentation is not required here. For a pretribulational presentation of the arguments from Rev 3:10 see, Jeffrey L. Townsend, “The Rapture in Revelation 3:10,” BSac 137 (1980): 252-266; David G. Winfrey, “The Great Tribulation: Kept ‘Out of’ or ‘Through’?” Grace Theological Journal 3 (1982): 3-18; and John F. Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ (Chicago: Moody, 1966).

62 Essex, “The Rapture and the Book of Revelation,” 239; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 110; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 11; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 289, n. 21; Pentecost, Things to Come, 216; Stanton, Kept from the Hour, Thomas, Revelation 1-7, 283-91; Thomas, “Imminence,” 199; Robert L. Thomas, “The ‘Comings’ of Christ in Revelation 2-3.” MSJ 7 (1996): 153-181; Thomas, “The Doctrine of Imminence,” 452-467.

63 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 110.

64 Following the argument of Stanton, Essex identifies four reasons why this text supports a pretribulational rapture: First, the text applies to all churches of all ages since verse 13 adds “He who has

66

Since this text is frequently used by advocates from at least two eschatological

perspectives, it should be considered central for the biblical argument for imminence.

“Behold, I am coming like a thief. Blessed is the one who stays awake and keeps

his clothes, so that he will not walk about naked and men will not see his shame” (Rev

16:15). Payne is alone among the scholars surveyed in citing this text in their arguments

for imminence.65 Since this text is used by only advocate, it should not be considered

central.

“And behold, I am coming quickly. Blessed is he who heeds the words of the

prophecy of this book.” “Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to

render to every man according to what he has done.” “He who testifies to these things

says, “Yes, I am coming quickly.” Amen, Come, Lord Jesus” (Rev 22:7, 12, 20). Brindle,

Essex, Hoekema, MacArthur, Merkle, Stanton, Thomas, and Walvoord cite this text in

their arguments for imminence.66 Typical among the arguments by advocates, Brindle

argues:

Most likely the promises point to the rapture as being imminent and ready to occur “at any moment.” The word tacu, suggests the suddenness of Christ’s coming whenever it occurs. A related promise in Revelation is found at 16:15: “I am coming like a thief.” Beale suggests that the idea of a “swift, unexpected appearance” is included, especially with respect to the “possibility that Jesus

an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches (cf. 2:7, 11, 29, 3:6, 13, 22. emphasis added).” Second, the trial mentioned will “come upon the whole world.” The whole world marvels at the beast (13:3), and the wrath of God falls on those who worship that beast (13:8; 14:9-11). Third, “those who dwell on the earth” is not applicable or suitable for members of the church (cf. Phil 3:20; Heb 11:13). Fourth, the grammar of τηρέω ε jκ supports a reading of ‘removal from.’ Essex, “The Rapture and the Book of Revelation,” 221-227. cf. Stanton, Kept from the Hour, 46-50.

65 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 101.

66 Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 150-51; Essex, “The Rapture and the Book of Revelation,” 239; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 110; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 289, f.n. 21; Stanton, Kept from the Hour, 125; Thomas, “The Doctrine of Imminence,” 453, n. 7. cf. Thomas, Revelation 1-7,54-56.

67

could come at any time. The promises thus assume imminence, and the probability of a reference to the rapture is strengthened by the reference to Christ’s rewards in 22:12 (based on works, as at the judgment seat of Christ; 2 Cor. 5:10-11).67

Hoekema likewise argues that this is indicative of the “strong sense of expectation of the

Lord’s return,” which “resounds through the book of Revelation.”68 Since this text is

frequently used by advocates from at least two eschatological perspectives, it should be

considered central for the biblical argument for imminence.

Conclusion

This chapter has presented the biblical arguments for the belief that the rapture could

occur at any moment. It was determined that arguments citing the following texts are

central to the biblical argument for imminence: The Olivet Discourse and related texts

(Matthew 24-25, Mark 13, Luke 12:35-48; 17:22-37; 21), the Upper Room Discourse

(John 14:1-3), Rom 13:11, 12; 1 Cor 1:6; 15:51-52; Phil 3:20; 1 Thess 1:10; 4:13-18; 5:6-

8; 2 Thess 1:5-10; Titus 2:13; Heb 10:24-25, 27; Jas 5:7-9; 1 John 2:18, 3:2-3; Rev 1:1;

3:3; 3:20 (cf. Rev 2-3); 3:10-11; 22:7, 12, and 20. It was also determined in this chapter

that arguments citing the following texts are not central to the biblical argument for

imminence: Rom 8:19, 23, 25; Phil 4:5; Col 3:4; Heb 9:28; 1 Pet 4:7; 5:4; 2 Pet 3:10; 1

John 2:18; Jude 21; and, Rev 16:15. In the next chapter theological arguments will be

presented which argue the imminence implied in these central texts are not negated by

texts which teach signs.

67 Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 151; G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 1135.

68 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 110.

68

CHAPTER 4: THEOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS

The purpose of this chapter is to present the theological arguments for the belief that the

rapture could occur at any moment and to determine which arguments are central to the

case for imminence. As already noted in Chapter 3, the distinction between the biblical

arguments and the theological arguments, for the purpose of this thesis, is that biblical

arguments are those arguments that present positive textual data to argue for imminence,

while theological arguments are those that attempt to reconcile these same imminence

texts with texts that appear to teach preceding signs. These arguments, then, are

developed to answer the basic question of how imminence texts (e.g. Matt 24:36) are not

negated by sign texts (e.g. Matt 24:14). Thus, the arguments presented here have been

used by imminence advocates to show that a belief in the imminent rapture is

theologically consistent with biblical data concerning the signs of the second coming.

The primary imminence advocates represented here include Anthony Hoekema

(amillennialist), Benjamin L. Merkle (amillennialist), and J. Barton Payne

(premillennialist) for imminent posttribulationism,1 and Craig A. Blaising, Darrell L.

Bock, Wayne A. Brindle, Lewis S. Chafer, Mal Couch, Thomas R. Edgar, Paul D.

Feinberg, D. Edmond Hiebert, Richard Mayhue, John F. MacArthur, J. Dwight Pentecost,

John A. Sproule, Gerald B. Stanton, John F. Strombeck, Henry B. Thiessen, John F.

1 Anthony A. Hoekema, The Bible and the Future (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979); Benjamin L. Merkle, "Could Jesus Return At Any Moment? Rethinking the Imminence of the Second Coming," TJ 26 (2005): 279-292; J. Barton Payne, The Imminent Appearing of Christ (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962).

69

Walvoord and Leon Wood for dispensational pretribulationism (premillennialist). 2

Arguments made by these advocates will be assessed based on their frequency of use

among all imminence advocates surveyed, breadth of usage by advocates, and

prominence within an advocate’s writings. An argument will be identified as central to

the case for imminence if it either is used frequently by a number of advocates, is used

broadly among all eschatological views that hold to imminence, or holds a prominent

place within an advocate’s writings. Cogency of the arguments will be addressed only if a

major logical fallacy is apparent. Arguments that fail any of the criteria will be identified.

Abandonment or revision of arguments will be noted when appropriate.

This chapter will be divided into two sections based on the eschatological

viewpoints from which these arguments arise. The first section will present the arguments

made by imminent posttribulationists, which are consistent within that system. The

2 Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1993), 262-64; Wayne A. Brindle, “Biblical Evidence for the Imminence of the Rapture,” BSac 158 (2001): 138-151; Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology (8 vols.; Dallas, Tex.; Dallas Theological Seminary, 1976; repr., Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1993), 4:360-78, 385-401; Mal Couch, “Major Rapture Terms and Passages,” in When The Trumpet Sounds (ed. Thomas Ice and Timothy Demy; Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House, 1995), 25-56; Paul D. Feinberg, “The Case for the Pretribulational Rapture Position,” in Three Views on the Rapture (ed. Stanley N. Gundry; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 45-86; D. Edmond Hiebert, “Living in the Light of Christ’s Return: An Exposition of 1 Peter 4:7-11,” BSac 139 (1982): 243-254; John F. MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” MSJ 11 (2000): 7-18; John F. MacArthur, 1&2 Thessalonians (The MacArthur New Testament Commentary; Chicago: Moody Press, 2002); Clarence E. Mason, Jr., “The Day of Our Lord Jesus Christ,” BSac 125 (1968): 352-59; Richard Mayhue, “Why a Pretribulational Rapture?” MSJ 11 (2000): 241-53; J. Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1964); John A. Sproule, In Defense of Pretribulationism: A Review of Robert Gundry’s “The Church and the Tribulation” (Birmingham, Al: Southeastern Bible College, 1974); Gerald B. Stanton, Kept From the Hour: Biblical Evidence for the Pretribulational Return of Christ (4th ed.; Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle Publishing, 1991); J. F. Strombeck, First the Rapture: The Church’s Blessed Hope (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1950); Henry C. Thiessen, “Will the Church Pass Through the Tribulation?” BSac 92 (1935): 292-314; Robert L. Thomas, Ralph Earle, and D. Edmond Hiebert, "1, 2 Thessalonians, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus" (EBC 11; ed. Frank E. Gaebelein; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996); Robert L. Thomas, “Imminence in the NT, Especially Paul’s Thessalonian Epistles,” MSJ 13 (2002): 191-214; Stanley D. Toussaint, “Are the Church and the Rapture in Matthew 24,” When The Trumpet Sounds, 235-50; John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question: A Comprehensive Biblical Study of the Translation of the Church (Grand Rapids: Dunham Publishing, 1957); Leon Wood, Is the Rapture Next? (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1956).

70

second section will present arguments made by dispensational pretribulationists, which

are consistent with that system.

Theological Arguments Made By Imminent Posttribulationists

Hoekema, Merkle, and Payne’s principal argument is that Jesus’ statements concerning

the unpredictability of His return (Matt 24:36) must be given preeminence in

interpretation so that one’s interpretation of signs do not nullify the clear teaching of

imminence.3 All other arguments presented in this section are subsidiary arguments

meant to support this principal one. Hoekema argues that we do not know “exactly how

the signs of the times will intensify. This uncertainty means that we must always be

prepared.”4 Payne argues,

The Bible teaches the coming of Christ as one glorious event, when the kingdom of this world is become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ. The Bible also teaches the coming of Christ as imminent, the “blessed hope” whose day and whose hour we know not, but that could, accordingly, be fulfilled at any hour. Both of these truths (imminent and a single event) must be accepted at face value: and then, after having been conditioned by these matters of basic understanding, the student of the Word may proceed to work out the details of a more Biblically consistent eschatology. 5

Merkle likewise argues,

How can we do justice to the verses which exhort us to be constantly ready for Jesus’ return in light of the fact that we do not know when it will be? If certain events have yet to be fulfilled, might the church become lackadaisical knowing that Jesus’ return is not imminent? In light of these questions, I believe that we must rethink the doctrine of imminence of the second coming and give it more prominence in our lives and our teaching.6

3 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 136; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return at Any Moment?” 279-80; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 85-93, 104-59.

4 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 136.

5 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 105.

6 Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 279-80.

71

Without fully developing a rationale for this view, several exegetical

commentators including Craig L. Blomberg, W. D. Davies, Dale C. Allison Jr., and

David L. Turner affirm the claim that the signs do not negate imminence. In each of their

commentaries they argue that Jesus’ statements in Matthew 24:36, 42-25:13 should be

taken as teaching the imminent return of the Lord.7 For these commentators, the purpose

of the Discourse is to promote constant readiness for the Lord’s return due to the

unpredictability of that coming. Turner writes,

Jesus is concerned not so much with the “when?” and the “what?” of these events as he is with the “so what?” Although 24:4-35 speaks to some extent about the when and what, it does so with relative brevity and imprecision. Jesus speaks at more length and detail in 24:36-25:46 about the alertness, trustworthiness, and compassion that will be required of his disciples until he comes. In a word, they are concerned about when he will renew his presence with them, and he is concerned about how they will live in his absence.8

Turner further clarifies that this coming is completely unpredictable and imminent in his

discussion of the Noah comparison (Matt 24:36-41), and the other imminence parables

(Matt 24:42-25:46).9 Speaking of Matt 24:36 Turner comments that it “sets the tone for

the rest of the discourse: ignorance of the time of Jesus’ coming should result in constant

alertness.”10

The following supporting arguments can be grouped into four categories. Signs do

not negate imminence due to: 1) the nature of prophetic fulfillment; 2) the nature of

7 Craig L. Blomberg, Matthew (NAC 22; Nashville, Tn.: Broadman, 1992), 351-80; David L. Turner, Matthew (BECNT 1; Grand Rapids, Mi: Baker Academic, 2008), 565-611; W. D. Davies and D. Allison Jr., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew: Commentary on Matthew XIX-XXVIII. (ICC 3; Edinburgh, T & T Clark, 1997), 374.

8 Turner, Matthew, 570.

9 Ibid., 587-611.

10 Ibid., 587. A similar note can be found in Davies and Allison, Matthew, 374.

72

prophetic utterance; 3) the nature of the prophet’s limited understanding; and, 4) the

nature of the interpreter’s limited understanding.

The Nature of Prophetic Fulfillment

Hoekema, Merkle, and Payne argue that the nature of prophetic fulfillment prevents

determination of the second coming so that from a human viewpoint11 it could occur at

any moment.12 These advocates claim that “it is difficult to understand the nature of

prophecy until after-the-fact from OT prophecies and their fulfillment.”13 Merkle cites the

pouring out of the Spirit prophesied in Joel 2 and fulfilled in Acts 2 as an example.

Merkle argues,

[A]ccording to Peter, the fulfillment of this prophesy (Joel 2:28-32) occurred at Pentecost (Acts 2:16). In accordance with other biblical prophecy, the prophet used cosmic imagery and figurative language to describe God’s divine intrusion into history.14 In a similar manner, Jesus’ return will no doubt be fulfilled, but the manner in which it is fulfilled might be different than we expect.15

Merkle argues, “I ask the question, what exactly will this great tribulation look like?

Where will it occur? How long will it last? Will everybody know about it? Since we

cannot be certain as to the nature of the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy, we must be open

11 As was discussed in the introduction, p. 5, imminence is considered an “any-moment” possibility from a human viewpoint, so that, while from God’s perspective there are certain events that must necessarily precede the second coming, those events are hidden sufficiently, either not revealed in scripture or not identifiable in scripture, so as to prevent any possible human calculation of timing; thus, making the second coming an any-moment possibility.

12 Merkle, “Could Jesus Return at Any Moment?” 291; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 106-107.

13 Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 291.

14 Merkle lists similar texts. Ibid., 291, n. 24.

15 Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 291. Commenting on the issue of the gospel being preached to all nations (Matt 24:14), which is a precursor to the second coming, Merkle argues, “The problem is that it is impossible for us to know exactly how this verse will be fulfilled in history.” Ibid., 280.

73

to the fact that such signs might be missed by us.”16 Additionally, Hoekema argues that

the fulfillment of the signs will not be easily recognizable, thus making it possible to miss

their occurrence. He argues,

Another mistaken understanding of these signs is to think of them only in terms of abnormal, spectacular, or catastrophic events . . . on the basis of this view . . . the signs are thought of as spectacular interruptions of the normal course of history which irresistibly draw attention to themselves. But if the signs of Christ’s return are of such a sort, how can we be continually watchful?17

All signs, then, given by Christ in the Olivet Discourse are impossible to correctly

identify; thus, all Christians of all ages could be in the Tribulation, thereby protecting the

doctrine of imminence.18

Payne carries the argument further in his grouping of signs into three categories:

first, the signs are such that they defy absolute identification, which he labels as

“Potentially Present Antecedents;”19 second, they occur so near to the second coming as

to prevent them from nullifying imminence, which he labels as “Future Antecedents;”20

third, all major signs have occurred already, which he labels as “Alleged (Actually Past)

Antecedents.”21 His discussion of these three categories takes up the major portion in his

16 Ibid., 283.

17 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 130-131.

18 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 107. Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 291.

19 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 106-32.

20 Ibid., 133-44. Payne writes, “They [some prophecies] do precede the appearing of Christ. Here we should include certain elements of the wrath of God, such as the great earthquake and the sun being darkened (Matt 24:29, cf. the first four trumpets and bowls of God’s wrath in Rev 8 and 16:1-9). But as long as the Lord protects His people from these things (and He does: 1 Thess 5:9; Rev 7:1-3), and as long as they are restricted to events that last only a few minutes (and this is all they do: Luke 21:28), then such matters do not invalidate the Church’s imminent hope.” J. Barton Payne, “Jesus is Coming Again: Pasttribulation,” in When Is Jesus Coming Again? Hal Lindsey and others (Carol Stream, Ill.: Creation House, 1974), 72-73; cf. Feinberg, “The Case for the Pretribulational Rapture Position,” 50.

21 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 145-59.

74

book arguing for imminence.22 In each of these three views, the coming of the Lord

cannot be predicted and is thus an any-moment possibility.

Since this argument is frequently used by at least two advocates from two

eschatological perspectives, and because it holds a prominent place in at least one

advocate’s writings, it should be considered a central theological argument for

imminence.

The Nature of Prophetic Utterance

Hoekema, Payne, and Merkle argue that the nature of prophetic utterance prevents signs

from negating imminence.23 The principle argument is that prophecy is given in such a

way as to allow for multiple fulfillments throughout history, in which successive

fulfillments more completely fulfill the given prediction. For this reason, no one knows

how intense the signs will be just before Christ returns, and thus no one can know when

they have been finally fulfilled.24 In his section discussing potentially present

antecedents, Payne argues that if Christ did not come back today, then “His delay might

well be because of a need for their more complete fulfillment in days that are still future.

The only point attempted to be made is that they could be adequately fulfilled at the

present time and that they thus constitute no valid argument, humanly speaking, against

22 Ibid., 104-159.

23 Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 291-92.

24 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 130-31; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 285; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 107.

75

the imminent appearing of Jesus Christ.”25 Hoekema labels this view, “prophetic

foreshortening,”26 and argues that the Olivet Discourse is a clear example of it:

Since this discourse exemplifies the principle of prophetic foreshortening, however, the signs mentioned in it will have a further fulfillment at the time of the Parousia. In the meantime, all the signs of the times described in the New Testament characterize the entire period between Christ’s first and second coming, and every decade of that period. The signs of the time therefore, summon the church to constant watchfulness.27

Payne further argues that the language of prophecy itself has a wide range of meaning

that is not completely certain. He writes,

The duration of the great tribulation is nowhere clearly stated in Scripture. . . . The “times” in Daniel’s “time and times and half a time” (7:25, 12:7) could be anything from three and a half days to seven and a half decades; and it seems best to say simply that we will know the tribulation is over when we see the Lord coming in glory.28

Discussing Jesus’ response to the disciples’ question in Matt 24:3, Merkle likewise

argues that “Jesus seems to be intermingling the two answers by using prophetic

foreshortening like the OT prophets before him. Also we must be careful not to interpret

the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy too literally.”29 In such a case, Merkle argues that “the

seemingly contradictory emphasis on the imminence and the delay of the second coming

was designed to make it impossible for us to know the exact time of the return.”30

25 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 106-107.

26 Prophetic Foreshortening is the view that these signs have been being fulfilled by the entire church age (historicist view), but also will be intensified to an unspecified degree just prior to the second coming.

27 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 130-131.

28 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 118-19.

29 Merkle, “Could Jesus Return at Any Moment?” 283.

30 Ibid., 291. Merkle rightly quotes George Ladd at this point: “This is where the Gospels leave us: anticipating an imminent event and yet unable to date its coming. Logically this may appear contradictory,

76

Since this argument is frequently used by at least three advocates from two

eschatological perspectives, it should be considered a central theological argument for

imminence.

The Nature of the Prophets’ Limited Understanding

Hoekema and Merkle argue that the nature of the prophets’ limited understanding

prevents determination of the timing of the second coming.31 The interpreter cannot

derive more information from a text than the author of that text. Therefore, since the

prophet who gave the signs did not know when they would be fulfilled, it follows that the

interpreter likewise cannot know when they will be fulfilled. Merkle argues that “Christ

himself said that he did not know the time of his return. He admits in Mark 13:32, ‘But of

that day or hour no one know, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the

Father.’”32 Hoekema argues that by Christ’s own admission in Matt 24:36, He did not

know the time of His own advent. “If then, Christ Himself did not know the hour of his

return, no other statements of his can be interpreted as indicating the exact time of that

return.”33

Since this argument is used by at least two advocates from two eschatological

perspectives, it should be considered a central theological argument for imminence.

but it is in a tension with an ethical purpose—to make date-setting impossible and therefore to demand constant readiness.” George Eldon Ladd, The Presence of the Future (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 328.

31 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 117; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 287; cf. 285-87.

32 Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 287.

33 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 113.

77

The Nature of the Interpreters’ Limited Understanding

Merkle and Payne argue that the nature of the interpreters’ limited understanding

prevents determination of the timing of the second coming from a human viewpoint.34

They argue, that based on Biblical examples, interpreters of prophecy cannot be certain

that their own understanding of prophecy is correct. Merkle argues that “Even John the

Baptist, who believed Jesus to be the Messiah, began to have doubts about Jesus since

Jesus was not fulfilling certain prophecies as he understood them. . . . Therefore, if John

the Baptist was unsure about the fulfillment of prophecies, what assurance do we have

regarding predictions related to Christ’s second coming?”35 He concludes, “Yes, we

strive to understand the signs of the times, but we must also admit that the precise

fulfillment of many verses of Scripture is ambiguous to us. This ambiguity, I believe, is

God’s design.”36

Payne likewise agrees that prophecies are often fulfilled in ways unforeseen by

interpreters. One possibility of alternate fulfillment is in what he labels as “Alleged

(Actually Past) Antecedents.”37 These are signs that have been taken by many, if not most

current interpreters to be events that must occur before the second coming, but have

actually, or at least possibly already occurred in the past. For example, he argues that the

“abomination of desolation” prophesied in Matt 24:15 already has fulfillment in 70 A.D.

34 Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 291.

35 Ibid., 290-91.

36 Ibid., 292.

37 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 145-59.

78

by Titus.38 Such examples leave room for the possibility that signs once thought to still be

future have already been fulfilled. The lack of the interpreter’s dogmatic assurance of

such fulfillments must engender humility.

Since this argument is frequently and extensively used by at least two advocates,

it should be considered a central theological argument for imminence.

Theological Arguments Made By Dispensational Pretribulationists

By far most imminence advocates of modern times have fallen under the category of

dispensational pretribulationism. For the purposes of this thesis, the definitive

presupposition held by dispensationalists is a distinction between the Church and Israel.

From this basic presupposition, numerous arguments for imminence have been made.

The most notable include: 1) logically-prior pretribulationism; 2) the mystery and

uniqueness of the rapture; 3) the church is given no events that must occur prior to the

rapture; 4) lack of admonition, warning or signs given to the church regarding the

tribulation; 5) the church is not appointed to God’s eschatological wrath; 6) imminence of

the parousia; 7) imminence of the day of the Lord Jesus Christ (who is God).

Logically-Prior Pretribulationism

Unlike most dispensational pretribulationists, John A. Sproule argues that

pretribulationism is logically prior to imminence.39 Sproule believes that imminence is a

logical result from a pretribulational rapture and must arise from an exegetically

38 Ibid., 152-54.

39 Sproule states that he believes “imminency is supportive (not determinative) of pretrib and that an exegetically demonstrated pretrib must precede any appeal to imminency.” Sproule, In Defense, 14.

79

supported pretribulationism.40 He argues that if a pretribulational rapture can be

exegetically proven, then all signs that have been proposed for the coming of Christ will

be negated. The rapture will be imminent since all signs refer to the second coming and

occur only after the Tribulation has begun. He writes, “This writer (Sproule), while fully

recognizing the correlation of Pretribulationism and imminency, is firmly convinced that

the prior activity is to demonstrate exegetically that Pretribulationism is a true biblical

doctrine and then to derive such ancillary, supportive truths as imminency, and so forth,

from an exegetically established Pretribulationism.”41 Sproule is currently the only

advocate found who argues that pretribulationism is logically prior to imminence. In

addition, this argument is not prominent within his own writings; therefore, it should not

be deemed a central argument for imminence.

The Mystery and Uniqueness of the Rapture

Couch, Edgar, Feinberg, Mayhue, MacArthur, Stanton, Thomas, Walvoord, and Wood

argue that the mystery and uniqueness of the rapture require it to be a separate event from

the gathering of the elect at the second coming.42 They argue that there are clear

distinctions between the rapture passages (John 14:1-3; 1 Cor 15:51-58; and 1 Thess

4:13-18) and the second coming passages (Zech 14:1-21; Matt 24:29-31; Mark 13:24-27;

Luke 21:25-27; and Rev 19). All prophesied signs are associated with the second coming

40 Contra Walvoord who states that imminency is the “heart of pretribulationism,” in The Rapture Question, 55.

41 Sproule, In Defense, 18-19. cf. 17-23.

42 Mal Couch, “Major Rapture Terms and Passages,” 26-56; Feinberg, “The Case for Pretribulational Rapture,” 80-86; Feinberg, “The Case for Posttribulational Rapture: Response: Paul D. Feinberg,” 229-31; Mayhue, Why a Pretribulational Rapture? 244-247; Stanton, Kept from the Hour, 56-

80

texts rather than the rapture texts. By separating the rapture from the second coming, the

rapture is severed from the signs connected to the second coming and argued to be

imminent.

Thomas is succinct in arguing the distinctions between the Matthew and 1

Thessalonians passages:

Similarities between this passage in 1 Thessalonians and the gospel accounts include a trumpet (Matt 24:31), a resurrection (John 11:25, 26), and a gathering of the elect (Matt 24:31)43 Yet dissimilarities between it and the canonical sayings of Christ far outweigh the resemblances (Olshausen, p. 138; Lightfoot, p. 65; Hendriksen, p. 114) Some of the differences between Matthew 24:30-31 and 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 are as follows: (1) In Matthew the Son of Man is coming on the clouds (but see Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27), in 1 Thessalonians ascending believers are in them. (2) In the former the angels gather, in the latter the Son does so personally. (3) In the former nothing is said about resurrection, while in the latter this is the main theme. (4) Matthew records nothing about the order of ascent, which is the principal lesson in Thessalonians. Distinctions between this and the Johannine passages are just as pronounced, if not more so.44

In addition, Feinberg argues that there are six major omissions and two major

inconsistencies in these texts that argue that the two events are distinct. The six omissions

are:

First, in passages that deal with the Second Advent there are signs or events that lead up to and signal the return of Jesus Christ. . . . On the other hand, there is no mention of any signs or events that precede the Rapture of the church in any of the Rapture passages. . . . Second, every passage that deals with the Second Coming is set in the context of Tribulation and judgment. . . . In each of the Rapture passages there is no mention of trial before the event. . . . Third, there is no clear, indisputable reference to the Rapture in any Second Advent Passage. . . .

65; Strombeck First The Rapture, 24-30; Thomas, "1 Thessalonians,” 53; Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 34-36, 101—104, 198-199; Thy Kingdom Come, 182, 190-95; Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 36-40.

43 Robert Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973), 104, 135.

44 Thomas, "1 Thessalonians," 50-51. William Hendrickson, “I and II Thessalonians,” New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1955), 114; J.B. Lightfoot, Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul(New York: Macmillan, 1895; repr., Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1957), 65; Hermann Olshausen, Biblical Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistles to the Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, and Thessalonians (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1851), 138. cf. Strombeck, First the Rapture, 28-30.

81

Fourth, nowhere in the texts that deal with the Second Advent is there the teaching about the translation of living saints. . . . Fifth, there is no clear, indisputable mention of the resurrection of the church at the Second Advent. . . . Sixth, there seem to be changes with the earth associated with the Second Coming . . . it does not appear that the Rapture of the church will bring about such changes.45

In addition, Feinberg lists two inconsistencies between the two types of passages. First, it

appears that the time of the resurrection of saints is different. In 1 Thess 4, the

resurrection occurs during the descent of Christ; whereas, in Revelation, the resurrection

occurs after the descent, the slaying of Christ’s enemies, the throwing of the beast and

false prophet into the lake of fire, and the binding of Satan. Second, there seems to be an

inconsistency in the destination of the saints who participate in each event. In John 14

and 1 Thessalonians the implication is that the saints are heading to heaven, whereas in

the second coming, the saints remain on earth.46

If the rapture is not described in Matthew 24, which lists signs, and since there is

no other text that gives signs in direct connection with the rapture, then it is possible that

the rapture is a sign-less and thus imminent event. Regardless, the differences are present

and have been acknowledged by non-dispensationalists,47 which lends some strength to

this argument. This argument is widely used by many imminence advocates, it is broadly

used throughout the history of the debate, and it occupies a prominent place in their

overall argument for imminence; therefore, this argument should be considered a central

theological argument for imminence.

45 Feinberg, “The Case for the Pretribulational Rapture Position,” 80-83.

46 Ibid., 84.

47 Blomberg writes, “Walvoord correctly observes that nothing in any of these verses in Matthew describes the rapture.” Blomberg, Matthew, 363. cf. Walvoord, Matthew, 182.

82

The Church is Given No Signs of the Rapture

This argument is made by Brindle, Feinberg, MacArthur, Mayhue, Pentecost, Stanton,

Strombeck, Thomas, Walvoord, and Wood.48 Wood argues that there is no recorded

instance of a sign being given to the church that will precede the rapture:

Nothing immediately precedes which may warn the Christian of the event, such as the seven-year Tribulation time. He simply must be ready at all times. And, if it is objected that the beginning of the Tribulation period may be hard to fix exactly, and so not be a definite warning signal after all, the answer is that at least the mid-point of that time will be definite. . . . [T]hese texts require an imminency to Christ’s coming, with no definite warning period preceding.49

All signs given in Scripture relating to the Day of the Lord refer to events during that

day,50 and are given to signal the soon appearing of Christ at the end of the Tribulation.

Christ gave these signs to the disciples upon their question of what would be the sign of

His Parousia and the end of the age (Matt. 24). In contrast, they argue that Christ gave no

signs for the rapture.

Feinberg argues that “there is no mention of any signs or events that precede the

rapture of the church in any of the rapture passages. The point seems to be that the

believer prior to this event is to look, not for some sign, but the Lord from heaven.”51

Brindle concurs, “These passages that promise the rapture of the church all teach, imply,

48 Brindle, Biblical Evidence, 138-51; Feinberg, “The Case for the Pretribulational Rapture Position,” 65-70, 81; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” MSJ 11 (2000): 7-18; Mayhue, Why a Pretribulational Rapture? 241-53; Pentecost, Things to Come, 202-04; Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 56-60; Strombeck, First the Rapture, 46; Thomas, “Imminence in the NT,” 191-214; Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 78-80, 194, 196; Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 21-25, 31-35.

49 Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 32-33.

50 Strombeck, First the Rapture, 46.

51 Feinberg, “The Case for the Pretribulational Rapture Position,” 80.

83

or allow for imminence as an event that can occur ‘at any moment.’”52 Within these

passages or in the immediate context are usually admonitions for believers to be ready at

the present time. MacArthur writes, “Nothing in the NT ever suggests that we should

defer our expectation of Christ’s appearing until other preliminary events occur.”53

The apostles also never received questions concerning the signs preceding the

rapture, unless 1 Thessalonians 5:1-2 is included; however, this would argue in favor of

the sign-less rapture view. If Paul was answering this question by saying that they knew

that the Day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night, then he is equating the coming of a

thief with the rapture in chapter 4. For those who separate the rapture and second coming,

and see all passages with signs as second coming passages, this argument seems cogent.

It is used frequently, broadly, and emphatically. It should be considered a central

theological argument for imminence.

Lack of Admonition, Warning, or Signs Given to the Church Regarding the Tribulation

This argument is made by Brindle, Feinberg, MacArthur, Mayhue, Pentecost, Stanton,

Strombeck, Thomas, Walvoord, and Wood.54 These scholars argue that there is a

complete absence of any idea that there will be a future Tribulation prior to the rapture

for the church. Believers since Pentecost are never said to be ready for the Tribulation,

52 Brindle, Biblical Evidence for the Imminence of the Rapture, 151.

53 MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 10.

54 Brindle, Biblical Evidence, 138-51; Feinberg, “The Case for the Pretribulational Rapture Position,” 65-70; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 7-18; Mayhue, Why a Pretribulational Rapture? 241-53; Pentecost, Things to Come, 202-04; Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 56-60; Strombeck, First the Rapture, 46; Thomas, “Imminence in the NT,” 191-214; Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 78-80, 194, 196; Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 21-25, 31-35.

84

instead, they are consistently told to be ready for the Lord. Furthermore, rather than being

warned, they are actually told to be comforted in the idea of the coming day of the

Lord.55

Mayhue, typical among advocates of this view, argues that if the church was to

endure the Tribulation, then it would have been inappropriate for the apostles to warn the

church to be ready for the Lord, when in fact the church should be ready for the

Tribulation.56 If Christ warned and instructed those in it (Matt 24:16-20, 24), exhorted

people to pray that they might escape it (Luke 21:36; cf. Matt 24:20), and said that there

has been and will be no other time in history as bad as it (Matt 24:21-22), why should the

apostles not do the same? How could it be that the NT is silent on any warnings and

admonitions to the church concerning its most severe test of faith? Peter, whose second

epistle was written directly to answer problems raised concerning the second coming,

never warns the church of the coming Tribulation.

Further, Mayhue argues that it seems illogical from a practical perspective for the

NT to be silent in admonishing Christians to not lose faith during this time.57 Clearly

there are other times of admonition given by the apostles to not lose faith in tribulation,

or against sin. Why, then, would they not have also warned about this unprecedented time

of evil and persecution that is wrought with so many defecting from the faith (Matt 24: 5,

10-12; 2 Thess 2:3)?

55 Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 80. cf. Bruce Ware, “Is the Church in View in Matthew 24-25?" BSac 138 (1981): 158-72. Ware argues that the church is not in view in the Olivet Discourse.

56 Mayhue, Why a Pretribulational Rapture? 245.

57 Ibid., 245.

85

While both sides of this argument occupy a prominent place in many advocates’

arguments for imminence, it has not seemed to be persuasive to non-imminence scholars.

This lack of persuasion is probably due to the dispensational presuppositions on which it

stands. Nevertheless, it seems cogent to those within their system and it is used

frequently, broadly, and emphatically; thus by the standards set forth, the argument that

the church is given no preceding events should be considered a central theological

argument for imminence.

The Church Is Not Appointed To God’s Eschatological Wrath

Blaising, Bock, Brindle, Chafer, Feinberg, MacArthur, Sproule, Stanton, Strombeck,

Thomas, and Wood argue that the Tribulation is for judging the unbelieving world, and

unbelieving Israel, but not for the church.58 Furthermore, they argue that the church has

been given a special promise by the Lord for exemption from the future time of wrath.

The following verses are typically cited as proof: 1 Thess 1:10; 5:9; 2 Thess 2:13; and

Rev 3:10.

First, these scholars argue that since the Tribulation is the outpouring of the wrath

of God (Rev 6:17) and will affect the entire world (Luke 21:35; Rev 3:10), the church

cannot be present. To argue that since the church is promised persecution in this age (2

Tim 3:12) it is therefore not exempt from the persecutions of the Tribulation (Rev 6:10,

11; 12:17; 13:7), is to equate the Tribulation with persecutions of the church. These

58 Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 263-94; Chafer, Systematic Theology, 4:364-67; Feinberg, “The Case for the Pretribulational Rapture Position,” 50-72; MacArthur, 1& 2 Thessalonians. 135-136; Sproule, In Defense 19; Stanton, Kept From the Hour: 25-50; Strombeck, First the Rapture, 38-40, 45, 89--96; Thomas, "1 Thessalonians," 50; John F. Walvoord, Bible Study Commentary: The Thessalonian Epistles (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1967, 1976), 54; Walvoord, The Rapture Question, 139-43; Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 36-40.

86

scholars argue that the Tribulation should not to be confused with the world’s persecution

of the church. Stanton argues that Satan’s authority and ability to send his wrath on the

earth is a direct result of God’s judgment (2 Thess 2:11, 12) on it; thus negating the claim

that the church endures Satan’s wrath rather than God’s.59 The Tribulation, which

includes the wrath of Satan and the Antichrist, is completely the result of God’s wrath

and judgment on the unbelieving world. In contrast to the Tribulation, persecutions of the

church are: throughout the church age (2 Tim 3:12), rather than future (2 Thess 2:2-3);

continuous (John 16:33; Rom 8:17, 18) rather than limited (Matt 24:22; Rev 13:5);

perpetrated by the world (1 Pet 4:12-19; 1 Thess 5:9) rather than by God (2 Thess 2:11-

12); for the purpose of purification (Rom 5:3-5; 1 Pet 5:10) rather than for judgment (Rev

6:15-17); and have precedence in history (Heb 11:35-39) rather than being unprecedented

(Matt 24:21).60 Commenting on Revelation 9:6 (cf. 14:13; 16:1-21), Strombeck writes:

This exercise of the wrath and fierce anger of God upon a God-rejecting mankind is the very opposite of His expression of grace and long-suffering in the present age. In grace is seen the infinite love of God toward the Church. Paul wrote: ‘For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus’ (Rom 8:38-39)

A heavy responsibility rests upon those who hold the mid- and post-tribulation views to reconcile the claim that the Church will pass through these awful days of terror, or part of them, with Christ’s love for her. They must also show good and valid reasons why the Church, for which Christ died that she might be saved from wrath, shall pass through that day of God’s wrath. This responsibility seems to have been entirely overlooked.61

59 Stanton, Kept from the Hour, 40-41.

60 Stanton develops each of these points in detail in his work. Cf. Ibid., 25-50.

61 Strombeck, First the Rapture, 45.

87

In effect, Strombeck is arguing that if the church must go through the same time of

judgment is to say that there is still payment for sins yet to be made.

Responding to posttribulational arguments on this point, Feinberg agrees that it

cannot be maintained that the Church is exempt from the Tribulation because Christ bore

the wrath of God for her.62 Pretribulationists agree that there will be those who perish in

the Tribulation due, indirectly at least, to the wrath of God.63 Feinberg believes that the

pivotal point of the argument is whether or not the church-age believers are granted a

special exemption from this time of wrath (Rev. 3:10), which he would argue.64 He

points out that this exemption is not without precedence. Noah and Lot were both

removed from the sphere of God’s wrath because of His special protection (2 Pet 2:5-7),

and likewise the godly of this age are promised special protection (v. 9).

Since this argument is widely used by numerous imminence advocates, and has

been widely used for decades, and is based on interpretations that dispensationalists think

are strongly supported, it may be considered a central theological argument for

imminence.

All Signs Occur After the Parousia Has Begun

Strombeck, Stitzinger, Thomas, and Toussaint argue that there is only one parousia of

Christ, which is referenced in the Olivet Discourse, that the term is technical, and that it

62 Feinberg, “The Case for the Pretribulational Rapture Position,” 51-2; Cf. Robert H. Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973), 44-45.

63 Ibid.

64 Feinberg, “The Case for Pretribulational Rapture,” 63-72.

88

is imminent.65 The parousia under this view is a period of time that encompasses the

rapture, the Day of the Lord, the Tribulation, the revelation, the physical coming or

manifestation of Jesus Christ at the end of the Tribulation (Matt 24:30; 2 Thess 2:866), the

millennial kingdom, and culminating in the eternal state. It is to be seen as the time in

which Jesus begins His judgment on earth to purge sin and setup the kingdom. All signs

that are given to indicate the parousia occur within the parousia itself rather than before

it. Signs, then, are not used to calculate the timing of the parousia, but are used to denote

that the parousia of Christ has already begun. Since the rapture is said to occur at the

beginning of the parousia (1 Thess 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 2 Thess 2:1), and since the parousia

is imminent, then the rapture itself is imminent.

Strombeck begins his support for this argument by demonstrating that the term

parousia can refer to “presence” as opposed to “coming.”67 In Matthew 24, both Greek

65 Strombeck, First the Rapture, 69-70; Stitzinger, “The Rapture,” 151-53; Thomas, “Imminence,” 196; Thomas, “1 Thessalonians,” 51-61; Thomas, “2 Thessalonians,” 76-78, 85-86, 88, 91-101; Toussaint, “Are the Church and the Rapture in Matthew 24,” 241-244. This view is closely connected to the argument in the next section “The Imminence of the Day of Our Lord Jesus Christ (Who is God).”

66 Both Strombeck and Thomas argue that 2 Thessalonians 2:8 refers to the man of lawlessness being destroyed by the “appearance of His parousia.” Rather than saying that he will be destroyed by Christ’s parousia, Paul says that it is the manifestation or shining forth of that parousia. Paul is pointing to a particular aspect of Christ’s parousia rather than to the actual parousia that had started several years previously.

67 Presence, coming. “Denotes active presence.” Abrecht Oepke, Parousi,a, TDNT, 5:859-60. The word is used 24 times in the New Testament. Twice it is translated as ‘presence,’ and 22 times it is translated as ‘coming.’ “Parousia is used (1) to describe the presence of Christ with His disciples on the Mount of Transfiguration (2 Pet 1:16). (2) When used of the return of Christ, at the rapture of the church, it signifies, not merely His momentary coming for His saints in the rapture, but His presence with them from that moment until His revelation and manifestation to the world in His second coming. (3) In some passages the word (3a) gives prominence to the beginning of that period, the course of the period being implied (1 Cor 15:23; 1 Thess 4:15; 5:23; 2 Thess 2:1; Jas 5:7-8; 2 Pet 3:4). (3b) In some, the course is prominent (Mt 24:3, 37; 1 Thess 3:13; 1 John 2:28); (3c) in others the conclusion of the period (Mt 24:27; 2 Thess 2:8).” The New Strong’s Expanded, Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible: Greek Dictionary of the New Testament (Nashville, Tn: Thomas Nelson, 2001), 3952, 194; cf. Parousi,a, BAG, 635.

The confusion regarding the ‘coming’ of Christ given in the Olivet Discourse is understandable since English translations have translated two distinct Greek words as ‘coming’ throughout the New Testament when it relates to the second advent of Christ: Parousi,a, ‘presence, coming, arrival’ (Matt 24:3,

89

terms for “coming” are used, and he argues that this is evidence of a different meaning.

This parousia is to be distinguished from the physical coming (e;rcomai) of Christ at the

end of the Tribulation (Matt 24:29). Next, Strombeck argues that parallel statements in

the Synoptics support a meaning of present rather than coming. For example, in Luke, the

phrase “the days of the Son of Man,” is directly parallel and synonymous to the parousia

of the Son of Man in Matthew (compare Matt 24:37, 39 with Luke 17:26). “Days” is

directly parallel to “parousia” and indicates a period of time. Strombeck writes, “This

shows clearly that the parousia is not only an arrival, but a subsequent presence with.”68

Jesus’ comparison of this period of time with the days of Noah and Lot indicate that it is

preceded by a period of peace and normalcy of life, and commences with sudden and

unexpected judgment.

He also notes that the use of the term “Son of Man” is restricted in the gospels to

refer to the coming of Christ in judgment.69 He writes,

These words describe the conditions on the earth at the parousia of the Son of man. Things shall be as from the beginning when God commanded Adam and Eve to “be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.” Such a time cannot

27, 37, 39); e“rcomai, ‘coming’ (Matt 24:30, 42, 44; 25:13). The problem is further complicated when other Greek words, such as evpifa,neia, ‘appearing’ (Matt 24:30 ‘fai,nw’), and avpoka,luyij, ‘revelation, unveiling’ (1 Cor 1:7) are equated with passages translated ‘coming’ and then referenced back to the Discourse. Any distinctions made by the NT authors regarding particular aspects of the second advent of Christ are hopelessly confused.

68 Strombeck, First the Rapture, 70.

69 Strombeck argues, “It is important to recognize that the parousia of the Son of man has in view His coming to deal with the conditions on the earth while the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ is not spoken of in relation to things to happen on earth, but in relation to the Church. The parousia of the Lord is in relation to both the Church and the day of the Lord. The parousia of the Son of man is for judgment upon the inhabitants of the world, both Israel and the Gentiles. The first time the Son of man came to the earth He came “to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28). He “came not to judge the world, but to save the world” (John 12:47). At His parousia He will come to judge, for all judgment is committed unto Him (John 5:22). He is given authority to execute judgment because He is the Son of man (John 5:27). To those who have heard His words and believed on Him who sent Him He cannot come as the Son of man to judge, because they shall not come into judgment (John 5:24, ASV).” Ibid., 68.

90

possibly be found at any time during the tribulation, of which Jesus said: “Such as was not since the beginning of this world to this time, no, nor ever shall be” (Matt 24:21). There can be no complacency nor unexpected destruction after the most terrible destruction of all time has begun. Nor can this destruction come when the Son of man shall come in the clouds of heaven. He shall then come to restore and establish peace on earth. Yes, this must be before the tribulation begins (emphasis original).70

Since the parousia brings judgment that takes the world by surprise, it cannot refer to the

physical return of Christ at the end of the Tribulation. The time period of the parousia is

further described in Matt 24:27-28. In verse 27 the presence is compared to lightning

which “comes from the east and flashing even to the west.” The comparison points not to

a particular location as in the physical coming of Christ at the end of the Tribulation (vs.

30), but to a vast area and everywhere evident.71 In verse 28 the presence is further

described as, “Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather,” which is indicative

of a time of carnage.72 So then, the parousia will be a time of severe judgment on evil by

the presence of the Son of Man, resulting in unprecedented carnage, and will be

70 Ibid., 69.

71 Allen writes concerning this verse, “Luke has: ‘For as the lightning, when it flashes from the one part under the heaven shines to the other part under the heaven, so shall be the Son of Man.’ The idea apparently is that the presence of the Son of Man will be not local, but everywhere visible. See on Luke 17:24, 37.” Willoughby C. Allen, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew (ICC 26; New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1907), 257.

72 Allen notes, “Here the meaning probably is that the Parousia will be at the destined time when evil has reached its fated climax. Just as when life has abandoned a body, and it becomes a corpse, the vultures immediately swoop down upon it; so when the world has become rotten with evil, the Son of Man and His angels will come to execute the divine judgment.” Allen, Matthew, 257-58. Note that this would be the exact state of the world at the beginning of the Tribulation when the apostasy, or great fallen away from God, has occurred (2 Thess 2:3) and no righteous remain (cf. Luke 18:8).

Plummer comments, “The proverbial saying about the carcass (ptw/ma) and the vultures (avetoi,) is in a very general form, and is capable of various applications, but here it seems to refer back to the false Christs and false prophets. A time of severe crisis is a great opportunity for imposters. . . . There may also be a reference to God’s judgments coming upon a corrupt state of society.” Alfred Plummer, An Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to S. Matthew (London: Robert Scott Roxburghe House Paternoster Row, 1915), 334-335. Turner concurs, “In the most common view, the corpse stands for signs and the vulture stands for Jesus’ appearance as judge.” Turner, Matthew, 579.

91

universally apparent. Only the beginning of this time can be said to come when they say

“peace and safety (1 Thess 5:2-3),” and only at the beginning can the parousia be said to

occur when the world is at ease as in the time of Noah (Matt 24:38; cf. Rev 18:23).

Further, Matthew 24:37-39 does not follow verses 27-28; rather, verses 37-39

describe the period immediately preceding the parousia, while verses 27-28 describes

that the parousia itself will be evident to all.73 Matthew 24:16-18 further describes events

within the parousia. Strombeck writes,

That which is here in view is undoubtedly later than the arrival aspect of the parousia as in the days of Noah in verses 37-39. Beginning with verse 22 Jesus explained how it can be known when the parousia of the Son of man will be near. Therefore, verses 37-39 do not follow chronologically verse 27. A comparison of the order in Luke 17:26-31 with Matthew 24:16-18, 37-39 confirms this view.74

These observations are argued to mean that the parousia must include all events within

the Tribulation. Though not directly attributing the parousia to the day of the Lord, many

other commentators agree that Jesus is describing a time period75 that is most likely the

future day of the Lord, that is completely unpredictable, and is thus imminent.76

73 Robert L. Thomas writes, “The dev (de) that begins v. 36 must be transitional, because the thirty-sixth verse changes the discussion of signs preceding the coming to emphasize that no signs will precede the parousia. Peri. de. (Peri de, 24:36) is a frequent NT device for introducing a change from one phase of a subject to another phase of the same subject or from one subject to another subject (cf. Matt 22:31; Mark 12:26; 13:32; Acts 21:25; 1 Cor 7:1; 7:25; 8:1; 12:1; 16:1, 12; 1 Thess 4:9, 13; 5:1). The verse introduces an aspect of the coming different from the one pointed to in Matt 24:29-31. The verb depicting the coming in 24:30 is erchomenon, but the noun designating the “coming” in 24:37 is parousia, a term that easily covers a wider span.” Thomas, “Imminence,” 193, n. 8.

74 Strombeck, First the Rapture, 71.

75 Blomberg notes that “day and hour” in Chs. 24-25 refers to a general period of time in Matthew rather than merely a 24-hour day and a 60-minute hour. Blomberg, Matthew, 365.

76 This view is further supported by non-dispensational commentators. Cf. Plummer notes, “The meaning of ‘all these things’ seems to be determined by the disciples’ question in ver. 3, and this in Mt. includes not merely the destruction of Jerusalem, but the Coming and the consummation of the age.” Plummer, Matthew, 338. Davies and Allison see “All these things” in vv. 33 and 34 as including “all the signs and events leading up to the parousia.” Davies and Allison, Matthew, 366, cf. 367. Hagner confirms that this expression includes “everything spoken of in vv. 4-28.” Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 14-28 (WBC

92

Finally, he draws from this definition to explain all other occurrences of the term

parousia in connection with the coming of Christ. Since all signs given occur during the

parousia, there are none left to predict the when the parousia will occur. The parousia is

thus imminent. The rapture of the church, while not in the Discourse, is said to occur at

the parousia (1 Thess 4:15). Since the parousia is imminent, the rapture is also

imminent.77

Strombeck’s contention is further advanced by recent scholarship. Thomas

supports this argument exegetically while Toussaint supports it linguistically.78 Toussaint

argues that the disciples’ use of the term parousia (Matt 24:3) had significant cultural,

messianic, and theological connotations that were commonly known throughout Judaism

at the time.79 The term meant more than just ‘coming’ as English versions translate it, but

includes the idea of active presence.

Since this argument has been used by past advocates, such as Strombeck, is

frequently used by current advocates, and it holds a prominent place within the writings

of at least two advocates, it should be considered a central biblical argument for

imminence.

33b; eds. David A. Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker; Dallas: Word, 1995), 715; D. A. Carson, “Matthew,” 8:507.

77 Strombeck, First the Rapture, 64-77.

78 Thomas, “Imminence,” 202-13; Thomas, “1 Thessalonians,” 51-61; Thomas, “2 Thessalonians,” 76-78, 85-86, 88, 91-101; Toussaint, “Are the Church and the Rapture in Matthew 24,” 241-244.

79 Plummer writes, “It occurs in all the groups of the Pauline Epistles, excepting the Pastoral Epistles, being specially frequent in 1 and 2 Thess. It would seem therefore to have been in common use, almost as a technical term for the Coming of Christ in glory, some time before the First Gospel was written. . . . It intimates that the return of the Messiah in glory will not result, like the First Coming in a transitory stay, but will inaugurate an abiding presence” (emphasis original). Plummer, Matthew, 329; Toussaint, “Are the Church and the Rapture in Matthew 24,” 242.

93

The Imminence of the Day of Our Lord Jesus Christ (Who is God) 80

Blaising, Bock, Mason, Strombeck, and Thomas argue that the first event of the Day of

the Lord is the rapture, and since the beginning of the Day of the Lord is sign-less, the

rapture is thus imminent.81 All eschatological events are part of that one Day. The Day of

the Lord includes the rapture, Tribulation, Man of Lawlessness, the Second Coming,

Millennial Kingdom, and New Heaven and New Earth. The Day of the Lord is called

various names in Scripture, which emphasize certain aspects of that Day, including the

Day, that Day, the Day of Christ, the Day of the Lord Jesus, the Day of the Lord Jesus

Christ, the Day of God, and the Parousia.82 Mason argues concerning the phrase “the

Day of the Lord Jesus Christ” in 1 Cor 1:8 that,

A comparison of this verse (8) with verse 7 shows that on this occasion the title is used of the time of the catching up and rewarding of the saints. May it not well be that this designation should be understood to be the full title which combines a number of different titles in itself, including most of those listed under the second point above, and particularly combining the terms “day of Christ” and “day of the Lord”? Why should not these terms be considered complementary rather than antithetical and mutually exclusive? Probably we have here the same situation as is involved in the varying wordings given in the four Gospel accounts as to what constituted the title over the cross of Christ. . . . Would it not be foolish to argue that the titles above the cross were different or contradictory or that they meant various things? Is it not clear that all quoted that part of the title that was

80 Mason adds the phrase “who is God” to the phrase “The day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 1:8), to bring in references to the day of God, or of Jehovah (2 Pet 3:12; cf. Rev 16:14). He argues that this phrase is the full composite title of the end of the age which includes: “Day of the Lord” (Acts 2:20; 1 Thess 5:2; 2 Thess 2:2; 2 Pet 3:10), “Day of God” (2 Pet 3:12), “Day of Christ” (Phil 1:10; 2:16), “Day of Christ Jesus” (Phil 1:6), “Day of the Lord Jesus” (1 Cor 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14), and is synonymous with “the Days of Vengeance” (Luke 21:22), “the Day of Judgment” (Matt 10:15; 11:22, 24; 12:36; 2 Pet 3:7; 1 John 4:17), “the Last Day” (John 6:44), “the Day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God” (Rom 2:5), “Day of Visitation” (1 Pet 2:12), and “the Great Day of Judgment” (Rev 6:17; cf. Jude 6; Rev 16:14). Mason, “The Day of Our Lord Jesus Christ,” 356.

81 Blaising and Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism, 262-264; n. 15, 317; Mason, “The Day of Our Lord Jesus Christ,” 352-59; Strombeck, First the Rapture, 31-37; Thomas, “Imminence,” 213; Thomas, “1 Thessalonians,” 51-61; Thomas, “2 Thessalonians,” 76-78, 85-86, 88, 91-101.

82 Mason, “The Day of Our Lord Jesus Christ,” 357; cf. Greg A. King, “The Day of the Lord in Zephaniah,” BSac 152 (1995), 32. Wood, Bible and Future Events, 54-56

94

appropriate to their emphasis? Why should not the same analogy be pertinent to the eight variants of day cited above?83

These scholars argue that this understanding of the Day of the Lord removes all

difficulties of reconciling sign and imminence texts. All signs are given to identify the

presence of that Day, while no signs are given to indicate the nearness of the beginning of

that Day. That Day can be said to come as a thief in the night, and still consist of events

that signal its presence once it has commenced.84

Since this argument has been used by past advocates, such as Strombeck and

Mason, is frequently used by current advocates, and it holds a prominent place in the

writings of at least two advocates, it should be deemed a central biblical argument for

imminence.

Conclusion

This chapter has presented the theological arguments for the imminence of the rapture.

These arguments were developed to address the apparent paradox between sign texts and

imminence texts, and to show that imminence is not negated by these sign texts. It was

determined that the following argument made by imminent posttribulationists is their

central theological argument for imminence: Imminence texts must be given preeminence

in interpretation so that sign texts do not diminish the direct statements of Jesus of His

83 Mason further argues, “The force of this argument is, therefore, that there is a well-defined event plainly taught, but that it is variously described and not limited to one title. This variety of expression for the same doctrine occurs often in Scripture.” Mason, “The Day of Our Lord Jesus Christ,” 355-56.

84 Concerning 2 Thess 2:1-8 Mason writes, “That day cannot be asserted to be present until there come first “the falling away’ (or departing) and, second, the manifestation of the man of sin (vs. 3). Since these events have not yet come, plainly you are not in the day of the Lord. The wicked one cannot and will not be revealed (vs. 8) until the Hinderer (vs. 7, the Holy Spirit and with Him the church) be taken out of the way (i.e., from earth to heaven). Ergo, since you are here and the Hinderer has not been removed, you are not in ‘the day of the Lord,’ the tribulation period.” Ibid., 359. This argument is further expanded by Thomas. Cf. Thomas, “Imminence,” 209-11.

95

imminent return. This argument was supported by four other supplemental arguments, all

of which were also found to be central: the nature of prophetic fulfillment; the nature of

prophetic utterance; the nature of the prophet’s limited understanding; and, the nature of

the interpreter’s limited understanding. It was also determined that the following

arguments made by dispensational pretribulationists are also central theological

arguments for imminence: the mystery and uniqueness of the rapture; the church is given

no events that must occur prior to the rapture; the lack of admonition, warning, or signs

given to the church regarding the tribulation; the church is not appointed to God’s

eschatological wrath; all signs occur after the parousia has begun; and the imminence of

the day of our Lord Jesus Christ (who is God). It was also determined in this chapter that

the argument labeled logically-prior pretribulationism is not a central theological

argument for imminence.

96

CHAPTER 5: PRACTICAL ARGUMENTS

The purpose of this chapter is to present the practical arguments for the belief that the

rapture could occur at any moment and to determine which arguments are central to the

case for imminence. The arguments presented here have been used by imminence

advocates to show that a belief in the imminent rapture is more edifying and encouraging

than a non-imminence view. Furthermore, these arguments assert that only an imminent

return of Christ can practically explain, motivate, and empower New Testament

exhortations that are based on that return.

The primary imminence advocates represented here include Anthony A.

Hoekema, Benjamin L. Merkle, and J. Barton Payne for imminent posttribulationism, and

Wayne A. Brindle, Lewis S. Chafer, Mal Couch, D. Edmond Hiebert, John F. MacArthur,

J. Dwight Pentecost, Arthur W. Pink, Gerald B. Stanton, John F. Walvoord, and Leon

Wood for pretribulationism.1 Arguments made by these advocates will be assessed based

1 Wayne A. Brindle, “Biblical Evidence for the Imminence of the Rapture,” BSac 158 (2001): 138-51; Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology (8 vols.; Dallas, Tex.; Dallas Theological Seminary, 1976; repr., Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1993), 4:360-78, 385-401; Mal Couch, “Major Rapture Terms and Passages,” in When The Trumpet Sounds (ed. Thomas Ice and Timothy Demy; Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House, 1995), 25-56; D. Edmond Hiebert, “Living in the Light of Christ’s Return: An Exposition of 1 Peter 4:7-11,” BSac139 (1982): 243-254; Anthony A. Hoekema, The Bible and the Future (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979); 109-128; John F. MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” MSJ 11 (2000): 7-18; Benjamin L. Merkle, "Could Jesus Return At Any Moment? Rethinking the Imminence of the Second Coming," TJ 26 (2005): 279-292; J. Barton Payne, The Imminent Appearing of Christ (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962), 98-103; J. Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1964), 209; Arthur W. Pink, The Redeemer’s Return (Ashland, K.Y.: Calvary Baptist Church Book Store, 1918), 134-153; Gerald B. Stanton, Kept From the Hour: Biblical Evidence for the Pretribulational Return of Christ (4th ed.; Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle Publishing, 1991), 124-137; John F. Walvoord, The Return

97

on their frequency of use among all imminence advocates surveyed, breadth of usage by

advocates, and prominence within an advocate’s writings. An argument will be identified

as central to the case for imminence if it either is used frequently by a number of

advocates, is used broadly among all eschatological views that hold to imminence, or

holds a prominent place within an advocate’s writings. Cogency of the arguments will be

addressed only if a major logical fallacy is apparent. Arguments that fail any of the

criteria will be identified. Disagreement, abandonment, or revision of arguments will be

noted when appropriate.

There are four primary arguments that summarize all the practical arguments that

advocates have made and will constitute the divisions in this chapter. First, the

exhortations to the apostolic church indicate an imminent return; second, imminence has

empowered service and holy living for Christians throughout church history; third, the

doctrine of imminence is a source of joy, hope, comfort, and patience in trial and

persecution; finally, the rejection of imminence has resulted from, and/or resulted in sin

and doctrinal error.

The Exhortations to the Apostolic Church Indicate an Imminent Return

Brindle, Couch, Hiebert, Hoekema, MacArthur, Merkle, Payne, Pink, Stanton, Walvoord,

and Wood argue that the imminent return of the Lord was the basis of exhortation to the

of the Lord (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979), 48-57; Leon Wood, Is the Rapture Next? (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1956), 7, 29-40.

It should also be noted that one historical motivation, if not the primary motivation for arguing for the doctrine of imminence, has been a firm belief that it was singularly important to Christian character and holy living. The following statement of belief from the Philadelphia Prophetic Conference (1918) illustrates this motivation: “The doctrine of the return of our Lord will be taught from the Word of prophecy, coupled with the question, ‘What Manner of Persons Ought We to Be?’ What application has the doctrine to our conduct and to our daily activities?” Light on Prophecy: Authorized Report of Philadelphia Prophetic Conference (New York: The Christian Herald, 1918), 13.

98

NT church in motivating the readers to Christian service, holiness, obedience and

evangelism.2 Hoekema argues that “every book of the New Testament points us to the

return of Christ and urges us to live in such a way as to be always ready for that return.”3

Further, the NT writers themselves believed that the Lord’s return was imminent, and

they lived their own lives in accordance with that belief. Pink argues that “The imminent

return of the Redeemer is a practical hope. It is the commanding motive of the New

Testament.”4 Hoekema argues that within Paul’s writings, the expectation5 of the near

coming of the Lord and the hope it produces is “one of the most central and powerful

motifs of Paul’s preaching.”6 Merkle likewise argues that though Paul taught that certain

signs must take place, he still “expected Christ to return at any moment.”7

MacArthur writes, “From the very earliest days of the church, the apostles and

first-generation Christians nurtured an earnest expectation and fervent hope that Christ

2 Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 148-50; Couch, “Major Rapture Terms,” 28, 45-55; Hiebert, “Living in the Light,” 243-254; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 109-128; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 7-18; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 289-90; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 98-103; Pentecost, Things to Come, 209; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return,145-49; Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 127-134; Walvoord, The Return, 48-57; Wood, Is the Rapture Next?, 29-40; Wood, Bible and Future Events, 79-82, 89-90.

3 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 109.

4 Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 146.

5 It should be noted that Hoekema uses the term “expectancy” instead of “imminence” due to its affiliation with dispensationalism; however, his definition of expectancy is congruous with the definition for imminence used in this thesis as given on p. 6. Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 136. See also Chapter 3, “Biblical Arguments,” n. 1 of this work.

6 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 122. Hoekema is citing Ridderbos. Cf. Herman N. Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology (trans. John R. De Witt; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1966), 487.

7 Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 290. In Merkle’s view, the signs are not of the type to allow for anyone to say with certainty that they have or have not occurred. So then, Paul could affirm preceding events while also affirming the any moment return of the Lord. See Chapter 4, “Theological Arguments Made by Imminent Posttribulationists” for further discussion of Merkle’s view.

99

might suddenly return at any time to gather His church to heaven.”8 After citing Jas 5:7-

9, 1 John 2:28, 3:2, Col 3:4, 2 Tim 4:8, Heb 10:24-25, 37, 1 Pet 4:7; 5:4, and Rev 1:1

MacArthur, in agreement with all other imminence advocates surveyed, further argues,

“All those texts suggest that in the early church expectation of Christ’s imminent return

ran high. A solid conviction that Christ could return at any time permeates the whole NT.

When the apostle Paul described the Lord’s coming for the church, he used personal

pronouns that show he clearly was convinced he himself might be among those who

would be caught up alive to meet the Lord.”9

Collectively, the following arguments are made by these advocates: they argue

that New Testament writers present the imminent coming of the Lord for the saints as the

reason for living a holy life (1 Thess 5:22; Titus 2:12; 2 Pet 3:10-11), a pure life (Col

3:5;1 John 3:3), a Spirit-filled life (1 Thess 5:19), a life of service (Matt 24:42-51; Mark

13:35-37; 1 Cor 15:58; 1 Thess 1:9), a sober life (1 Thess 5:8; Tit 2:12; 1 Pet 4:7), a life

of prayer (1 Thess 5:17; 1 Pet 4:7), a life separated from the world (Col 3:2; 1 Thess 5:6;

Tit 2:12), a doctrinally pure life (2 Tim 4:1-4), and a life that glorifies God (Tit 2:12; 1

Pet 4:11). Further, they argue that the NT writers present the imminent coming of the

Lord as a source of comfort and encouragement (1 Thess 4:18; 5:11), hope (1 Thess 4:13-

18), joy (1 Thess 2:19), thanksgiving (1 Thess 5:18), longsuffering (1Thess 1:10), unity

with other believers (Jas 5:9), and patience (1 Thess 5:14; 2 Pet 3:3-11). Finally, these

8 MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 7.

9 Ibid., 8; See also Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 148-50; Couch, “Major Rapture Terms,” 28, 45-55; Hiebert, “Living in the Light,” 243-254; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 122-25; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 289-90; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 98-103; Pentecost, Things to Come,209; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return,146-49; Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 127-134; Walvoord, The Return, 48-57; Wood, Is the Rapture Next?, 29-40. cf. 1 Thess 4:15, 17.

100

advocates argue that the NT writers present the imminent coming of the Lord as

something that believers should marvel at (2 Thess 1:10), be encouraged by (1 Thess

5:11), eagerly wait for (1 Cor 1:7; Phil 3:20), look forward to (Titus 2:13), and love (2

Tim 4:8).10 Concerning these texts, Walvoord argues that only an any moment return fits

the practical nature of the exhortations:

As in other passages considered, the imminency of the Lord’s coming is that which underlines and emphasizes the meaning of the exhortation. It is because it is a moment-by-moment expectation that the believer is exhorted to holiness. It is as if a distinguished guest were expected at any moment. Everything must be in order and spotless. There will be no time for preparation when he comes. . . . If it were known that the guest would not arrive for days or months or years, there would be no need of vigilance. It is the imminency of his coming that determines the urgency for preparation.11

MacArthur summarizes: “The hope of Christ’s imminent return is therefore the hinge on

which a proper understanding of sanctification turns.”12

Since this argument is frequently used by a wide range of imminence advocates

from differing eschatological views, it should be considered a central practical argument

for imminence.

Imminence Empowers Service And Holy Living For Christians Throughout Church History

Chafer, Hoekema, Hiebert, MacArthur, Merkle, Payne, Pink, Stanton, Thomas, and

Walvoord argue that the doctrine of the imminent return of Christ has been a source of

10 Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 148-50; Couch, “Major Rapture Terms,” 28, 45-55; Hiebert, “Living in the Light,” 243-254; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 109-136; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 18; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 98-103; Pentecost, Things to Come, 209; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return,145-49; Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 127-134; Walvoord, The Return, 48-57; Wood, Is the Rapture Next?, 29-40.

11 Walvoord, The Return of the Lord, 56-57.

12 MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 18.

101

motivation to service and holy living for believers throughout the history of the church.13

This argument is separate from the previous argument since it has been postulated by

non-imminence advocates that imminence was impossible for the apostolic church,14 and

that because of this, NT exhortations are not grounded in imminence for later

generations. Moo, among other posttribulationists, argues that if the original authors did

not mean “any moment” in their imminence statements, then how could those statements

mean any moment for anyone else in history?15 In response, Hiebert, Thomas and Wood

argue that both Peter’s words just prior to his imminent departure (2 Pet 1:14) and the

imminence texts in the book of Revelation dictate the believer’s attitude in the post-

apostolic period. Hiebert writes, “Peter’s assertion that the end is ‘at hand’ and ready to

break in expresses the Christian conception of the nature of the present age.”16 Likewise,

Thomas argues that by the time of the writing of the book of Revelation no event

remained before Christ could come as a thief (2 Pet 3:10). For that reason believers

throughout the entire church age must live in anticipation of the imminent return.17

13 Chafer, Systematic Theology 4:367; Couch, “Major Rapture Terms,” 28, 45-55; Hiebert, “Living in the Light,” 243-254; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 109-128; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 7-18; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return At Any Moment?” 289-90; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 98-103; Pentecost, Things to Come, 209; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return,149-53; Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 127-134; Walvoord, The Return, 48-57; Wood, Is the Rapture Next?, 29-40.

14 Merkle identifies four predicted events: 1) The gospel preached to all the nations; 2) The conversion of “all Israel;” 3) The great tribulation and great apostasy; 4) The coming of the antichrist. Merkle, “Could Jesus Return at Any Moment?” 280.

15 Douglas J. Moo, “The Case for the Posttribulational Rapture Position,” in Three Views on the Rapture (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996),209-10. cf. Robert H. Gundry, The Church and the Tribulation: A Biblical Examination of Posttribulationism (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1977) 37; Millard Erickson, Contemporary Options in Eschatology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1977), 142.

16 Hiebert, “Living in the Light,” 245.

17 Thomas argues, “Opponents of imminence have cited the necessity of intervening events such as the death of Peter, the plan and content of Paul’s ministry, and the destruction of Jerusalem. . . . However, all those lay in the past by the time the book of Revelation was written and so were no obstacle

102

Hoekema argues that,

a lively expectation of the Parousia should be found in the church today, as it was found in the early church. What is the significance of this expectation? ... Herman Ridderbos, writing about Paul’s preaching and teaching, has this to say: “The eschatological motive, the consciousness of the coming of the Lord as near at hand, has not a negative, but a positive significance for life in the present time. It does not make the responsibility for that life relative, but rather elevates its.”18

What he says about Paul can be said about the entire New Testament. What do the New Testament writers have to say about the practical significance of the expectation of the Parousia for faith and life?

Most common is the emphasis that our expectation of the Lord’s return should serve as an incentive to holy living.19

After citing Matt 25:14-30, Matt 25:31-46, Luke 12:41-48, Luke 19:11-27, Rom 13:11-

14, 1 Cor 4:5, 1 Tim 6:14, Titus 2:11-13, 1 Pet 1:13-15, 2 Pet 3:11-12, 1 John 2:28, and 1

John 3:2-3, Hoekema concludes, “Our expectation of the Lord’s return, therefore, should

be a constant incentive to live for Christ and for his kingdom, and to seek the things that

are above, not the things that are on the earth.”20 These advocates further cite Matt 24:42-

51, Mark 13:35-37, Titus 2:12, 1 Pet 4:7-11 to argue imminence empowers service and

holy living throughout church history.21 Walvoord argues,

One of the reasons for presenting the doctrine of the imminent return of Christ is that it is an impelling motive to be living for Him every day. There is no better reason for working for Christ, apart from real love for Him, than the motive that we may see Him today. It makes a tremendous difference whether Christ is

to understanding the book’s emphasis on imminence.” Robert L. Thomas, “The Doctrine of Imminence in Two Recent Eschatological Systems,” BSac (2000), 453, n. 7; Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 1-7: An Exegetical Commentary (Chicago: Moody, 1992), 54-56; Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 39-40.

18 Ridderbos, Paul, 495.

19 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 127-28.

20 Ibid., 128.

21 Couch, “Major Rapture Terms,” 28, 45-55; Hiebert, “Living in the Light,” 243-254; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 109-128; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 7-18; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 98-103; Pentecost, Things to Come, 209; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return,197-216; Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 127-134; Walvoord, The Return, 48-57; Wood, Is the Rapture Next?, 29-40.

103

coming now or whether our prospect is that we will go through the tribulation and our only hope of seeing Him without dying would be to go through that awful time of trouble. The imminency of the Lord’s return is a precious truth.22

MacArthur argues that if the Lord’s return was said to be imminent by the apostles, how

much closer is it today. Commenting on Romans 13:11 he argues,

So Paul’s penetrating appeal here in Romans 13 assumes that Christ’s return is imminent. . . .“The night is far spent, the day is at hand” (v. 12). The kairos of persecution, hardship, and darkness was “far spent” (prokoptō in the Greek text—meaning “advancing quickly,” or “being driven out”). Daylight—the final consummation of our salvation when Christ returns to take us to glory—is imminent. We have no idea how much sand remains in the hourglass of human history. But we ought to realize that a lot of sand has passed through the hourglass since the apostle Paul said the dawning of daylight was already at hand. How much more urgent is this wake-up call for the church today!23

Stanton argues that even non-Christians have noted the affect the doctrine of the

imminent return of Christ has on Christian behavior. He cites Gibbon, a critic of

Christianity, who authored The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire:

Those who understood in their literal sense the discourses of Christ Himself were obliged to expect the Second and glorious Coming of the Son of man before that generation was totally extinguished. . . . As long as for wise purposes this error was permitted to exist in the Church, it was productive of the most salutary effects on the faith and practice of Christians who lived in the awful expectation of that moment.24

The reverse of this argument has also been employed by Hoekema, Hiebert,

MacArthur, Merkle, Stanton, and Walvoord who further argue that rejection of

22 Walvoord, The Thessalonian Epistles, 54. cf. Walvoord, The Return of the Lord, 56-57.

23 MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 15; cf. Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 127.

24 Cited first by I. M. Haldeman, The History of the Doctrine of Our Lord’s Return (New York: First Baptist Church, n.d.), 17; cf. Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 134.

104

imminence removes a key motivation to service and holy living.25 Hoekema argues that if

events “must still occur before Jesus comes again, how can we be always ready for that

return? Does not a consideration of these signs carry with it the danger of pushing off the

return of Christ into the far-distant future, so that we no longer need to be concerned

about being always ready?”26 Merkle argues, “How can we do justice to the verses which

exhort us to be constantly ready for Jesus’ return in light of the fact that we do not know

when it will be? If certain events have yet to be fulfilled, might the church become

lackadaisical knowing that Jesus’ return is not imminent?”27 MacArthur argues:

The Christian who is not living a holy and obedient life with heavenly priorities is a Christian who does not grasp the significance of the Lord’s imminent return. If we genuinely are expecting our Lord to appear at any time, that blessed hope should move us to be faithful and walk properly, lest our Lord return to find us walking improperly, disobeying, or dishonoring Him. (cf. Mark 13:35-37)28

Stanton likewise argues that a non-imminent view destroys the exhortations for all but the

final generation:

The purpose of such imminency is that the Church may be in a constant state of expectancy, always looking for and waiting for the coming of her Lord from heaven. Not only is the hope of His return a source of comfort and encouragement to the believer, but also it is a very definite incentive for service and holy living. By the very nature of the case, if the exact time of the rapture had been revealed, none but the final generation of Christians would have cause to look for the return of their Savior, and for every other generation this vital hope and incentive would then have been lost. Such is the mischief caused when any known event, such as

25 Couch, “Major Rapture Terms,” 28, 45-55; Hiebert, “Living in the Light,” 243-254; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 109-128; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 7-18; Merkle, “Could Jesus Return at Any Moment?” 279; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 98-103; Pentecost, Things to Come, 209; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return,197-216; Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 127-134; Walvoord, The Return, 57; Wood, Is the Rapture Next?, 29-40.

26 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 130.

27 Merkle, “Could Jesus Return at Any Moment?” 279.

28 MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 17.

105

the Tribulation, the coming of Antichrist, or the Millennium, is thrust between the church and the coming of Christ for His own.29

Since this argument is frequently used by a wide range of imminence advocates

from differing eschatological views, it should be considered a central practical argument

for imminence.

The Doctrine of Imminence is a Source of Joy, Hope, Comfort, and Patience in Trial and Persecution

Chafer, Couch, Hiebert, Hoekema, MacArthur, Payne, Pentecost, Pink, Stanton,

Walvoord, and Wood argue that the imminent return of Christ is a source of joy, hope,

comfort, and patience in trial and persecution.30 Pink argues, “If the wondrous truth that

our Redeemer might return today once took firm hold on our heart, it would revolutionize

our lives and provide us with a spiritual dynamic that is incalculable in its reach and

incomparable in its value.”31

Collectively, these scholars cite John 14:1-3, James 5:7-9, 1 Cor 15:23-24; 15:51-

52, Phil 3:20-21, 1 Thess 1:9b-10; 2:17-19; 4:13-18; 5:1-11, 2 Thess 2:1-2, Titus 2:13,

and 1 John 2:28; 3:2-3. Couch writes,

Almost all of the rapture passages speak of the blessing of the Lord’s return for His own, or more specifically, the return of Jesus Christ to take His children home to heaven. This is hope and comfort! And it is a different scenario than that of Jesus coming back to judge the earth, to reign and rule as Messiah. In fact a key to most rapture passages is this “going home” joy and anticipation!32

29 Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 109.

30 Chafer, Systematic Theology 4:367; Couch, “Major Rapture Terms,” 28, 45-55; Hiebert, “Living in the Light,” 243-254; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 109-128; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 7-18; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 98-103; Pentecost, Things to Come, 209; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return,146-50; Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 127-134; Walvoord, The Return, 48-57; Wood, Is the Rapture Next?, 7, 29-40.

31 Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 197-198.

32 Couch, Major Rapture Terms, 32.

106

Hoekema writes, “The believer should live in constant joyful expectation of Christ’s

return; though he does not know the exact time of it, he should always be ready for it.”33

Stanton likewise argues that pastorally, imminence is more effective than non-imminence

to produce hope, comfort, and patience:

From the standpoint of a pastor or evangelist, the value of teaching and preaching the imminency of the return of Christ is plainly marked. Preach that the coming of Christ from glory is an imminent event, that it may transpire even in our day, and the people are blessed and hearts throb with a joyful anticipation. Teach that the Church must face the fires of the great Tribulation, and you send people back to their homes in despondency and dismay. Preach the posttribulational view to believers who hope and look for His return, and discord and heartache is sown in the midst. Multiplied examples that this is true could readily be cited. Teach the imminent return of Christ and people are renewed in hope and courage, despite the surrounding gloom.34

Concerning James 5:7, 8 Wood writes,

The admonition to have patience is given with the afflictions of the readers in view. The ground given for having this patience is their hope of Christ’s soon coming, which coming would be the occasion of their deliverance from this suffering. Thus Christ’s coming promised a release from affliction, and a freedom from persecution. But on the post-tribulation basis, would such a condition be true? Rather, would they not have to expect still worse affliction before the promised deliverance?...How then could James here extend such hope to them of possible soon deliverance from their suffering if he knew that these seven years of still greater affliction would have to precede that time?35

In order to prove that imminence is a source for these practical effects, Hiebert,

MacArthur, Stanton, Strombeck, and Walvoord further argue that non-imminence has

produced an attitude that is inconsistent with the NT attitude of joy, hope, comfort, and

33 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 126.

34 Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 136.

35 Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 34-35.

107

patience concerning the return of the Lord.36 Principally, to reject imminence is to affirm

that believers will have to endure the Day of the Lord (1 Thess 5:2-3). MacArthur argues

that 2 Thess 2:1-8 is a biblical example of the loss of joy, hope, and comfort caused from

no longer viewing the return as imminent, but as taking place only after the events of the

Tribulation.37 Wood also argues, “if the Church must go through that seven-year period

of suffering, then its members have quite a different outlook before them as they watch

for Christ’s coming than if it does not. Christians are urged in the New Testament to

await with joy the coming of their Savior, but if that coming must be preceded by seven

years of endured affliction, then the joy in such anticipation must be seriously affected.”38

Strombeck likewise argues, “To hold that the Church shall pass through the tribulation . .

. destroys the comfort that comes from the words, ‘God hath not appointed us unto wrath,

but . . . salvation,’ with which Paul said they should comfort themselves together.”39

Stanton also argues,

Can the Christian fully rejoice in the knowledge of His soon coming, believing that those who share the rapture experience must first endure the greatest hour of torment in earth’s history and that, at best, the privilege of rapture awaits only the few who escape the Beast’s rage and a martyr’s death?...The very fact that the primary passage on the rapture of the Church (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18) declares that this message is one of comfort, makes a posttribulational rapture incredible. . . . It is of no solace or encouragement to tell suffering saints that far worse things

36 Couch, “Major Rapture Terms,” 28, 45-55; Hiebert, “Living in the Light,” 243-254; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 7-18; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 164; Pentecost, Things to Come,209; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return,197-216; Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 127-134; Walvoord, The Return, 51; Wood, Is the Rapture Next?, 7, 29-40.

37 MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 10-11.

38 Wood, Is the Rapture Next? 7. He continues, “On the other hand, it is not for Christians to relax in wishful thinking either, and so if such affliction must be experienced by the Church, then it is for them to believe accordingly, recognizing that God ‘doeth all things well.” The answer is, of course, dependent solely on the teaching of the Word of God.”

39 Strombeck, First the Rapture, 95.

108

are in store for them! There is all the difference in the world between looking for the Lord and looking for the Antichrist. . . . The plainly intended meaning of the Thessalonians passage is that saints should be comforted by the prospect of Christ’s coming. There is not the slightest hint that distressed saints must endure still greater distress in the Tribulation. Rather than enter that period of anguish and torment, it would be far better to die, for to be absent from the body means to be gloriously present with the Lord (II Cor. 5:8). Death is a defeated enemy, having lost its sting by Christ’s victory over the grave (I Cor. 15:54-57), but it is an enemy nevertheless, and as such is of doubtful comfort. Yet death is far to be preferred to the great Tribulation.40

Stanton further supports this argument by citing a posttribulationist who has indicated by

his own attitudes that denying imminence leads not to hope but to despair. He quotes the

following from Henry Frost’s Chapter entitled “The Coming Posttribulational:”

My purpose now, will be to indicate that the second advent, according to the Scripture, may not momentarily be expected, as it will not take place until God has fulfilled certain large purposes of His and has brought to pass the last great testing and purifying of His people in the midst of furnace fires. As touching this last aspect of our subject, let me frankly admit that it is not an inviting one, for all of us shrink from suffering of any kind. But let me add that we must not evade prophetical presentations simply because they are dark and sinister.41

By Frost’s own admission, the second advent must be preceded by a “dark and sinister”

course of events, that are not “inviting.” His account is likewise devoid of anything

resembling the NT characteristic of Christians “awaiting eagerly the revelation of our

Lord Jesus Christ (1 Cor 1:7; cf. Phil 3:20).” His anticipation of the future return is not

comforting (1 Thess 4:18) nor encouraging (1 Thess 5:11), since he fully believes that it

must be preceded by dark and sinister events. It seems that Frost’s denial of imminence

has also denied him of his “blessed hope (Tit 2:13).” Payne likewise argues that “while

40 Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 133. cf. Pentecost, Things to Come, 209.

41 Henry W. Frost, The Second Coming of Christ (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1934), 202 (emphasis Stanton). Quoted in Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 132.

109

joy is not the equivalent of dedication,” the fact that for the modern posttribulationists,42

“the aspect of seven years of frightful tribulation still to precede Christ’s return has

marred their joy in anticipating His coming seems impossible to deny.”43

Since this argument is frequently used by a wide range of imminence advocates

from differing eschatological views, it should be considered a central practical argument

for imminence.

Rejection of Imminence Has Resulted From and/or Resulted In Sin and Doctrinal Corruption

Brindle, Couch, Hiebert, Hoekema, MacArthur, Payne, Pink, Stanton, and Walvoord

argue that rejection of imminence can be the result of sin.44 Hoekema argues, “If the

expectation is no longer present, there is something radically wrong.”45 Many scholars

have quoted Jesus’ statement regarding the evil servant who says, “My lord delayeth his

coming (Matt 24:48 KJV).”46 Payne argues,

It is indeed true that a man’s fear of being caught does not constitute the highest of possible motives, but Scripture nonetheless does not hesitate to employ it

42 Payne defines “modern posttribulationists” as those who have reacted against the any moment view of dispensationalists. As opposed to classic posttribulationists, modern Posttribulationists have largely agreed with the futuristic and clearly identifiable interpretation of the signs preceding the second coming of Christ, including a 7 year Tribulation, and the appearance of the man of lawlessness. Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 36-40, 164.

43 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 164.

44 Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 148-50; Couch, “Major Rapture Terms,” 28, 45-55; Hiebert, “Living in the Light,” 243-254; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 109-128; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 7-18; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 164; Pentecost, Things to Come, 209; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return,146-49; Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 127-134; Walvoord, The Return, 48-57; Wood, Is the Rapture Next?, 29-40.

45 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 110.

46 Couch, “Major Rapture Terms,” 28, 45-55; Hiebert, “Living in the Light,” 243-254; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 110; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 7-18; Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 98-103; Pentecost, Things to Come, 209; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return,199; Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 127-134; Walvoord, The Return, 48-57; Wood, Is the Rapture Next?, 29-40.

110

(Luke 12:46, 21:34). The denial of imminence, moreover, may serve as an excuse for unfaithfulness: “That evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord tarrieth: and shall begin to beat his fellow-servants, and shall eat and drink with the drunken” (Matt 24:48, 49). Human nature is depraved; and believers, though born again, are not wholly released therefrom in this life: “Even if someone should say to the Christians that it [the Lord’s return] will not be for six months, they would think that they were exempt from watching for five and a half months.”47

Pink has gone a step further and argued from this text that denial of imminence results in

sin: “When he said in his heart, ‘my lord delayeth his coming,’ he began to beat his

fellow servants and to eat and drink and be drunken, . . . unwatchfulness results in

worldliness of heart, carelessness of walk, and carnality of life.”48 He further comments

on Luke 21:34,

Mark particularly the words “lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting [self-indulgence] . . . and so that day come upon you unawares.” Daily—nay, hourly—readiness is required of us. Language could not be more explicit. Let those who speak so disparagingly of the “any-moment theory” weigh the words “at any time” and remember they were uttered by the Lord Himself. The precise date of the Second Advent has been designedly withheld from us in order that we should maintain our attitude of watchfulness and that we remain on the very tiptoe of expectation.”49

More recent scholars, such as Payne and Hoekema, though quoting this parable of the

wicked servant, are much more reluctant to declare that a non-imminence view leads to

sin. Advocates typically would rather argue that denial of imminence removes an

obstacle to sin rather than declaring a direct cause-effect relationship.50 Payne further

notes,

47 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 164. Quoting René Pache, The Return of Jesus Christ (trans. Wm. S. LaSor; Chicago: Moody, 1955), 69.

48 Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 208.

49 Ibid., 201.

50 Couch, “Major Rapture Terms,” 28, 45-55; Hiebert, “Living in the Light,” 243-254; Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 109-128; MacArthur, “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” 7-18; Payne, The Imminent

111

While the denial of the imminent appearing of Christ would seem to have a detrimental effect upon the morals of Christians who have not yet come to the point of grateful yieldedness to the Lord, it is an observable fact that the lives of consecrated, non-imminent post-tribulationist leaders are no whit inferior to those of their evangelical colleagues who are committed to the classical hope of the Lord’s appearing at any time. . . . The charge therefore that to deny the imminent hope is necessarily to dim practical “watchfulness” appears ill-founded.51

At most, Payne argues that the denial of imminence “may serve as an excuse for

unfaithfulness (emphasis original).”52

These advocates also argued that rejection of imminence may be a product of sin

and/or doctrinal error. Hoekema argues,

There may be various reasons for the loss of this sense of expectation. It may be that the church today is so caught up in material and secular concerns that interest in the Second Coming is fading into the background. It may be that many Christians no longer believe in a literal return of Christ. It may be that many who do believe in a literal return have pushed that event so far into the distant future that they no longer live in anticipation of that return. Whatever the reasons may be, the loss of a lively, vital anticipation of the Second Coming of Christ is a sign of a most serious spiritual malady in the church. Though there may be differences between us on various aspects of eschatology, all Christians should eagerly look forward to Christ’s return, and should live in the light of that expectation every day anew.53

J. Barton Payne notes that the development of Postmillennialism, which pushed the

imminent return of Christ into the future at least a thousand years, was the result of both

Daniel Whitby’s Unitarian tendencies and extreme sects of the Anabaptists:54

Appearing, 98-103; Pentecost, Things to Come, 209; Pink, The Redeemer’s Return,197-216; Stanton, Kept From the Hour, 127-134; Walvoord, The Return, 57; Wood, Is the Rapture Next?, 29-40.

51 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 164.

52 Ibid.

53 Hoekema, Bible and the Future, 111.

54 Payne does not mention in his discussion which aspect of these extremist sects of the Anabaptists he considers to be in error. Given his overall argument, it is most likely their literalizing and date-setting tendencies of prophecy.

112

In the eighteenth century there arose a major reaction against the Reformation’s second-advent anticipations, the effects of which still dominate non-evangelical Protestant thought. The deviation began in 1706 when Daniel Whitby taught that the overthrow of the pope and the Turks would serve to introduce not the visible reign of Christ but the spiritual conversion of the world and its submission to the church. This desupernaturalized tendencies may have arisen, in part, from Whitby’s Unitarian tendencies in theology, but its rapid acceptance seems to have been due to the extremes to which the doctrine of Christ’s second advent had been carried by the post-Reformation sects, such as certain of the Anabaptists. . . . Postmillennialism thus automatically postponed any hope of Christ’ imminent appearing for a minimum of a thousand-plus years.55

He continues by noting that liberalism also diminished any hope of an imminent advent:

But if the postmillennial deviation postponed Christ’s advent by a thousand years, the further distortion that classical eschatology suffered at the hands of the liberal leaders who rose to power at the turn of the century well-nigh eliminated the blessed hope from organized Protestantism. . . . When liberalism forced all prophecy into the preterist mold, then the coming of the Son of Man with the clouds of heaven became itself a Maccabean or first century dream and left the future devoid of revealed hope.56

It should be noted that Payne, like other advocates, again stops short of arguing a direct

cause-effect relationship. In fact he notes many well known conservative Christians such

as Jonathan Edwards, Charles Hodge, and B. B. Warfield who held to postmillennialism.

He merely argues that a non-imminence view provides a fertile environment for doctrinal

error to flourish and that doctrinal error such liberalism and postmillennialism generally

rejects any view of imminence.57

In contrast, Arthur W. Pink, an imminence advocate from the late nineteenth and

early twentieth century, was much more inclined to argue a close relationship between

55 Payne, The Imminent Appearing, 26-27.

56 Ibid., 27-28.

57 Ibid., 27-30.

113

non-imminence and error. He is typical of imminence advocates of this generation when

he writes,

The majority of errors and heresies that have gathered around this subject are directly traceable to the ignoring of this elementary consideration. For example: if the Lord’s people had given due heed to the fact that Scripture presents the Second Coming of Christ as something that may happen at any hour, then the postmillennial teaching that our Lord will not come back again for more than a thousand years would never have obtained the hearing and acceptance that it has received.”58

Yet the argument still remains that doctrinal error flourishes in an environment that

denies the imminent return of Christ.

While many advocates have argued that a denial of imminence does negate many

of the NT exhortations, most have stopped short of declaring that it is a direct product of

or directly produces sin and doctrinal error. Due to the reluctance of most current

advocates to argue that rejection leads to sin and doctrinal error, or that it is even the

product of them, this argument cannot be held to be a central practical argument.

Conclusion

This chapter has presented the practical arguments for the imminence of the rapture. It

was determined that the following arguments are central practical arguments for

imminence: first, the exhortations to the apostolic church indicate an imminent return;

second, imminence empowers service and holy living for Christians throughout church

history; third, the doctrine of imminence is a source of joy, hope, comfort, and patience in

trial and persecution. It was also determined in this chapter that the argument that the

rejection of imminence has resulted from, and/or resulted in sin and doctrinal error is not

a central practical argument for imminence.

58 Pink, The Redeemer’s Return, 132.

114

CONCLUSION

It was the thesis of this paper that the doctrine of the imminence of the rapture can be

clarified by a presentation of the central historical, biblical, theological, and practical

arguments held by its proponents. Each chapter presented historical, biblical, theological,

and practical arguments that have been made by imminence advocates with the intent of

determining which arguments were central to the case for imminence. In this

presentation, an argument was deemed central if it either was used frequently by a

number of advocates, was used broadly among all eschatological views that hold to

imminence, or if it held a prominent place within an advocate’s writings.

Definition of Imminence

According to the discussion on pages 5 and 6, imminence was defined as having the

possibility of occurrence at any moment from a human perspective. Differences in

opinion about how imminence can be maintained arise from differing theological

perspectives. While dispensationalists hold that imminence is maintained because there

are no predicted events that will transpire before the imminent event, imminent

posttribulationists argue that imminence is maintained regardless of these predicted

events. In both cases, however, the shared view of imminence is that it refers to an any

moment occurrence. Therefore, for the purpose of this thesis, the definition of imminence

was limited to only meaning the possibility of occurrence at any time.

115

Summary of Arguments

Chapter two presented the historical arguments for imminence that were based on texts

and writers throughout the history of the church. This chapter was divided into the

following five sections: 1) the Ante-Nicene Fathers; 2) the Post-Nicene Fathers and the

Medieval Church; 3) the Reformation Church; and, 4) the Post-Reformation Church.

Chapter three presented the biblical arguments for imminence based on scriptural

passages. Biblical arguments in this chapter were be divided into five sections: 1) The

Olivet Discourse and related texts (Matthew 24-25; Mark 13, Luke 12:35-48; 17:22-37;

21:1-36); 2) the Upper Room Discourse (John 14:1-3); 3) the Pauline epistles; 4) the

general epistles; and, 5) the book of Revelation.

Chapter Four presented the theological arguments from two major theological

systems. The arguments in this chapter were developed to answer the basic question: how

can imminence texts (e.g. Matt 24:36) be reconciled with sign texts (e.g. Matt 24:14)?

The chapter was divided into two sections based on the theological systems from which

they arose. Imminent posttribulationists argued that there will not be a clearly identifiable

future time of Tribulation on the earth. Broadly speaking, this view argued that the signs

that Christ gave are actually general events that have taken place throughout history, and

thus are meant as continual reminders of the imminent return of the Lord. Dispensational

pretribulationists, in contrast, generally argue that the rapture, which is imminent, is

distinct from the second coming, which is heralded by the sign texts.

Chapter five presented the practical arguments for the imminence of the rapture.

Four primary arguments were presented in this chapter for imminence: first, the

exhortations to the apostolic church indicate an imminent return; second, imminence

116

empowers service and holy living for Christians throughout church history; third, the

doctrine of imminence is a source of joy, hope, comfort, and patience in trial and

persecution; finally, the rejection of imminence has resulted from, and/or resulted in sin

and doctrinal error.

The Central Case Most Often Made By Those Arguing For Imminence

In chapter 2, the following historical texts and writers were found to be central to the

historical argument for imminence: Clement of Rome, the Didache, Ignatius of Antioch,

The Epistle of Barnabas, The Shepherd of Hermas, and Cyprian of Carthage from the

Ante-Nicene Fathers; the Ephraem of Nisibis and The History of Brother Dolcino texts

from the Post-Nicene Fathers and the Medieval Church era; Martin Luther and John

Calvin from the Reformation church era; and, John Gill and Morgan Edwards during the

post-Reformation church era.

In chapter 3, the following biblical texts were found to be central to the biblical

argument for imminence: the Olivet Discourse and related texts (Matthew 24-25, Mark

13, Luke 12:35-48; 17:22-37; 21), the Upper Room Discourse (John 14:1-6), Rom 13:11,

12; 1 Cor 1:6; 15:51-52; Phil 3:20; 1 Thess 1:10; 4:13-18; 5:6-8; 2 Thess 1:5-10; Titus

2:13; Heb 10:24-25, 27; Jas 5:7-9; 1 John 2:18, 3:2-3; Rev 1:1; 3:3; 3:20 (cf. Rev 2-3);

3:10-11; 22:7, 12, 20.

In chapter 4 the following theological argument made by imminent

posttribulationists was found to be central to the theological argument for imminence:

imminence texts must be given preeminence in interpretation so that sign texts do not

diminish the direct statements of Jesus of His imminent return. This argument was

supported by four other supplemental arguments, all of which were also found to be

117

central: the nature of prophetic fulfillment; the nature of prophetic utterance; the nature of

the prophet’s limited understanding; and, the nature of the interpreter’s limited

understanding. In chapter 4 it was also determined that the following arguments made by

dispensational pretribulationists are also central theological arguments for imminence:

the mystery and uniqueness of the rapture; the church is given no events that must occur

prior to the rapture; the church is not appointed to God’s eschatological wrath; all signs

occur after the parousia has begun; and the imminence of the day of our Lord Jesus

Christ (who is God).

Finally, in chapter 5 the following arguments were determined to be central

practical arguments for imminence: first, the exhortations to the apostolic church indicate

an imminent return; second, imminence empowers service and holy living for Christians

throughout church history; third, the doctrine of imminence is a source of joy, hope,

comfort, and patience in trial and persecution.

The Arguments Employed By Only A Few

In chapter 2, the following historical texts and writers were employed by only a few

advocates and thus determined to not be central to the historical argument for imminence:

The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus of Lyons from the

Ante-Nicene Fathers; the Codex Amiatinus text from the Post-Nicene Fathers and the

Medieval Church era; Balthasar Hübmaier and Hugh Latimer from the Reformation

church era; and, Joseph Mede, Increase Mather, Peter Jurieu, Philip Doddridge, and

James MacKnight during the post-Reformation church era. In chapter 3, the following

biblical texts were found to not be central to the biblical argument for imminence due to

infrequent use: Rom 8:19, 23, 25; Phil 4:5; Col 3:4; Heb 9:28; 1 Pet 4:7; 5:4; 2 Pet 3:10;

118

1 John 2:18; Jude 21; and Rev 16:15. In chapter 4 it was determined due to infrequent use

that logically-prior pretribulationism is not a central theological argument for imminence:

Finally, in chapter 5 it was determined that the argument that rejection of imminence has

resulted from, and/or resulted in sin and doctrinal error is not a central practical argument

for imminence.

Future Studies

It was the purpose of this thesis to provide a foundation from which a more thorough

argument for imminence could be made. Likewise, the work conducted in this thesis

allows for opponents of imminence to observe what the central arguments for imminence

are, and thereby conduct a more efficient debate with imminence advocates. This thesis

has attempted to eliminate nonessential arguments for imminence in each of the various

areas of study so that both sides of the argument will not repeat the debate over largely

abandoned arguments. By condensing and distilling the arguments down to the most

central, the debate over imminence can commence using the best arguments to date.

119

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abrahamse, Dorothy deF. Introduction to The Byzantine Apocalyptic Tradition. Edited by Paul J. Alexander. Berkeley: University of California, 1985.

Alexander, Paul J. “The Diffusion of Byzantine Apocalypses in the Medieval West and the Beginnings of Joachimism,” in Prophecy and Millenarianism: Essays in Honour of Marjorie Reeves. Edited by Ann Williams. Essex: Longman, 1980.

Allen, Willoughby C. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Matthew. International Critical Commentary 26. New York: Charles Scribners’s Sons, 1907.

Archer, Gleason L., Paul D. Feinberg, Douglas J. Moo, and Richard R. Reiter. Three Views on the Rapture: Pre-; Mid-; or Post-Tribulation? Edited by Stanley N. Gundry. Counterpoints. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.

Asselt, W. J. Van. “Structural Elements in the Eschatology of Johannes Cocceius.” Calvin Theological Journal 35 (2000): 76-104.

Aune, David E. Revelation 1-5. Word Biblical Commentary 52a. Dallas: Word, 1997.

. Revelation 6-16. Word Biblical Commentary 52b. Nashville: Nelson, 1998.

. Revelation 17-22. Word Biblical Commentary 52c. Nashville, Nelson, 1998.

Backus, Irena D. Reformation Readings of the Apocalypse: Geneva, Zurich, and Wittenberg.Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Baker, David W. ed. Looking Into the Future: Evangelical Studies in Eschatology. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001.

Balabanski, Vicky. Eschatology in the Making: Mark, Matthew, and the Didache. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

Ball, Bryan W. A Great Expectation: Eschatological Thought in English Protestantism to 1660. Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1975.

Beale, G. Κ. The Book of Revelation. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999.

Beechick, Allen. The Pretribulation Rapture. Denver, Colo.: Accent Books, 1980.

Bell, William E. “A Critical Evaluation of the Pretribulation Rapture Doctrine in Christian Eschatology.” Ph.D. Diss. New York University, 1967.

120

Benware, Paul N. Understanding End Times Prophecy. Chicago: Moody, 1995.

Beker, J. Christiaan. Paul’s Apocalyptic Gospel. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982.

Bernard, Thomas Dehany. The Progress of Doctrine in the New Testament, Eight Lectures Delivered Before the University of Oxford on the Bampton Foundation, 1864. New York: American Tract Society, 1891.

Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology, 2nd rev. ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1941.

. The Second Coming of Christ. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953.

. The History of Christian Doctrines. Carlisle: Banner of Truth Trust, 1969.

Bercot, David W. A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs. Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson, 2002.

Best, Ernest. A Commentary on the First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians. Harper’s New Testament Commentaries. New York: Harper and Row, 1973.

Betts, Sylvester J. The Imminent Second Coming of Christ. n.p. Capital Printing, 1935.

Birch, Desmond A. Trial, Tribulation, & Triumph: Before, During and After Antichrist. Santa Barbara: Queenship, 1996.

Blackstone, W. E. Jesus Is Coming. rev. ed. New York: Fleming H. Revell, 1908.

Blaising, Craig A. and Darrell L. Bock. Progressive Dispensationalism. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1993.

, Darrell L. Bock, Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. and Robert B. Strimple. Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond. Edited by Stanley N. Gundry. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999.

Blomberg, Craig L. Matthew. New American Commentary 22. Nashville: Broadman, 1992.

Bock, Darrell L., Luke. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament 2. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996.

Boyer, Paul. When Time Shall Be No More: Prophecy Belief in Modern American Culture. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap, 1992.

Bray, John L. Morgan Edwards and the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Teaching (1788). Lakeland, Fla: John L. Bray Ministry, 1995.

. The Origin of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Teaching. Lakeland, Fla: John L Bray Ministry, 1982.

121

. The Second Coming of Christ and Related Events. Lakeland, Fla: John L. Bray Ministry, 1985.

Brindle, Wayne A. “Biblical Evidence for the Imminence of the Rapture.” Bibliotheca Sacra 158 (2001): 138-151.

Brookes, James H. “Kept Out of the Hour.” Our Hope VI (1899): 153-157.

Brower, Kent E. ed. Eschatology in Bible and Theology: Evangelical Essays at the dawn of the New Millennium. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1997.

Brown, Raymond E. The Gospel according to John [xiii-xxi]. The Anchor Bible. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1970.

Brown, Schuyler. “Hour of Trial (Rev. 3:10).” Journal of Biblical Literature 85 (1966): 308-314.

Bruce, F. F. 1 & 2 Thessalonians. Word Biblical Commentary 45. Dallas: Word, 1982.

. "Review of The Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin by Dave MacPherson." Evangelical Quarterly 47 (1975): 58.

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Edited by John T. McNeill. Translated from the original Latin and indexed by Ford Lewis Battles. Library of Christian Classics 20-21.Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960.

. Calvin’s Commentaries. 22 vols. Translated from the original Latin and collated with the author’s French version by William Pringle. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999.

. Sermons of M. John Calvin on the Epistles of S. Paule to Timothie and Titus. Translated by Laurence Tomson. n.p. 1579. Translation of Sermons de Iean Calvin sur les deux Epistres Sainct Paul à Timothee, & sur l’Epistre a Tite. Genèva, n.p., 1563.

Carson, D. Α., Matthew. The Expositor's Bible Commentary 8. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984.

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Dallas, Tex.; Dallas Theological Seminary, 1976. Repr., Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1993.

Clark, K. W. “Realized Eschatology.” Journal of Biblical Literature 59 (1940): 367-83.

Clouse, Robert G. “Millennialism in the Seventeenth Century.” Grace Journal 6 (1965): 3-15.

Clouse, Robert G. ed. The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1980.

122

. “Rapture of the Church,” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Edited by Walter A. Elwell. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984.

Coad, F. Roy. A History of the Brethren Movement. Greenwood, S.C.: Attic, 1968.

Cohn, Norman. The Pursuit of the Millennium. London: Secker and Warburg, 1957.

Cotterell, Peter, and Max Turner. Linguistics & Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1989.

Couch, Mal. ed. A Bible Handbook to Revelation. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2001.

. Dictionary of Premillennial Theology. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1996.

Crutchfield, Larry V. The Origins of Dispensationalism: The Darby Factor. Lanham, Md: University Press of America, 1992.

Criswell, W.A. “Christ is Coming Back.” Criswell Theological Review 1 (2003): 111-115.

Dake, Finis Jennings. The Rapture and The Second Coming of Christ. Lawrenceville, Ga: Dake Bible Sales, 1977.

Daley, Brian E. The Hope of the Early Church: A Handbook of Patristic Eschatology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.

Davidson, James W. Logic of Millennial Thought: Eighteenth-Century New England. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977.

Davies, W. D., and Dale C. Allison, Jr. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew: Commentary on Matthew XIX-XXVIII. International Critical Commentary 3. Edinburgh: Τ&Τ Clark, 1997.

Demy, Timothy J., and Thomas D. Ice, “The Rapture and an Early Medieval Citation.” Bibliotheca Sacra 152 (1995): 306-317.

Douglas, J. D. ed. The New Dictionary of the Christian Church. rev. ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978.

Douty, Norman F. The Great Tribulation Debate. Harrison: Gibbs, 1956.

. Has Christ’s Return Two Stages? New York: Pageant Press, 1956.

Dunham, Duane A. “2 Thessalonians 1:3-10: A Study in Sentence Structure.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 24 (1981): 39-46.

123

Edgar, Thomas R. “Robert H. Gundry and Revelation 3:10.” Grace Theological Journal 3 (1982): 19-49.

Erickson, Millard. A Basic Guide to Eschatology. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998.

. The Concise Dictionary of Christian Theology, rev. ed. Wheaton: Crossway, 2001.

. Contemporary Options in Eschatology. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1977. Emmerson, Richard and Bernard McGinn eds. The Apocalypse in the Middle Ages. Ithica, N.Y.:

Cornell University Press, 1992.

English, E. Schuyler. Re-Thinking the Rapture. Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, 1954.

Essex, Keith H. “The Rapture and the Book of Revelation.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 13 (2002): 215-39.

Fee, Gordon D. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Edited by Gordon D. Fee. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.

Frame, James Everett, The Epistles of St. Paul to the Thessalonians. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1912.

Froom, LeRoy Edwin. The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers: The Historical Development of Prophetic Interpretation. 4 vols. Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1950.

Frost, Henry W. The Second Coming of Christ. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1934.

Fuller, Reginald H. A Critical Introduction to the New Testament. London: Gerald Duckworth, 1966.

Garrett, James Leo. Systematic Theology, Biblical, Historical, and Evangelical. 2 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990.

George, Timothy. Theology of the Reformers. Nashville: Broadman, 1988.

Gerstner, John H. Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth: A Critique of Dispensationalism. Brentwood, Tenn.: Wolgemuth and Hyatt, 1991.

Giles, Kevin. “Present-Future Eschatology in the Book of Acts.” Reformed Theological Review41 (1982): 11-18.

Gill, John. Exposition of the New Testament. 2 vols. London: William Hill Collingridge, 1853.

Gromacki, Robert. “The Imminent Return of Jesus Christ,” Grace Theological Journal 6 (1965):

124

Gumerlock, Francis. “A Rapture Citation in the Fourteenth Century.” Bibliotheca Sacra 159 (2002): 349-62.

Gundry, Robert H. Matthew: A Commentary on His Handbook for a Mixed Church under Persecution. 2d ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994.

. The Church and the Tribulation: A Biblical Examination of Posttribulationism. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1977.

. First the Antichrist. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997.

Hagner, Donald Α., Matthew 14-28. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word, 1995.

Hannah, John D. Our Legacy: The History of Christian Doctrine. Colorado Springs: NavPress, 2001.

Harrison, William K. “The Time of the Rapture As Indicated In Certain Scriptures.” Bibliotheca Sacra 114 (1957): 316-325.

. “The Time of the Rapture As Indicated In Certain Scriptures: Time of the Rapture in Second Thessalonians.” Bibliotheca Sacra 115 (1958): 20-26.

. “The Time of the Rapture As Indicated In Certain Scriptures: Time of the Rapture in Matthew 24.” Bibliotheca Sacra 115 (1958): 109-119.

. “The Time of the Rapture As Indicated In Certain Scriptures: Time of the Rapture in Revelation.” Bibliotheca Sacra 115 (1958): 201-211.

Hauser, Charles A. “Eschatology of the Early Church Fathers.” Th.D. Diss. Grace Theological Seminary, 1961.

Heinz, Johann. “The ‘Summer That Will Never End’: Luther’s Longing for the ‘Dear Last Day’ in His Sermon on Luke 21 (1531).” Andrews University Seminary Studies 23 (1985): 181-186.

Hellemo, Geir. Adventus Domini: Eschatological Thought in 4th Century Apses and Catecheses.Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1989.

Helyer, Larry R. “The Necessity, Problems, and Promise of Second Temple Judaism for Discussions of New Testament Eschatology.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 47 (2004): 597-615.

Hendrickson, William. I and II Thessalonians. New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1955.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. 1 & 2 Thessalonians: A Call to Readiness. Chicago: Moody, 1971.

125

. “Living in the Light of Christ’s Return: An Exposition of 1 Peter 4:7-11.” Bibliotheca Sacra 139 (1982): 243-254.

Hitchcock, Mark L. “A Critique of the Preterist View of “Soon” and “Near” in Revelation.” Bibliotheca Sacra 163 (2006): 467-478.

Hodges, Zane C. "The First Horseman of the Apocalypse." Bibliotheca Sacra 119 (1962): 324-34.

Hoekema, Anthony A. The Bible and the Future. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979.

. “Did J.N. Darby Believe in the Pretrib Rapture by 1827?” Dispensational Distinctives 1 (1991): 1-2.

. “The Origin of the Pretrib Rapture.” Part 1. Biblical Perspectives, II. (1989): 1-6.

. “Why the Doctrine of a Pretribulational Rapture Did Not Begin with Margaret Macdonald.” Bibliotheca Sacra 147 (1990): 155-168.

Holmes, Michael W. ed. The Apostolic Fathers. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1999.

Hoyt, Herman A. The End Times. Chicago: Moody, 1969.

Hubmaier, Balthasar. “Apologia,” in Balthasar Hubmaier, Theologian of Anabaptism. Translated and edited by H. Wayne Pipkin and John H. Yoder. Scottdale: Herald, 1989.

Huebner, R. A. Elements of Dispensational Truth.2 vols. Jackson, N.J.: Present Truth Publishers, n.d.

. John Nelson Darby: Precious Truths Revived and Defended. vol. 1 Jackson, N.J.: Present Truth Publishers, n.d.

Hunt, Steven ed. Christian Millenarianism: From the Early Church to Waco. Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 2001.

Ice, Thomas and Timothy Demy eds. When The Trumpet Sounds. Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House, 1995.

. “Examining an Ancient Pre-Trib Statement.” No pages. Cited 7 April 2010. Online: http://www.raptureme.com/featured/tt14.html.

. "Morgan Edward: Another Pre-Darby Rapturist," No pages. Cited 7 April 2010. Online: http://www.raptureme.com/featured/tt3.html.

. “Myths of the Origins of Pretribulationism.” No pages. Cited 7 April 2010. Online: http://www.pre-trib.org/article-view.php?id=50.

126

, and Kenneth L. Gentry Jr. The Great Tribulation, Past or Future? Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1999.

, and Timothy Demy. Fast Facts on Bible Prophecy. Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House, 1977.

Johns, Loren L. ed. Apocalypticism and Millennialism: Shaping a Believers’ Church Eschatology for the Twenty-First Century. Kitchener: Pandora, 2000.

Johnson, Alan F. Revelation. The Expositor's Bible Commentary 12. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981.

Jurier, Peter. The Approaching Deliverance of the Church. No pages. Cited 7 April 2010. Online: http://books.google.com/books.

Kelly, John Norman Davidson. Early Christian Doctrines. 2d ed. New York: Harper & Row, 1960.

Kelly, William. "The Rapture of the Saints: Who Suggested It, or Rather in What Scripture?" The Bible Treasury 4 (1903): 314-18.

Kerr, Hugh Thomson Jr., ed. A Compend of Luther’s Theology. Whitefish, Mont. Kessinger, 2008.

King, Greg A. “The Day of the Lord in Zephaniah.” Bibliotheca Sacra 152 (1995): 16-32.

Ladd, George Eldon. A Commentary on the Revelation of John. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972.

. Crucial Questions About the Kingdom of God. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952.

. The Blessed Hope. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962.

. The Presence of the Future. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974.

LaHaye, Tim, and Thomas Ice. Charting the End Times. Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House, 2001.

Larondelle, Hans K. “The Middle Ages Within the Scope of Apocalyptic Prophecy.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 32 (1989): 345-354.

Lea, Thomas D. “A Survey of the Return of Christ in the Ante-Nicene Fathers.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 29 (1986): 163-177.

Lemer, Robert E. The Feast of Saint Abraham: Medieval Millenarians and the Jews.Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001.

Lewis, Charlton T., and Charles Short. A New Latin Dictionary. New York: American Book Company, 1907.

127

Lewis, Gordon. "Biblical Evidence for Pretribulationalism." Bibliotheca Sacra 125 (1968): 216-26.

. "Theological Antecedents of Pretribulationalism." Bibliotheca Sacra 125 (1968): 129-38.

Lightfoot, J. B. Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul from Unpublished Commentaries. New York: Macmillan, 1895. Repr., Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1957.

Lindsey, Hal, and C. C. Carlson. The Late Great Planet Earth. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1970.

. When Is Jesus Coming Again? Carol Stream, Ill.: Creation House, 1974.

Luther, Martin. Complete Sermons of Martin Luther. vol. 1.1-2. Edited by John Nicholas Lenker. Translated by John Nicholas Lenker. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000.

, Table Talk, Luther’s Works. Hagerstown, Md: Christian Heritage, 2003.

MacArthur, John F. “Is Christ’s Return Imminent?” The Master’s Seminary Journal 11 (2000): 7-18.

. Matthew 24-28. The MacArthur New Testament Commentary. Chicago: Moody Press, 2002.

. 1& 2 Thessalonians. The MacArthur New Testament Commentary. Chicago: Moody Press, 2002.

. The Second Coming: Signs of Christ's Return and the End of the Age. Wheaton: Crossway, 1999.

MacLeod, David J. “The First ‘Last Thing’: The Second Coming of Christ (Rev. 19:11-16).” Bibliotheca Sacra 156 (1999): 203-220.

MacPherson, Dave. The Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin. Kansas City, Mo.: Heart of America Bible Society, 1973.

. The Incredible Cover-Up. Plainfield, N.J.: Logos International, 1975.

. The Great Rapture Hoax. Fletcher, NC: New Puritan Library, 1983.

. The Rapture Plot. Simpsonville, S.C.: Millennium III Publishers, 1995.

. The Three R's: Rapture, Revisionism, Robbery. Simpsonville, S.C.: POST, 1998.

Maddox, Robert. “Sense of New Testament Eschatology.” Reformed Theological Review. 36 (1977): 42-50.

128

Malherbe, Abraham J. The Letters to the Thessalonians. The Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 2000.

Marotta, Frank. “Dave MacPhearson’s The Rapture Plot: weighed and found wanting.” No pages. Cited 7 April 2010. Online: http://www.according2prophecy.org/macphers.html.

Marshall, I. Howard. The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.

Martin, D. Michael. 1, 2 Thessalonians. New American Commentary 33. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1995.

Marxen, Willi. Introduction to the New Testament. Translated by G. Buswell. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1968.

Mason, Clarence E. Jr. “The Day of Our Lord Jesus Christ.” Bibliotheca Sacra 125 (1968): 352-359.

Mayhue, Richard L. “Why a Pretribulational Rapture.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 13 (2002): 241-53.

. “Jesus: A Preterist or a Futurist?” The Master’s Seminary Journal 14 (2003): 9-22.

. Snatched before the Storm! Winona Lake, Ind.: BMH Books, 1980.

McAvoy, Steven. “A Critique of Robert Gundry’s Posttribulationism.” Th.D. Diss. Dallas Theological Seminary, 1986.

McGinn, Bernard. Visions of the End: Apocalyptic Traditions in the Middle Ages. New York: Columbia University Press, 1979.

Merkle, Benjamin L. "Could Jesus Return At Any Moment? Rethinking the Imminence of the Second Coming." Trinity Journal 26 (2005): 279-292.

Michaels, J. Ramsey. Interpreting the Book of Revelation. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992.

Middlekauff, Robert. The Matthers: Three Generations of Puritan Intellectuals, 1596-1728. New York: Oxford University Press, 1971.

Miller, J. Graham. Calvin’s Wisdom: An Anthology Arranged Alphabetically by a Grateful Reader. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1992.

Moltmann, Jürgen. ”The End as Beginning.” Word and World 22 (2002): 221-227.

Moore, A. L. The Parousia in the New Testament. Supplements to Novum Testamentum Vol. 13. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1966.

129

Mounce, Robert A. The Book of Revelation. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977, 1998.

Morris, Leon. The Revelation of St. John. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1969.

Nelson, Neil D., Jr. '"This Generation' in Matthew 24:34: A Literary Critical Perspective." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 38 (1996):369-85.

Noē, John. Beyond the End Times. Bradford: International Preterist Association, 1999.

. Shattering the "Left Behind" Delusion. Bradford: International Preterist Association, 2000.

North, Gary. Rapture Fever. Tyler, Tex.: Institute for Christian Economics, 1993.

Northrup, Bernard E. "The Posttribulational Rapture Error." The Baptist Bulletin (1976):12-14.

Oberman, Heiko A. The Dawn of the Reformation. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992.

Olshausen, Hermann. Biblical Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistles to the Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, and Thessalonians. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1851.

Pache, René. The Return of Jesus Christ. Translated by Wm. S. LaSor. Chicago: Moody, 1955.

Page, Sydney H. T. “Revelation 20 and Pauline Eschatology.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 (1980): 31-43.

Parsons, Michael. “Time and Location: Aspects of Eschatological Motivation in Paul.” Reformed Theological Review 60 (2001): 109-122.

Pate, C. Marvin ed. Four Views on the Book of Revelation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998.

Payne, J. Barton. The Imminent Appearing of Christ. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1964.

Perrin, Norman, The New Testament, An Introduction. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1974.

Peterson, Rodney L. Preaching in the Last Days: The Theme of ‘Two Witnesses’ in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.

Petry, Ray C. Christian Eschatology and Social Thought. Nashville: Abingdon, 1956.

130

Pettegrew, Larry D. “The Rapture Debate at the Niagara Falls Conference.” Bibliotheca Sacra157 (2000): 331-347.

. “Interpretive Flaws in the Olivet Discourse.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 13 (2002): 173-190.

Pierson, Arthur T. The Coming of the Lord. New York: Fleming H. Revell, 1896.

Pink, Arthur W. The Redeemer's Return. Swengel, Pa.: Bible Truth Depot, 1918. Pink, Arthur W. The Redeemer’s Return. Ashland, K.Y.: Calvary Baptist Church Book Store, 1918.

Plummer, Alfred An Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to S. Matthew. London: Robert Scott Roxburghe House Paternoster Row, 1915.

Pond, Eugene W. "The Background and Timing of the Judgment of the Sheep and Goats." Bibliotheca Sacra 159 (2002): 201-20.

. "Who Are the Sheep and Goats in Matthew 25:31-46?" Bibliotheca Sacra 159 (2002): 288-301.

Poythress, Vern S. “2 Thessalonians 1 Supports Amillennialism.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 37 (1994): 529-538.

Quistorp, Heinrich Calvin’s Doctrine of the Last Things. Translated by Harold Knight. London: Lutterworth, 1955.

Rand, James F. “A Survey of Eschatology of the Olivet Discourse [1].” Bibliotheca Sacra 113 (1956): 162-173.

. “A Survey of Eschatology of the Olivet Discourse [2].” Bibliotheca Sacra 113 (1956): 200-213.

Reese, Alexander. The Approaching Advent of Christ. London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1937. Repr., Grand Rapids: Grand Rapids International Publications, 1975.

Reeves, Marjorie. The Influence of Prophecy in the Later Middle Ages. Oxford: Clarendon, 1969.

Reiter, Richard R. ed. The Rapture: Pre-, Mid-, or Post-Tribulational. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984.

Ridderbos, Herman N. Paul: An Outline of His Theology. Translated by John R. De Witt; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975.

Roberts, Alexander, and James Donaldson, eds. The Ante-Nicene Fathers. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981.

131

Rowley, H. H. The Relevance of Apocalyptic. London: Lutterworth, 1950.

Ryrie, Charles C. Basic Theology. Wheaton: Victor, 1986.

. Dispensationalism. Chicago: Moody, 1995.

. The Bible and Tomorrow’s News. Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1969.

. What You Should Know About the Rapture. Chicago: Moody, 1981.

Scofield, C. I. Addresses on Prophecy. New York: A. C. Gaebelein, 1902.

Scott, J Julius. “Paul and Late-Jewish Eschatology: A Case Study 1 Thess 4:13-18 and 2 Thess 2:1-12.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 15 (1972): 133-143.

Sherwin, Byron L. “Jews and the World to Come.” First Things 164 (2006): 13-16.

Showers, Renald E. Maranatha, Our Lord Come! Bellmawr, N.J.: Friends of Israel, 1995.

. There Really is a Difference; A Comparison of Covenant and Dispensational Theology. Bellmawr, N.J.: Friends of Israel, 1990.

Silver, Jesse Forest. The Lord’s Return: Seen in History and in the Scriptures as Premillennial and Imminent. New York: Fleming H. Revell, 1914.

Smith, Charles R. "A Review of The Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin by Dave MacPherson." Spire (1974): 8-10.

Smith, J. B. A Revelation of Jesus Christ. Scottdale, Pa: Herald, 1961.

Sproule, John A. A Revised Review of “The Church and the Tribulation,” by Robert H. Gundry.Birmingham, Al: Southeastern Bible College, 1974.

. In Defense of Pretribulationalism. Winona Lake, Ind.: BMH Books, 1980.

Stallard, Mike. "Review of The Last Days According to Jesus by R. C. Sproul." The Conservative Theological Journal 6 (2002):45-71.

Stanton, Gerald B. Kept From the Hour: Biblical Evidence for the Pretribulational Return of Christ. 4th ed. Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle Publishing, 1991.

Stein, Robert H. Luke. New American Commentary 24. Nashville: Broadman, 1992.

Stenton, F. M. Anglo-Saxon England. Oxford: Oxford University, 1947.

132

Still, Todd D. “Eschatology in the Thessalonian Letters.” Review & Expositor 96 (1999): 195-210.

Stitzinger, James F. “The Rapture in Twenty Centuries of Biblical Interpretation.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 13 (2002): 149-71.

Strandberg, Todd. “Imminency: The Rapture of the Church is an Imminent Event.” No pages. Cited 7 April 2010. Online: http://raptureready.com/rr-imminency.html.

Strombeck, John F. First the Rapture: The Church’s Blessed Hope. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1950.

Svigel, Michael J. "The Apocalypse of John and the Rapture of the Church: A Reevaluation." Trinity Journal 22 (2001): 23-74.

Swanson, Dennis. “International Preterist Association: Reformation or Regression?” The Master’s Seminary Journal 15 (2004): 39-58.

Taylor, Nicholas H. “Early Christians Expectations Concerning the Return of Jesus: From Imminent Parousia to the Millennium.” Journal of Theology for Southern Africa 104 (1999): 32-43.

Tenney, Merrill C. Interpreting Revelation. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957.

Teulon, J. S. The History and Teaching of the Plymouth Brethren. London: S.P.C.K., 1899.

Thiessen, Henry C. “Will the Church Pass Through the Tribulation?” Bibliotheca Sacra 92 (1935): 292-314.

Thomas, Robert L. “The Chronological Interpretation of Revelation 2-3.” Bibliotheca Sacra 124 (1967): 321-331.

. “The ‘Comings’ of Christ in Revelation 2-3.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 7 (1996): 153-181.

. “Glorified Christ on Patmos.” Bibliotheca Sacra 122 (1965): 241-247.

. “A Hermeneutical Ambiguity of Eschatology: The Analogy of Faith.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 23 (1980): 45-53.

. “Imminence in the NT, Especially Paul’s Thessalonian Epistles.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 13 (2002): 191-214.

. “The Doctrine of Imminence in Two Recent Eschatological Systems.” Bibliotheca Sacra 157 (2000): 452-467.

. “Literary Genre and Hermeneutics of the Apocalypse.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 2 (1991): 79-97.

133

. “The New Testament Use of the Old Testament.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 13 (2002): 79-98.

. “The Principle of Single Meaning.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 12 (2001): 33-47.

. Revelation 1-7. Chicago: Moody, 1992.

. Revelation 8-22. Chicago: Moody, 1995.

. “The Structure of the Apocalypse: Recapitulation or Progression?” The Master’s Seminary Journal 4 (1993): 45-66.

, Ralph Earle, and D. Edmond Hiebert. "1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus" The Expositor's Bible Commentary 11. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.

Toon, Peter ed. Puritan Eschatology 1600 to 1660: Puritans, The Millennium and the Future of Israel. London: James Clarke & Co. Ltd., 1970.

Toussaint, Stanley D. “A Critique of the Preterist View of the Olivet Discourse.” Bibliotheca Sacra 161 (2004): 469-490.

Townsend, Jeffrey L. “The Rapture in Revelation 3:10.” Bibliotheca Sacra 137 (1980): 252-266.

Turner, David L. Matthew. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament 1. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008.

. "The Structure and Sequence of Matthew 24:1-41: Interaction with Evangelical Treatments." Grace Theological Journal 10 (1989): 3-27.

Von Balthasar, Hans Urs. “Faith and the Expectation of an Imminent End.” Communio 26 (1999): 687-697.

Wallace, Daniel B. “A Textual Problem with 1 Thessalonians 1:10: ek tes orges vs. apo tex orges.” Bibliotheca Sacra 147 (1990): 470-479.

Wallis, Wilber B. “Problem of an Intermediate Kingdom in 1 Corinthians 15:20-28.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 18 (1975): 229-242.

Walvoord, John. The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976.

. Daniel: A Key to Prophetic Revelation. Chicago: Moody, 1971.

. "Is a Posttribulational Rapture Revealed in Matthew 24?" Grace Theological Journal 6 (1985): 257-66.

134

. The Millennial Kingdom. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979.

. “New Testament Words for the Lord’s Coming.” Bibliotheca Sacra 101 (1944): 283-289.

. “Posttribulationism Today - Part I-X.” Bibliotheca Sacra 132-134 (1975-1977).

. The Prophecy Knowledge Handbook. Wheaton: Victor, 1990.

. The Rapture Question: A Comprehensive Biblical Study of the Translation of the Church. Grand Rapids: Dunham, 1957.

. The Return of the Lord. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979.

. The Revelation of Jesus Christ. Chicago: Moody, 1966.

. The Thessalonian Epistles. Bible Study Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1967.

. Matthew: Thy Kingdom Come. Chicago: Moody, 1974. c1998. Wanamaker, Charles A. The Epistles to the Thessalonians: A Commentary on the Greek Text.

New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990.

Ware, Bruce A. "Is the Church in View in Matthew 24-25?" Bibliotheca Sacra 138 (1981): 158-72.

Waterman, G. Henry. “Sources of Paul’s Teaching on the 2nd Coming of Christ in 1 and 2 Thessalonians.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 18 (1975): 105-113.

Weber, Timothy P. Living in the Shadow of the Second Coming. New York: Oxford University, 1979.

Whiting, Arthur B. “The Rapture of the Church [1].” Bibliotheca Sacra 102 (1945): 360-372.

. “The Rapture of the Church [2].” Bibliotheca Sacra 102 (1945): 490-499.

Wilch, John R. “The Land and State of Israel in Prophecy and Fulfillment.” Concordia Journal 8 (1982): 120-178.

Williams, George H. Spiritual and Anabaptist Writers. Library of Christian Classics 25. London: SCM, 1957.

Williams, Michael D. “Rapture or Resurrection?” Presbyterion 24 (1998): 9-37.

Williamson, W Andrew. “The Last Things: Biblical and Theological Perspectives on Eschatology.” Reformed Theological Review 62 (2003): 51-52.

135

Willis, Wesley R., and John R Master, eds. Issues in Dispensationalism. Chicago: Moody, 1994.

, Elaine Willis, John Master, and Janet Master. Basic Theology Applied: A Practical Application of Basic Theology in Honor of Charles C. Ryrie and His Work. Wheaton: Victor, 1995.

Winfrey, David G. “The Great Tribulation: Kept ‘Out of’ or ‘Through’?” Grace Theological Journal 3 (1982): 3-18.

Wood, Leon. The Bible and Future Events: An Introductory Survey of Last Day Events. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973.

. Is the Rapture Next? Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1956.

Wurthwein, Ernst. The Text of the Old Testament; An Introduction to the Biblia Hebraica. Translated by Erroll F. Rhodes. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979.

Young, R. Garland. “The Times and the Seasons: 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:11.” Review and Expositor 96 (1999): 265-276.