The Rapture of the Church of Christ is an event that will indeed take place. But when that will happen has been debated among the best teachers of systematic eschatology ever sense the apostle Paul. The most common views are simple exegetical rendering of Scripture and a limited understanding of end times prophecy. Yet, some theologians, like Dr. Walter Martin, founder of The Christian Research Institute, thought better of it.
As a fellow theologian, he knew that an improper interpretation of apocalyptic literature was to blame. This was usually due to a misrepresentation of the context, especially that of the book of Revelation, and a dogmatic approach to the study of God’s Word.
The word rapture is a transliteration from the Greek term harapazo and means, “snatched up” and/or “taken away” and refers to the entire Christian Church. Beyond this genre of study is eschatology, the overall scholarship of the “end times”. The study of “the rapture” exists within the full body of eschatological knowledge and is a small part of its entirety. Yet many students of Scripture, especially Christian scholars, focus on the rapture sense most of them accept a pre-tribulation harapazo with the Church “escaping” the coming “time of trial”. Only, this view is presumptuous as well as problematic in light of Biblical hermeneutics and critical interpretation. Yet, it includes an element of truth later to be explained.
Within the Biblical text, it is true that Christians will not suffer the wrath of God based on faith in Christ. However, this differs greatly from the view that we will not be present during the time of tribulation, that is, the great tribulation at the end of the age.
Throughout much of the early Christian Church the apostles addressed these issues and left us, the entire Church, with expositions of truth to consider as well as honor in our faith. The problem has been, and continues to be, the application of these issues and how they are interpreted and accepted today. The majority of believers are resolved in truth while the few linger in relative absolutes – true representation of Scripture for personal opinion.
As such, John 3:36 is an example of a verse and 22-36 an example of a passage in Scripture that is misunderstood by many who study their words. And like any study of a Sacred Text, the method of Exegesis should be applied to grasp it properly. These passages in Scripture must be taken, and observed in context, just like our study of “The Word and the Logos of God”, or they will not be, well enough, understood.
For a proper rendering of John 3:36, one must “study” the text systematically, if one is to know the writer’s intent. It is not enough to simply read the passage and assume what John meant. To “meditate” on God’s Word is what we must do. And this, to avoid spiritualizing the text. For the Scriptures are full of wisdom, not foolishness – realism, not idealism. To this we must cling. Let us begin.
Exegesis, hermeneutics, and biblical criticism are methods we will utilize for this, and most all, systematic study of Scripture. John 3:36, I Thessalonians 5:9, II Thessalonians 2, and others, will be considered most. The book of Daniel, the book of Revelation, and less relevant books will be saved for the next study of “the rapture”, sense they are less clear, more advanced apocalyptic literature.
Aside from the above mentioned, a word of concern. There are many ways to study Scripture: topical, verse-by-verse, book-by-book, prophetically, historically, metaphorically, etc. But to study it systematically and thoroughly is of great gain. Especially so, when making “end times” study and the interpretation of it a part of faith. However careful, this is not necessary for salvation. Those who practice and teach it as such are in danger of apostasy!
Now, to start with the Gospel of John and what we can extract from this study of “The Rapture”. First, who is John and why did he write, “The Gospel according to John”? And second, what was his intent in the passage in consideration, 3:22-36?
OVERVIEW
Old Testament documentation reveals many valuable references, as do the Dead Sea Scrolls in knowing the worldview of John’s time…
The date of the Gospel is around 50-85 A.D… Most likely written latter in the century sense it contains a more developed discourse in theology than do the other three Gospels (i.e., Logos – see “THE WORD – THE LOGOS”).
In an outline John 3:22-36 falls under Section III entitled: John the Baptist’s Final Testimony of Jesus.
The Apostle John, beloved by Jesus, does not include his signature in the Gospel he writes yet the account he foretells is his in every way.
Historically, John as a Hebrew knew of the hostility between the Jews and the Samaritans and practiced the laws and customs he was subject to, just as they were. This is important to know sense the passage in question regards the address of Hebraic rituals by the Jews and the response of the Baptist to them.
Jesus’ own words summarizes the central theme of John’s Gospel: “For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only (His only begotten Son), that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life” (3:16). And the main purpose in John’s book is as such: “that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have eternal life in His name” (20:31). This is a central thought of John’s Gospel, and especially important here, considering its relevance to the discourse given in verses 22-36.
In this regard, the Gospel John writes, of what in the New Testament is considered “a testimonial account”, much different than a “letter of address”, such as the Epistle to the Church of Thessalonica. The Thessalonian letters of Paul we will study soon after John’s Gospel. However, both include specific themes at various times, while in them, are communicated profound thoughts and end time messages. Some speak of the “rapture” and others do not. But our focus is on these little passages that some decide are not what they intend.
When John wrote his Gospel, and latter the book of Revelation, he was, as most Biblical writers are, specific in his purpose and intent. Many things are addressed and much is put forth, but few greater than the Baptist’s admission that “He is greater than I”, and “I must decrease and He must increase” (…).
With exegetical study, we must keep in mind the writers original intent while applying its meaning to the worldview of today. The 21st century is less than relevant when seeking to find the door of profound truth. And to the Gospel of John, this is no unfulfilled written rule to men.
In this way, 3:22-36, John is writing an account about the Baptist who was answering questions to those who were concerned about ritualistic cleansing and were curious about Jesus baptizing, as He was (although some maintain He appointed disciples to baptize), on the other side of the Jordan: “An argument developed between some Jews over the matter of ceremonial washing. They came to John and said to him, ‘Rabbi, that man who was with you on the other side of the Jordan–the one you testified about–well, he is baptizing, and everyone is going to him” (John 3:25-26).
Already do we see an explanation of the account. The “argument” or dispute was not about judgment, the last days, or the “harapazo”. It was about what was proper according to Jewish custom and law, in that of purification, and why Jesus was baptizing at the same place John was (the parallel “upper” side), while those being baptized were John’s to baptize no more.
John the Baptist answers: “A man can only receive what is given him from heaven. You yourselves can testify that I said, ‘I am not the Christ but am sent ahead of Him.’ The bride belongs to the bridegroom. The friend who attends the bridegroom waits and listens for him, and is full of joy when he hears the bridegroom’s voice. That joy is mine, and it is now complete. He must become greater; I must become less.
“The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is from the earth belongs to the earth, and speaks as one from the earth. The one who comes from heaven is above all. He testifies to what he has seen and heard, but no one accepts his testimony. The man who accepted it has certified that God is truthful. For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit. The Father loves the Son and has placed everything in his hands. Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on him.” (v.27-36)
The theme of John’s Gospel is here evidenced and evermore heightened. The translation from Greek to English is accurate and relevant, as is the intent of John’s thought clear. It answers the question of Jewish relative concerns, and any statement of a prophetic nature is here not spoken of. The resurrection of the dead, and the revealing of Christ at the end of the age are future events and addressed elsewhere in this Gospel. But not here.
In other words, in the English translation of this reply, all the terms are past and/or present participles. All present-past verbs and nouns. No future tense is used. He is responding directly to their concern… Who is this Jesus and why is He acting in such a way? Is this appropriate? And: What shall we do about it? Their concerns were earthly and carnally driven.
John says, “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on him” (v.36). The word “remains” is significant and kept in the present tense intentionally, and means God’s wrath, God’s “judgment”, stays with him, the Jew and indeed the Greek, and continues in effectiveness, who have not believed on the Son – the promised Messiah. Wrath will endure as long as it is dependent upon the rejection of Christ. It “abides on whoever rejects the Son”. Thus, the removal of wrath is applied to those who believe. For as the Scriptures say, “they have been justified by faith in Christ” (…); And, “There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (…). Or as I render it: There is no condemnation in those who believe – Christ, being in them.
Appropriately and most assuredly, this passage and John’s reply, is not referring to a future time of tribulation. The Son had now come and judgment was now present (among) them. John was piercing the heart of the Jew’s with the truth of wrath that IS on them, and indeed IN them, without believing on the Son – the one (“that man”) who they themselves were arguing to judge.
As John suggests, judgment abides when the Law has no power to take it away (GR: harapazo). And the only power to remove God’s wrath is baptism in the Son. This was the Jew’s long awaited purification, their ceremonial cleansing, and indeed their invitation to the Lord’s banquet filled with the sacrificial Lamb and the redemptive baptism of living water.
This was John’s (the Baptist) method as a strict prophet and the method Christ used, in many cases, at the rebuke of the leaders of the Law. It was a type of parabolic teaching that illuminated truth and defeated error, not only in their thinking, but in their hearts as well. The question is, would they accept it, this truth, such as it was.
THESSALONIANS I & II
Epistles to the Church are what Paul wrote long after converting to Christianity while on the rode to (Damascus), and he did so to first century believers that needed fatherly guidance. I Thessalonians is one of those “letters of address” Paul put down for the Church of Thessalonica, most of which he discipled, and who needed further teaching while he was away. He found himself either preaching or “in chains” faithfully writing what might build them up and train them accordingly.
He addresses the Thessalonian issues, one of which applies to this study in the main: “But since we belong to the day, let us be self-controlled, putting on faith and love as a breastplate, and the hope of salvation as a helmet. For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ” (I Thessalonians 5:8-9). The hope of salvation that has now come!
It seems even the first century Church wanted to be “raptured away” before the appointed time of the Lord at His return. However, Paul states that to receive salvation through Christ Jesus removes God’s wrath and the suffering that comes with it. It is justice from God to circumvent suffering wrath when the impunity has been paid in full – in that of Christ. Salvation is now, as is God’s appointing relief from wrath’s result. Therefore, sense the cause is present tense, so is the effect after it is applied to Christ. Nothing more is to be waited for other than the glory that will be made known in the time God has appointed it so. Worry not, Paul soothes, salvation is today present, glory is yet to come, and come it will, just as you now are, remain in full anticipation of it.
Paul’s words are what he makes clear in the entire chapter, as an address to what they questioned him about – the coming of the Lord: “Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who fall asleep, or to grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope. We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. According to the Lord’s own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep” (4:13-15). (More to come)
Now, let us analyze what mistakes are made when studying Eschatology, “end times”, and that which is most often misunderstood by modern Christian scholars, teachers, and students:
“The Antichrist will be given authority “to make war with the saints, and to overcome them” Revelation 13:7. This could not happen to the Church because Jesus promised that the “gates of hell shall not prevail against it” Matthew 16:18” (Chuck Missler).
An example of spiritualizing the text… (more to come)
RAPTURE: STUDY II
In this next study we will look at a part of the “harpazo” including the dead who will rise first and consider these most profound apocalyptic texts – Daniel and the book of Revelation.
The book of Daniel and the “70th week” is a passage commonly misunderstood. However, it is true that the final redemption of Israel is yet to come – meaning Israel as a nation. Although they have, in part, been “redeemed” from the four corners of the earth wondrously, in 1948 by the re-establishment of Israel as a nation after the Holocaust, along with the capture of Jerusalem in 1967 – one of the most significant prophetic fulfillments of all “end of the age” Scripture. Shalom be to Jerusalem!
Revelation chapter 7 is another example of how many, including Missler, misrepresent the text. Although Missler is a brother in Christ, he is a student in err (err means “to stray”). This we will pursue as well as other relevant passages in Scripture on “the rapture”.
From this, let’s take a look at another part of the “harpazo” regarding the dead who will rise first.
In Revelation 6, they are given white robes and told to “wait a little longer”. indicating; while the rest of the number of mortals come in… And if they are to rise first, the saints must “wait” as well.
Consider then, at the “last trumpet” does the “harpazo” take place. During the time before, the Saints remain. (more to come)
Few prophecies are left before the return of “our great Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ” and these we will discuss in detail. But know, now is the time, now are the moments, right before His “coming in the clouds with multitudes of angels with Him”. The next topic of our studies will be, “The Second Coming”.
Indeed, “Come Lord Jesus, come”.
More to come. Thank you!
