The Problems of Pretribulationism

Pretribulationism, the teaching that the church will be taken out of the world before the time of the great tribulation, is problematic. There is no question that the Scriptures teach the visible second coming of the Lord Jesus in glory with His angels, and that when He comes the church will be caught up to meet Him in the air. But no Scriptures state or imply that the Lord Jesus is coming before the great tribulation.While many who teach and believe this doctrine are sincere, an examination of cited Scripture passages and the doctrinal reasoning employed to support this doctrine reveal faulty Bible study methodology. Reading in the "Light" of Hypothesis versus The WordThe cornerstone of this methodology is the reading of unclear passages of Scriptures in the light or bias of the pretribulation hypothesis. Correct Bible study requires that unclear passages of Scripture be read in the light of clearer passages that speak about the same subject. Scripture interprets Scripture. A clearly stated hypothesis should never be used to clarify the meaning of an unclear Scripture passage. Context, language, intent of the author, and other clearer Scripture passages should be used. The following is an example of reading an unclear Bible passage in the light of a hypothesis.False hypothesis: The Bible teaches that UFOs with people from other planets have visited the earth. This is supported by the following Scriptures:"Then it came about as they were going along and talking, that behold, there appeared a chariot of fire and horses of fire which separated the two of them. And Elijah went up by a whirlwind to heaven." (2 Kings 2:11)"And as I looked, behold, a storm wind was coming from the north, a great cloud with fire flashing forth continually and a bright light around it, and in its midst something like glowing metal in the midst of the fire." (Ezekiel 1:4).Incorrect reasoning and conclusion: A chariot of fire that flies like a whirlwind into heaven with Elijah is just another way of describing a flying saucer. Glowing metal in the midst of a storm cloud of fire is Ezekiel’s way of describing a flying saucer. The passages cited support and confirm that UFOs from other planets have visited the earth. The problem methodThe hypothesis, with all of its details, was introduced first. This created a certain light or context in the mind of the reader. Next, the passages were read to support the hypothesis. Ignored were the Biblical contexts which said nothing about flying saucers or other planets. The hypothesis achieved undeserved authority because it was proposed to be a plausible explanation of the Scriptures cited. The Rise of PretribulationismIn early 19th century Ireland, the doctrine of the pretribulation rapture of the church grew from the use of the above method. A clear hypothesis was stated, and various, less specific passages were appealed to for support. In an environment of renewed interest in prophecy, the doctrine grew like wildfire.Following is an examination of Scriptures often cited to support the pretribulation hypothesis. After examining the passage and the arguments presented for its meaning, ask these questions:• What does this passage clearly and unmistakably say?• If the meaning of the passage is not clear by itself, what clear and unambiguous Scripture passages or methods am I using to understand the passage?• Am I arriving at the meaning of the Scripture with the aid of the hypothesis?The Church and God’s Wrath1 Thess. 5:9 'For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ." Pretribulation reasoning:• The great tribulation is uniquely a time of God's wrath.• God's wrath is poured out on all inhabitants of the earth.• God has not destined true believers for wrath.Incorrect conclusion: The church cannot be present on the earth during the time of the great tribulation because the wrath of God would necessarily be directed toward it. Therefore the church must be raptured before the great tribulation. One pretribulation author, John Walvoord, says: "The church therefore cannot enter ’the great day of their wrath‘" (Rev. 6:17). Problems with this reasoning:First, every reader should study the Bible reference John Walvoord and others use to support the above conclusion. The passage makes no such claim. While it is true that God's wrath is poured out during the great tribulation (Rev. 6:17, 15:1, 16:1), it is not true that all persons on the earth at the time of the tribulation are the subjects of God's wrath. The book of Revelation speaks about saints living on earth during the time that God's wrath is being displayed (7:14, 11:3-12, 12:6, 13-17, 13:7, 14:12, 16:15). Some of these saints are the very agents of God's wrath (Rev.11:5-6). Jesus taught his disciples that the saints would be on the earth during the great tribulation, and then gathered together after the tribulation (Matt. 24:3-31, note vv. 29-31). The saints are not the target of God's wrath during this time, but are persecuted by the beast (Rev. 13:7). When God comes, his wrath is directed toward those who are persecuting the saints, and He provides relief for the suffering saints (2 Thess. 1:6-10).Pretribulation authors typically acknowledge that there will be saints on the earth during the tribulation, but they deny that such saints are members of the church. This assertion grows from dispensationalism, a method of interpreting Scripture that distinguishes Israel from the church in the last days. Thus they explain that although saints can be on the earth, the church is not. But there can be no doubt that believing Jews are portrayed as members of the church (from Pentecost to the coming of the Lord) in such passages as Eph. 2:14; Rev. 2:8-11, and Rev. 3:7-13. The dispensationalist’s assertion that believing Israel is not to be confused with the church during the time portrayed in Revelation fails to consider that: (1) believing Jews and gentiles go through the tribulation (Rev. 7:4-8, 9-14); (2) the church, since the time of Pentecost, has been composed of Jews and gentiles; and (3) the book of Revelation is written "to the churches" (Rev. 22:16). Thus, being present on earth during the great tribulation does not contradict the fact that God has not destined us for wrath. When the true believers of the church are present during the time of the tribulation, and looking forward to the rapture, they will be comforted and encouraged when they read: God has not destined us for wrath but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ. Philadelphia Kept From That Hour"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 upon the earth." Rev. 3:10. Pretribulation reasoning:• The members of the church in Philadelphia are promised that they will be "kept from the hour of testing."• Philadelphia, the church addressed, must represent the entire church prior to the time of the great tribulation.• The "hour of testing" is interpreted to mean the entire time of the great tribulation.• To be "kept from the hour of testing" is interpreted to mean that the church will be raptured from the earth.Incorrect conclusion: The church in Philadelphia is promised that it will be "kept from the hour," which must mean "be raptured from the earth," before the time of the great tribulation. The church in Philadelphia represents the whole true church of all believers just before the time of the tribulation. So the church will be raptured before the tribulation. Problems with this reasoning:In Revelation 2 and 3, seven contemporary churches are addressed. Five churches are warned to repent, while two churches, Philadelphia and Smyrna, are consoled and encouraged. To interpret the church of Philadelphia as representative of the entire church violates the context that presents it as one of seven churches. No passage of Scripture suggests that Philadelphia alone represents the entire church at the time preceding the great tribulation, while all the other six churches do not. Such an assertion is an arbitrary reading in the light of pretribulation hypothesis, not the results of exegesis.The "hour of testing" may be the time of the great tribulation, or it may be some segment before, during, or after the great tribulation. Whatever the meaning, the promise to be kept from it is only significant to the church in Philadelphia.To be "kept from the hour" could be interpreted various ways, including death before the onset of a particular time, or preservation and protection during such time. Indeed, the Lord Jesus, when praying for the church asks that they be "kept from the evil one," but specifically notes that He is not praying that they be "taken from the world" (John 17:15). To insist that "kept" means "raptured" is an arbitrary reading in the light of a hypothesis, not the result of any Scripture passage that teaches "kept" equals "raptured." It might be reasonable to suggest "kept" equals "raptured" if we had any passage of Scripture that presented the church being raptured (caught-up, removed, gathered) before the great tribulation, but no such passage exists. To conclude the meaning of this passage in the "light" of pretribulation hypothesis, and then use this passage as the basis of the pretribulation hypothesis, is a blatant example of circular reasoning.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------To conclude the meaning of this passage in the "light" of pretribulation hypothesis, and then use this passage as the basis of the pretribulation hypothesis, is a blatant example of circular reasoning.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Plausible meaning of the passage:The first chapter of Revelation identifies all the churches as lampstands. In chapters 2 and 3, both Philadelphia and Smyrna stand without criticism before the Lord while the other five churches are warned to repent. Chapter 11 describes the ministry, death, resurrection, and rapture of two witnesses after identifying them as "the two lampstands that stand" (the churches of Philadelphia and Smyrna). These two churches are protected by God while they carry out a unique ministry for 3 1/2 years. After their ministry is finished, the beast makes war with them and kills them. After 3 1/2 days, they are resurrected and raptured into the presence of the Lord. The protection by the Lord for their witness during the forty-two months, and their subsequent rapture before the events of the bowls, is the probable realization of the Lord's earlier promise to Philadelphia. Apostasy or Rapture: Taken out of the way"For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way" (2 Thess. 2:7).Pretribulation reasoning:• "He who now restrains" is a reference to the Holy Spirit, the church or the Holy Spirit as He indwells the church.• The phrase "taken out of the way" equals the events of the rapture.• The man of lawlessness appears (and consequently the tribulation begins) only after "he who now restrains" is "taken out of the way."Incorrect conclusion: He who now restrains (the Holy Spirit in the church) is taken out of the way (that is, taken out of the world), thus the church is taken out of the world before the tribulation begins. Problems with this reasoning:There is no general agreement among commentators regarding the meaning or even proper translation of the text rendered as "he who now restrains." It might better be translated, "he who now holds fast." In either case, the pretribulation hypothesis is improperly assumed so that "taken out of the way" equals "raptured out of the world."The phrase "taken out of the way" is literally "comes to be out of the midst." It is an explanation of the results of the apostasy that precedes the revelation of the man of sin introduced at the beginning of the passage. The general context and language of 2 Thess. 2 does not support, and in fact contradicts, the pretribulation hypothesis. The apostle Paul introduces this discussion with the fact that the apostasy would precede the appearance of the man of lawlessness and, consequently, the day of the Lord. The apostle does not introduce the passage with notification to the Thessalonians that they would be raptured before the appearance of the man of sin. On the contrary, the apostle argues that:• Apostasy, a falling away from the faith, would happen first.• The man of lawlessness would appear.• The man of lawlessness and day of the Lord had not yet appeared.• The apostasy had not occurred.• The Thessalonians were holding fast the faith (the opposite of apostasy).Whatever the meaning of 2 Thess. 2, it is necessary to notice that rapture (our "gathering together to Him") is discussed as an event that follows apostasy and the revelation of the man of lawlessness (2 Thess. 2:3).If Paul wanted to convince this church that the day of the Lord had not yet occurred and thus support the idea of a pretribulation raputure, he could have simply said, "The rapture happens first, and you Thessalonians HAVE NOT BEEN RAPTURED!" But he did not. Errors from Implication and Silence The Time of Jacob's TroubleThe pretribulation hypothesis points to the fact that the great tribulation is the time of "Jacob's trouble" (Jer. 30:7). Some infer from this that the church is not the focus of the tribulation and would not be expected to be on the earth during this time. However, even a casual reading of Jeremiah 30 reveals that the nations of the world are all drawn into the events described there, not just Jacob. In addition, the fact that this period of time is called "Jacob's trouble" does not invite us to conclude that "Jacob" is not the church, or a name equivalent to the church in end-times. Indeed, in the first century of the church's existence, "Jacob" was the predominant member of the church. The pretribulation argument that “Jacob’s trouble” is not the church’s trouble would have been nonsensical to John (himself a Jew) and to the early recipients of the book of Revelation. And why would the fact that it is the time of Jacob's trouble necessarily exclude anyone else of any description? This reasoning is again the product of dispensationalism, which insists that believing Jews are not members of the church in the end-times. The Term "Church" Not in Revelation 4-21 But Certainly on EarthSome have claimed that because the term "church" does not occur in Revelation chapters 4 through 21, the church is not involved in the events portrayed, and therefore must have been raptured before these events. However, seven churches are addressed as present in their earthly cities in chapters 2 and 3, and they are not portrayed as having been raptured anywhere in those passages. In fact, they are warned of the consequences of Jesus’ coming. So we would logically expect to find them where we last saw them, in Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea. One pretribulation author, attempting to overcome this difficulty, suggested that John is a symbol of the church, and portrays the rapture of the church when he is instructed to "come up here" (4:1). But this method would leave the gate wide open for us to interpret almost any symbol as the church in chapters 4-21. This argument from silence is self-destructive to the pretribulation hypothesis since the word for rapture, or any description of it, does not occur with reference to the specific term "church" anywhere in Revelation. Should not pretribulationists wonder why a book written to the churches about the revelation of Jesus Christ has no mention of the rapture of the “church” on any page, according to their terms? Hypothesis: That There Exists Two Distinct Classes of Christ Returns Passages It is under this heading, in the name of graduate credentials and the Greek language, that this argument is mounted. Certain verses are selected as "rapture passages" according to a supposed academic criteria, while others are chosen as Second Coming passages because they meet a different criteria. The criteria of one group is supposed to logically exclude the other group. That however is where the problem is. It is important for all to note from the outset that none of the passages speak about a PRE-TRIBULATION COMING OF THE LORD. It is not the intent of this paper to point out every instance or error made by Pretribulationists, so I will give some examples of wrongfully dividing passages of Scripture on the basis of the Pretribulation Hypothesis and/or Dispensationalism. John 14:2-3 versus Matthew 24:29-31The above two passage represent classic examples of the kind of argument that divides one passage as a so called rapture passage (John 14:2-3) against a second coming passage (Matthew 24:29-31). To fully experience the absurdity of this rewriting of Scripture every reader should obtain Dr. John Walvoord's book, The Rapture Question. Go straight to page 70 and start reading. After you have finished reading the subject of that heading, Going To The Father's House, you will find that Dr. Walvoord has argued, by direct implication, that if you are a "saint" gathered in the sky in Matthew 24 in the second coming of our Lord, you certainly are not a beneficiary of the promises he made to the disciples who gathered in the upper room shortly after he taught them of his coming on Mt Olivet. If you're going to the place Jesus prepared, you are certainly not going to expect to be the elect gathered by the angels. Dr. Walvoord went on to teach that the promise made in the upper room is to the church for a trip from earth to heaven, to the place He prepared for them, while believing Israel, not the church, is to receive, in the post tribulation 2nd coming, an earthly kingdom, where they will reign with Christ for a thousand years. Problem 1: In the upper room discourse the Lord Jesus does not use the word "heaven" (in spite of what Dr. Walvoord says), and He could have easily been going away to prepare the place in the Father's house from which these very men would reign for 1000 years. There is nothing spoken here by Jesus which disallows any saint from reigning on earth in the place in the Father's house the Lord Jesus prepared for them. To say that the place being prepared by Jesus is not in the Fathers house, if it is "down there on earth" versus "up there in heaven," is an argument begging many questions, not the least of which is who said so? Problem 2: Where is Christ for one thousand years, in heaven with the disciples and others, or on earth, with Israel and others? Problem 3: Where would these Jewish Christian disciples believe they were going to spend the one thousand years, in heaven or on earth? Problem 4: When Peter, James, John, and Andrew, (founding leaders of the church, and, men who were Jews who knew the promises to Israel) were present for the Mt. Olivet discourse, later heard Jesus say in the upper room, "I am going to prepare a place for you...I am coming again," did they, like Walvoord, believe that Jesus was talking about a coming other than the coming that they had questioned him about when walking by the temple?Problem 5: Jesus never mentions the Church or Israel to His disciples in either the upper room discourse or Mt. Olivet. But in the upper room He did say something about the Way, the Truth, and the Life. [Lord Jesus help us!] Read John 14 and then read Matthew 24, and then ask yourself or discuss with a friend, or better yet, someone who is known as quite logical, are the data stated in the two groups of data, in the two passages, actually exclusive of each other? Put yourself in Peter's, James, John's, and Andrew's sandals a couple days after the Lord Jesus ascended. Someone asks you about when Jesus is going to come again. This someone is a converted Jew living in Jerusalem. What are you going to tell him? Are you going to tell him about two separate future comings of the Lord, one a Rapture for the church to a home in heaven, the other a quite visible Second Coming for believing Israel for a job on earth? Are you going to say Jesus can come at any minute, even before I finish this sentence, or are your going to say we must see the temple torn down, rebuilt, Israel torn down, rebuilt, reoccupied in 1948? Pretribulational/Dispensational Corruption of Prophetic ScripturesDispensationalism views the Bible through a filter that says believing Israel is to be handled separately and is separate from the church. Thus, when the church is raptured before the tribulation, that is a gentile affair. At the occasion of the 2nd coming, that is a Jewish affair. Believing "elect" Jews, "Israel" will reign with Christ in His kingdom on earth. Never mind that the church is founded on believing Jewish apostles, Jewish converts, and has many Jewish converts to this day. Never mind that the churches of Smyrna and Philadelphia are addressed as Jewish believers, making Jewish believers two of the seven churches addressed in the day of the Lord by John (the "two lampstands" that stand). The apostles never taught dispensationalism in any of their letters to the churches, but did teach the unity of Jews and gentiles in Jesus (Eph. 2).The Church Raptured This approach neglects to recognize that the language of Revelation largely employs symbols, some of which represent the church. The golden lampstands are immediately defined by the angel in chapters 1-3 as churches. If we find the term "lampstand," or any other term synonymous with church in chapters 4-21, then the argument from silence fails by definition. But, even if no term for the church is found in these chapters, an argument from silence proves only what it says, which is nothing.However, five terms for church are used in Revelation 4-21. "Lampstand," "temple" "city" and “witnesses” are used in chapter 11, and in chapter 21 we find “bride.” John is instructed to "rise and measure the temple of God" (11:1), a term that stands for the whole church of Jews and gentiles (1 Cor. 3:16; Eph. 2:21). When Jesus commissions his church he calls them His witnesses, "You shall be My witnesses in..." (Acts1: 8 ). In Revelation 11 the chapter describes the ministry of two witnesses during the time of the great tribulation, and identifies these two witnesses as "the two lampstands that stand before the Lord." Because we were introduced in chapters 1-3 to seven lampstands (the whole church), and noticed that two of these lampstands stood without accusation before the Lord, the two lampstands of chapter 11 are obviously these two churches (www.expressright.com/wits.aspx). These two churches were distinguished from the other five in the scene where John is instructed to measure those who worship at the altar, believing Jews, from the outer court, believing gentiles. Paul uses language picturing the church as a virgin betrothed to Christ, in his second letter to the church of Corinth (2 Cor. 11:2), while the author of Hebrews describes the church as “the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem...church of the first born” (Heb. 12:22-23). The pretribulationists’ insistence that the temple of Revelation 11 is a literal building directly contradicts Jesus' own statement that the temple would not be standing in the end-times (Matt. 24:2), and that he would make the members of the Philadelphian church "pillars in the temple... (3:12)."As mentioned above, saints are portrayed on earth throughout the chapters that describe the events of the great tribulation. How is it possible to be a post-Pentecost saint and not be a member of the church, unless one imports a hyper-dispensationalist hypothesis that "explains" how tribulation saints are not in the church? Revelation 22:16 specifically says that the testimony of the book of Revelation is "for the churches." The Term "Rapture" Not In Matthew 24:31It is argued that because the term for "rapture" is not used in Matt. 24:31, the rapture is not being discussed. But using this reasoning no passage except 1 Thess. 4:17 would qualify as a "rapture" passage. Furthermore, neither 2 Thess. 2:1, ("our gathering together to Him") nor Rev. 11:12 (“Come up here”) would qualify as a rapture passage. Statements to Israel or the Church?It is also argued that the Lord’s statements in Matthew 24 to His inner circle of disciples are to be interpreted as a sermon directed to Israel, not instructions to the founding leaders of the Christian church. But the term "Israel" is not used to describe His disciples in Matthew 24. It is further asserted that Jesus, when addressing the very same disciples a short time later in the upper room, addressed them as the foundational Christians of the church, and that He spoke to them about a pretribulation rapture of the church. But the terms church and rapture are not used at all in the upper room discourse, and the disciples are told to have courage because of coming tribulation (John 16:33). However, the gathering of saints from the sky (an accurate description of rapture, cf. 1 Thess. 4:15 ff.) is described in detail in Matt. 24:31, specifically occurring "after the tribulation of those days" Matt. 24:29. Argument from Imminence: Coming like a thiefPretribulationism improperly insists that the doctrine of the imminent return of Christ be stated thus:Christ can and should be expected to return and rapture the church at any moment. No prophetic events will intervene between now and the rapture of the church.To support this definition of imminence, John 14:3 and 1 Thess. 4-5 are cited. But a single reading of these passages reveals that the coming of the Lord is not discussed as an event to be expected at any moment. Even when Paul writes that the day of the Lord comes as a thief in the night (1 Thess. 5:2), he emphasizes that such is the case only for unbelievers. He clearly states that the day will not overtake the Thessalonians like a thief (1 Thess. 5:4).1 Thess 4-5 teaches the imminence of "the day of the Lord" (I Thess. 5:2). The day of the Lord is a time frame with events that precede, attend, and follow the coming of Jesus. This is proved in Revelation 1:10. Thus, to say, "Jesus can arrive at any minute and rapture the church" is different than saying that the events that signal His coming could begin at any minute.The pretribulationist does not adhere to imminent return as he has defined it. His literature contains comments that suggest the coming of the Lord is now closer than ever before as certain current events have unfolded as fulfillment of prophecy. How often has it been suggested that the Lord is nearer because of the re-gathering of Israel as a nation in 1948? This is specifically mentioned as a fulfillment of prophecy from Ezekiel 37:12. Could the Lord have returned before 1948? Is imminence (as defined above by dispensationalism) true only since 1948? Or what about the proposed rebuilding of the temple that has so often been rumored by pretribulation Christian television hosts? Because these Scriptures do not teach the imminent return as defined by pretribulationism, one author reasons in the following manner:"If the teaching of Christ had been to the intent that His coming for them was after the Great Tribulation, it is difficult to see how this message [John 14] would have been a source of solace to their troubled hearts."[The Rapture Question, pg. 73 John Walvoord] If our source of joy or sorrow is related to our personal circumstances of suffering or the lack of it in this life, then I understand Walvoord's statement. But if the source of the disciples’ (and our) joy lies in being with the Lord, from whom we are now parted, then Walvoord's statement is puzzling. Jesus' words in John 14 and 1 Thess. 4:13-18 are a limitless source of comfort in that we know that in spite of death or tribulation, Jesus has overcome the world and is coming again for us. To postulate, as Walvoord does, that Jesus was comforting His disciples by assuring them of no tribulation or involvement in the great tribulation virtually contradicts everything Christ had told them up to that point. If it is true that even one prophetic event remains to be fulfilled before the coming of Christ, then imminence as defined by the pretribulation hypothesis, is discredited. (The reader is urged to review the things that will precede "our gathering together to Him" in 2 Thess. 2:1-7.) Argument from reputation or popularityThe arguments in favor of pretribulationism that carry the most weight are generally unspoken: (1) “If [some important teacher] believes and teaches the pretribulation rapture of the church, then it must be true.” How could a person of such reputation be wrong? (2) There are so many people that believe it, it must be true.These arguments are perhaps the most difficult of all to defeat. Whatever a Christian teacher of good reputation teaches is likely to be believed by a great number of others who trust that teacher. Here, the lessons of history should caution us. Loyalty to a reputable teacher or pastor is important, but we are never relieved of the responsibility to search the Scriptures. Loyalty and respect do not suggest or imply the sort of mindless obedience that has been at the foundation of large cults surrounding notorious charismatic personalities.There is no question that pretribulationism is popular today. The best selling fictional Left Behind series proved its popularity. But not one apostle or church father ever taught pretribulationism. There is no record that pretribulationism was ever taught before the early 1800s. P.S. To Fearful and Faith-weak PastorsI know that there are a good number pastors, who, like me, came out of school, pre-trib, and no longer believe it. Each of those men know that there are a great number of evangelical churches which would automatically ask them to leave their existing position or screen them out of consideration for a position when they declare their changed doctrinal belief. This is where integrity and obedience comes in to play, and the fear of the Lord. Re-read Revelation 22:18-1918 I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God shall add to him the plagues which are written in this book;19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book.The New American Standard Bible, (La Habra, California: The Lockman Foundation) 1977. Get on your knees and get right with the Lord, and then get out your pen and write a letter to your church explaining what happened to you, how and why. God will be glorified. You will be blessed. Your flock will be properly prepared. The Danger of PretribulationismThe danger of pretribulationism lies in the potential for disillusionment and disbelief when end-time events unfold in the way actually described in the Bible. Will those caught in the events of the tribulation lose their faith when pretribulationism is not borne out? Having heard their leaders describe pretribulationism with the same fervor as they describe the resurrection, will they abandon a belief in the resurrection when it becomes obvious pretribulation rapture in not true? I believe that the student of prophecy should note that some significant warnings are found in the Bible concerning what we believe about the end-times: Matt. 24:4; Rev. 22:18-19, 2 Thess. 2:3. The Fact of Tribulation Taught by JesusUnlike hypothetical pretribulationism, the Lord Jesus clearly stated the following words which were recorded by His disciple Matthew in the Word of God.Matthew 24:29-3129 “But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken,30 and then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory.31 “And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other."The New American Standard Bible, (La Habra, California: The Lockman Foundation) 1977.samy

During the time of the great tribulation there will still be children born and people alive who are not converted and do not follow the beast or bear the mark of the beast. These are mortals who will go into the 1000 year reign with Christ. The phrase, "those who dwell on the earth" is a distinct phrases that distinguishes those who take the mark of the beast and are judged at the return of Christ. samy