The Rupture of the Church

My wife and I attend a church in our neighborhood, and although they preach the Bible and are basically a good church, like many churches today they seldom teach anything related to end-time events like the Rapture, the Second Coming, the Tribulation, and so on. Mind you, they don't come out and preach against any of it, but things eschatological are seldom the focus.

That's why I was floored by something our pastor said one recent Sunday morning as the sermon was winding down. He made a casual reference to the fact that, you know, Jesus is going to take a handful of faithful, elite Christians to be with Him in heaven before the coming apocalypse begins, while many "average" Christians who are in a state of spiritual slumber will be left behind to suffer through this awful period (so be sure to sign up as a volunteer in such-and-so church program or this-and-that church activity).

Being reasonably well-schooled in Bible prophecy and eschatology, I went into immediate brain freeze. I understood the implications of what the preacher had said, and as I walked out of the church that morning I was shaking my head in disbelief and muttering to myself:

"A partial Rapture? Are you kidding me?! That turns the Church into the lady who gets sawed in half in a magic show! Rapture? Sounds more like the Rupture!"

I've had a great interest in end-time prophecy for a number of years, and I have studied the major positions concerning the timing of the Rapture in some depth. So, I had at least heard of the partial-Rapture theory before, but I confess that I never bothered to study it in any degree of detail. I assumed it was just another flaky, oddball belief that virtually no one took seriously, so I gave it a pass. I mean, I wouldn't spend a great deal of time and effort studying the details of why certain people believe the earth is flat, either. Why bother? I figured I had better things to do than study something that nobody with a lick of biblical sense would actually believe anyway.

But I had just come face to face with a card-carrying member of the Flat Earth Society, biblically speaking, and my curiosity was piqued. Now, please understand—I am not criticizing our pastor. He's a great guy and a good preacher and we all love him dearly, and so I don't mean to sound like I'm coming against him in some backbiting, un-Christlike manner. I'm not—I just happen to honestly and sincerely disagree with this particular doctrine based on clear teaching in God's Word, and I am perfectly content to do so in the privacy of my own scriptural ruminations.

Which leads me to a personal confession: I've reached the point where I actually prefer it if pastors avoid eschatology for the simple reason that most don't have a solid grounding in it these days. If they do, great—but frankly, most don't. I know it wasn't meant to be this way, but the climate in most modern churches is such that end-time prophecy has become a niche topic that is best left as an area of independent of study.

It's sad but true: When a pastor stands behind the pulpit and takes a clear position on the interpretation of the end-time scenario today, he runs the risk of being drawn and quartered by congregants who accuse him of spewing vile heresies spawned in the pit of hell (unless he's preaching to the choir with a group that he already knows agrees with everything he believes). Many pastors today deliberately steer clear of the end-time stuff because they see it as something controversial, and Rule #1 of church growth today is "Avoid controversy at all costs."

I just couldn't help but wonder how our pastor managed to get involved with a view of the Rapture that, even though at the time I didn't know what verses were being misappropriated to support it, I instinctively knew contradicted some basic tenets of Christian theology. That's what motivated me to learn about the partial-Rapture theory in greater detail so that I would fully understand it, and ultimately reach the point where I could point out to others why it is so wrong and so dangerous.

Hence this article.

There are variations of the partial-Rapture theory out there, and I am not going to spend time running down the nuances of every version. I only feel the need to focus on its central issues, because that is more than sufficient to expose the partial-Rapture theory for what it is: just another variation on Satan's favorite trick—getting sincere born-again believers to doubt their worthiness in the Lord's eyes and fill them with the desire to do things in their own effort to enhance their status with God. In other words, works.

Here is the partial-Rapture theory in a nutshell:

The Rapture will indeed occur prior to the seven-year Tribulation (just as pre-tribbers believe), but not all Christians will be raptured! Only elite Christians who are faithfully and diligently watching for the Lord's return and living overcoming lives will be raptured at that time, leaving a large portion of the less faithful, relatively carnal Church to suffer through the entire Tribulation. The purpose of this, of course, is to snap these average, born-again slugs out of their spiritual slumber and whip them into shape so they can be raptured at the Second Coming (just as post-tribbers believe) and prepare them to enter the Millennial Kingdom.

Again, there are variations (some versions have the remainder of the Church being raptured at the end of the Millennial Kingdom). The primary point, however, is that only part of the Church is rewarded for their great faithfulness and watchfulness by being taken in the Rapture prior to the Tribulation, and the rest of the Church—being the carnal, spiritual slugs that we are—must suffer through the Tribulation in all its cataclysmic horror in order to remove the spots and wrinkles before being considered worthy of being taken to be with the others. In other words, it splits the Church into two parts on the basis of works.

It literally turns the Rapture into the Rupture.

As I read up on this theory, I couldn't shake the sneaking suspicion that it was developed by a post-trib Rapture adherent who actually began to interpret a couple of key Scriptures correctly, but continued to misinterpret many others in ways that support a post-trib Rapture. The end result is something that amounts to a twisted version of the post-trib Rapture that includes a proviso that exempts super Christians from the Tribulation.

Now, to be completely honest, I have long considered the post-trib Rapture theory to be one of the worst pieces of Scripture-twisting I've ever had the misfortune of being exposed to, and one that robs believers of their blessed hope and gets their focus off Jesus and squarely onto their flesh. I am fully convinced from Scripture that the post-trib Rapture theory is one seriously flawed piece of doctrine.

But as bad as the post-trib Rapture is, the partial Rapture is even worse.

While the post-trib Rapture completely robs believers of the blessed hope that is the Rapture (Titus 2:13) and motivates them to store food and guns in the basement and look for the Antichrist, the partial Rapture dangles a carrot under the noses of believers—the possibility that if they are faithful enough or watchful enough or overcoming enough or volunteer for enough church programs or whatever, they might be one of the lucky elite who get to go in the Rapture. It tantalizes believers into working their rear ends off in order to be considered worthy of the Rapture, but leaves them in a constant state of uncertainty as to whether or not their efforts make the cut.

What I would like to do in this article is demonstrate from Scripture as clearly and convincingly as I can that the partial-Rapture theory is a doctrine that is sorely lacking in solid biblical support, and as such can and should be summarily rejected as biblical error. Although I sincerely don't mean to come across as dismissive or disrespectful to any Bible teacher or believer who adheres to this theory, I have to confess that I don't believe in taking prisoners with this sort of stuff. Biblical error that harms the body of Christ is biblical error that harms the body of Christ, and I will come against it full throttle when I feel led to do so.

The genuine article

When bank tellers, federal agents, and other people responsible for detecting counterfeit currency receive training, they're not given counterfeit currency and trained to spot the flaws or inconsistencies. They are given real currency and trained to spot what distinguishes it as real. They feel and examine genuine bills until they are intimately acquainted with every little detail that identifies them as genuine: the feel of the paper, certain areas with raised print or minute ridges, barely perceptible details in the printing, watermarks, holographs, security strips, and other features that are notoriously difficult to reproduce that identify them as real currency.

After spending time becoming extremely well acquainted with the real thing, they are presented with a stack of bills containing a mixture of both real and counterfeit notes, and at that point they are able to pick out the bogus bills with a remarkably high degree of accuracy.

You can't fool them because they're so familiar with the genuine article.

I think it would be instructive to apply this same principle to gain an understanding of what the Bible teaches about what is required to be part of the Church and to be qualified to be included in the Rapture. After we do, it will be far easier to spot false teaching in this regard because it will stand out in sharper contrast to what the Bible clearly says. In other words, we'll be able to easily spot the counterfeits because we'll recognize that they don't line up with the real McCoy.

As I said, partial Rapture adherents believe only members of the Church who are faithfully watching for the Lord's return and whose works make them worthy in some way will be raptured, while most average born-again believers will not be considered sufficiently watchful or faithful in one way or another and will be left behind to suffer through the Tribulation. OK, let's start out by closely examining the real deal.

First of all, how do we qualify to live in God's presence? That's easy: We have to be as righteous as He is. In Jesus' day, the Pharisees were considered the most righteous people on earth by the Jews. They meticulously and obsessively kept the Law of Moses, and the people looked up to them as role models of righteousness. The Pharisees taught—by word and by deed—that righteousness came through observance of the law, and the people of Israel followed their lead, offering the prescribed sacrifices at the prescribed times for the prescribed reasons and scrupulously maintaining the letter of the Law of Moses to the best of their ability.

But when Jesus stood in their midst, He blew their hair back with statements like the following:

Every Jew who heard Jesus say this was no doubt thinking:

"Yikes! How on earth can we be more righteous than the Pharisees?!"

The Law of Moses taught them that murder was a sin, but Jesus taught them that merely hating someone was equally bad. The Law of Moses taught them that adultery was a sin, but Jesus taught them the merely looking at someone with lust in your heart was every bit as much a sin. This line of teaching culminated in Jesus' inscrutable conclusion:

This was a hard teaching to receive—it showed the Jews that righteousness is not merely a matter of external behavior as they had been taught and believed, but was also a matter of internal motivation. Jesus made it clear to the Jews, and ultimately to all of us, that no one can ever be holy or righteous enough to meet God's standard through his own efforts due to the sin nature that infects us all. We just can't do it. That's the whole point.

Jesus taught that righteousness—the kind that would allow people to spend eternity with an infinitely holy God—wasn't through the law, it was through Him and Him alone:

Jesus was born into the world in a body of flesh as the Son of God, lived a sinless life, fulfilled the law perfectly for us because we could never do so, and was crucified to satisfy the Father's justice on our behalf—the just for the unjust, the righteous for the unrighteous:

But how do we appropriate Jesus' perfect righteousness for ourselves? How do we attain it? What do we have to do? Jesus spells out the requirement:

Believe. Believe in Him—believe in who He is, what He did, why He did it, and why it's the only way for you to spend eternity with God. Paul sums it up nicely in Romans:

In Old Testament days, if the Jews had faith in God's promise of a coming Redeemer or Messiah and demonstrated their faith by observing the Law of Moses, God accounted it to them as righteousness. Although they didn't fully grasp it before Christ came two thousand years ago (and most still don't today), in reality their righteousness was still based on faith in Christ—based on faith in what Christ would do in the future as their promised Messiah.

But when Jesus was crucified and resurrected (and the Church was conceived 50 days later), the law was rendered obsolete for those in Christ (Heb. 8:13) and it is only through our belief in faith in the atonement for sin that Jesus made on our behalf that we are made righteous in God's eyes. That's because the moment we believe the gospel in faith, we are in Christ (i.e., a member of the Church), and hence a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17).

God imputes His Son's righteousness to us, and from that moment on He sees us as being as righteous as His Son. We are forgiven of every sin we have ever committed and ever will commit, justified before God, reconciled to Him, and thus qualified to spend eternity with Him in heaven.

From God's point of view, the sinful person we were no longer exists because we've been changed into a saint who is just as righteous as His Son:

And it has nothing whatsoever to do with our works or good deeds:

The moment we believe the gospel in faith, we are born again, or born of the Spirit, who is sealed within us as a down payment (the "earnest") on our future redemption. At that moment, God effectively purchases us as His possession, and He paid a high price indeed—the shed blood of His Son:

At that moment we become a member of the Church, and we always will be:

As a born-again believer and member of the Church, we possess the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit who continues to convict us of sin and prompts us to turn from it, and gradually conforms us to the image of Christ. Of course, we will never achieve Christ-like perfection in this life because we still possess a sin nature that inhabits our flesh, and it wars constantly with the Spirit that dwells within us:

The day will come, however, when we will be made perfect for eternity. Our flesh (which includes our sin nature) will be changed into something that will remain perfect forever: The mortal will put on immortality; the corrupt will put on incorruption (1 Cor. 15:51–53), and we will be perfected in an event known as the Rapture in Evangelical parlance. Hold that thought—we'll get back to that in a moment.

Before we do, however, let's consider how we should think of the Church: as a single spiritual body based on faith, or something divided into parts based on our works?

Well, what does the Word say?

One body.

One new man. One body.

One body. One Spirit. One hope. One Lord. One faith. One baptism. One God.

Call me crazy, but it sure sounds like these verses are telling us in no uncertain terms that the Church is one single, unified spiritual body. And there are plenty more where these came from that say the same thing.

In addition, here are seven different characterizations of the Church found in the New Testament:

1. Christ is the Bridegroom, and the Church is the Bride (2 Cor. 11:2; Eph. 5:25–33; Rev. 19:7–8).

2. Christ is the Good Shepherd, and born-again believers (members of the Church) are His sheep (John 10:1–18).

3. Christ is the last Adam, and each member of the Church is a new creation (1 Cor. 15:45; 2 Cor. 5:17).

4. Christ is the vine, and those who remain in Him (members of the Church) are the fruit-bearing branches. (Those who do not remain in Christ were never in Christ—and hence were never in the Church—to begin with) (John 6:39; 15:1–8; 1 John 2:19).

5. Christ is our King and our High Priest, and the Church is a kingdom of priests (Heb. 4:15; 1 Peter 2:9).

6. Christ is the chief cornerstone, and members of the Church make up the stones in God's building (Eph. 2:19–22).

7. Christ is the head, and the Church is His body (1 Cor. 12:12–31; Eph. 5:30; Col. 1:18).

As you read over the above characterizations of the Church and read the Scriptures referenced, you will quickly notice one thing: There isn't one single word that remotely suggests that the Church is divided in any way whatsoever. There is absolutely no trace of such a concept. Not a hint.

• There isn't one Bride that's drop-dead gorgeous and another Bride that's a real dog.

• There is no mention of a sub-flock of elite sheep and another flock of average sheep.

• There are no premium creations and factory-reject creations.

• All the branches that produce fruit have life, and if they have life they are truly connected to the vine. If they produce zero fruit, they have no life, draw no nourishment from the vine, and so were never truly connected to it. And no distinction of any kind is made among the fruit-bearing branches.

• No mention is made of a group of kings superior to the rest, or priests with more elevated positions than the others.

• Nowhere does it say God's building has a guesthouse out in the backyard to put the poorer quality stones to use.

• And there's no indication that there is a rupture in Christ's body that has left it split into two pieces based on our works.

It goes without saying that these relationships are valid for every single member of the Church—every born-again believer who has trusted in Christ's finished work of atonement for their salvation, and there is nothing here that suggests that these relationships are in any way contingent upon our merits or good works. Quite the contrary—Christ did it all. Thus, any theory that refutes or calls into question any of these relationships risks standing in brazen opposition to the Word of God.

Finally, that brings us back to the Rapture. Of the Church. We need look no further than three of the primary Rapture passages in the Bible to see what we need to see:

We will all be changed. That's all believers—every member of the Church. Not some of us; not an elite few. And it's patently obvious that Paul means all of us at the same time, if plain language means anything at all.

We. It doesn't say some of us will be caught up together with them in the clouds, while the other members of the Church are left behind to lament their unworthiness of being included in the Rapture. Of the Church.

You you you you you. Not a clique composed of the eminently worthy or the super spiritual among you. All of you.

Of course, there are scores of other verses I could quote to spell all of this out in ever finer detail, but the point is made. So, the genuine article could be briefly summarized as follows:

We become a member of the Church in one and only one way: by believing in faith in the finished work of atonement for sin that Christ made for us on the cross. We don't deserve it, can't earn it, and can never lose it—but we must believe it in faith. At the Rapture (whenever it occurs) the Church will be translated to heaven, and it is abundantly clear that this applies to the entire Church—the whole body of Christ.

Notice that I haven't said one single word about the timing of the Rapture, and that's because it's not the central issue here. The real issue is whether the Rapture includes the entire Church as one body at one time, or does it only include an elite portion of the Church, with the less worthy remainder being raptured at a future date (presumably after the horrors of the Tribulation), as the partial-Rapture folks would have us believe.

To their credit, even post-tribbers believe the Rapture includes the entire Church as a single body—pre-tribbers simply disagree with them on the timing relative to the Tribulation.

In other words, refuting the partial Rapture is not just about defending the doctrine of the pre-trib Rapture, or any other position concerning its timing. And ultimately it's not just about the Rapture.

It's about defending the very nature of the Church.

How do they get there?

Now that we have taken time to familiarize ourselves with the genuine article in regard to what it means to be a member of the Church and thus be qualified to go in the Rapture, it should be easier for us to spot the errors in teaching that runs contrary to it, and I don't just mean in regard to the partial-Rapture theory. One of the biggest problems in the Church today is ignorance of the Word. Many Christians just don't know what the Bible teaches in any degree of detail, and so millions of people are being swept away with all manner of false teaching—from preterism to replacement theology, from the Hebrew Roots movement to Kingdom Now theology.

In reality, as far as refuting the partial-Rapture theory is concerned, I could stop right here. I'm done. Now that we have a clear picture of the nature of the Church and what qualifies us to be included in the Rapture, we can state based on the authority of God's Word that the partial Rapture theory contradicts what we know the Bible clearly teaches. The end.

But for the sake of rightly dividing the Word, it is instructive to study not only this but any errant doctrine in some detail to become cognizant of how people twist the Word to make it say things it doesn't say and not say things it clearly does say.

So, the $64,000 question is this:

If it's so clear from the Bible that the Church is one indivisible spiritual body, and the Rapture includes the entire Church as the body of Christ, then where do people get an idea like the partial-Rapture theory, a theory that splits the Church into two groups on the basis of faithfulness or watchfulness, i.e., works? What Scriptures are they looking at, and how are they interpreting those Scriptures? How do they get there?

As I familiarized myself recently with the theory of the partial Rapture, I finally began to see how its adherents were misinterpreting and misapplying certain verses of Scripture, reading things into Scripture that aren't there, and making a variety of exegetical errors in the process. It became clearer to me how they were getting from point A to point B, and effectively coming up with a counterfeit doctrine that could conceivably fool people into thinking it was the genuine article.

Four of the most common types of errors being made by partial-Rapture supporters include the following:

1. Confusing believers with unbelievers.
2. Confusing the Church with Tribulation saints.
3. Confusing the Rapture with the Second Coming.
4. Reading the Rapture into passages that have nothing to do with it.

In the following section of this article, I'd like to discuss a number of verses of Scripture that are the darlings of the partial Rapture crowd, and show you how these verses are being misinterpreted or misapplied to support their view. Multiple errors are often made in the interpretation of a single passage, plus there are other errors being made that don't fit into one of the above four categories. So, I'll just consider the passages one at a time without trying to categorize them in any particular way.

This is not meant to be exhaustive, but I hope that it will be sufficient to demonstrate conclusively that the partial-Rapture theory is so lacking in biblical support that it simply must be rejected as error.

Doing away with the darlings

One of the most common errors made by those trying to support the partial-Rapture theory seems to be confusing believers with unbelievers, especially as it relates to admonitions to "watch" found in the New Testament. Here's one of their favorites:

In the mind of partial-Rapture folks, the suggestion is that good, faithful Christians are the ones who watch, while the lazy slugs in the Church don't, and so miss the Rapture. But is that really what's being taught here?

Let's take a look at the next three verses:

Paul is simply exhorting believers to do what would normally be expected of them, to do what is in keeping with their hope. This is not a distinction between believers who watch and believers who don't—it's a distinction between believers and unbelievers.

Note that when Paul exhorts the Church to watch, he's speaking to the Church as a corporate body. Is he suggesting that some believers who don't watch quite as faithfully or enthusiastically as others are doomed to be left behind? No! He's not threatening or picking on individuals in such verses. He's speaking to the Church as a body, in regard to what is to be normally expected of the Church as a unified entity. As a body, the Church watches for their Lord and Savior. This is true for us as a body.

But do some individual believers get discouraged, or become beaten down by the cares of this world at times and maybe lose sight of the big picture? Sure. There are times when even relatively mature believers seem to be hanging by a thread. Is Paul telling us those believers will be excluded from the Rapture because of that? Not on your life, and here's why.

Notice how verses 7–9 characterize those who don't watch by implied contrast: Apparently those who don't watch are asleep; they are drunk; they don't belong to the day; they aren't sober; they haven't put on the breastplate of faith and love; they haven't put on the helmet which is the hope of salvation; they are appointed to wrath; they aren't appointed to obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Does that describe born-again believers? Uh, no.

Another passage of Scripture commonly cited by partial-Rapture people is from the Olivet Discourse:

Another exhortation to watch, and one that could easily be placed in a couple of our categories of error. For example, the context throughout the entire Olivet Discourse points squarely to Israel during the Tribulation, and has nothing to do with the Church. In fact, a strong case can be made for the fact that the Church is never mentioned and is nowhere in sight anywhere in Matthew 24–25. The Second Coming is clearly what is in view here, which was just described in verses 29–31, and I've dealt with the error of assuming the "elect" in verse 31 refers to the Church in a previous article. I've said it before and I'm gonna keep right on saying it:

As soon as you read the Church anywhere into the Olivet Discourse, the wheels begin to come off.

At any rate, it is clear that the characterization of being drunk and beating one's fellow servants speaks to something far more serious than the mere failure to be sufficiently watchful. Works are in view here, that's true, but they are indicative of either the presence or absence of saving faith, not varying degrees thereof. More importantly, however, the Church is not in view here in the first place. The context is after the Second Coming in verses 29–31, and so deals with those saved during the Tribulation, or Tribulation saints.

Partial-Rapture adherents also appeal to Mark 13:33–37 and Luke 21:36, both exhortations to watch in the context of the Olivet Discourse. These, however, can be similarly dismissed as failing to distinguish between the Church and Tribulation saints.

Two additional points should be noted in Luke 21:36, a verse that partial-Rapture advocates make much of:

Those searching for support for the partial-Rapture theory imagine this to be a reference to the Rapture, with some Christians being "counted worthy" to escape the Tribulation, and for the rest of the Church? See ya, wouldn't wanna be ya.

But here in Luke's version of the Olivet Discourse, just as in Matthew's and just as in Mark's, Israel during the Tribulation is in view—not the Church. Note that this verse does not speak of the deliverance from the time and place of the "hour of trial" (the Tribulation) promised to the Church in Revelation 3:10. Although the eyes of partial-Rapture folks light up when they see the word "worthy" here, in reality a more literal translation of the Greek used in the phrase "be counted worthy to escape (all these things...)" would be "have the strength to flee from (all these things...)," and many translations render the verse in this manner. This makes it crystal clear that this verse is not talking about works in the way partial-Rapture adherents would very much like it to.

This makes perfect sense in the given context because during the Tribulation, people will need all the strength they can get to flee from the earth-shaking events occurring around them. This cannot be the Rapture.

In addition, they try to turn the phrase "stand before the Son of Man" into a reference to the Rapture. Those who survive the Tribulation are in view, and they (both the righteous and the unrighteous) will indeed stand before the Son of Man on earth at the Sheep and Goat Judgment (Matt. 25:31–46). This is not the Rapture.

A couple of other verses where partial-Rapture folks similarly imagine a distinction between believers who are more watchful or faithful in some way and other subpar believers when the distinction is in fact between saved and unsaved people are Revelation 3:3 and 3:10, and I want to touch briefly on 3:10, another partial-Rapture standby:

Here, the works-based principle of the partial-Rapture theory is laid bare. The promise is to remove the Church from the very time and place of the Tribulation, and that promise is being given to people who have clearly demonstrated some degree of works: They have endured patiently in expectation of His coming. There's no disputing that—that's exactly what the verse says. But here's the question:

Are the believers in question being rewarded for their works by being raptured while other substandard believers are not, or does this promise apply to all believers, i.e., the entire Church?

Here's the thing. Yes, salvation is based on faith alone—this is all over the place in the New Testament, and I have already pointed out a few places where this is clearly taught in the first part of this article. We are saved by our faith in the atoning work of Christ and nothing else. But then what?

People who preach works-based salvation love to point to passages like this:

This is admittedly a much debated passage, but I think the end result of Paul's teaching is reasonably clear: Paul is not saying that our works save us—he's saying that our works show that we are saved. Not the same. Paul is saying that those whose lives show no trace of spiritual works of any kind were never truly born-again in the first place, because those who are will show evidence of it in their lives to some degree.

On the other hand, we have verses like this:

Paul is talking about the judgment seat of Christ, or the bema seat, where Christians will be rewarded by the Lord for their works: things they have done in obedience to the Lord, in the Lord's strength, and at the Lord's bidding during their lives. Note that Paul clearly teaches that a believer can be saved and show up at the bema (which occurs after the Rapture, so theB individual in question has undeniably been r-a-p-t-u-r-e-d), and have all their "works" burned away as so much dross although he himself will be saved "as though by fire." In other words, Paul is describing a hypothetical believer who gets raptured along with every other believer and shows up empty-handed in terms of works.

Raptured, rewarded, and ready to rock: In regard to the timing of the bema, it clearly must occur sometime before the Second Coming because when the Church returns to earth with Christ, we have already been rewarded (Rev. 19:7–8). In fact, I believe the bema occurs before the Tribulation even begins, since the 24 elders in Revelation 4 are the raptured Church, and they are already wearing stephanous, or victors' crowns of reward for faithful service, before the Tribulation starts in Revelation 6.

Now, not to put too fine a point on it, but please understand: The above passage of Scripture in 1 Corinthians 3, properly interpreted, effectively crushes the partial-Rapture theory out of existence.

For example, suppose a person gets saved five minutes before the Rapture. He has no clue about end-time events, and barely has any idea that there's even anything to "watch" for. Does he get a raw deal and get left behind? Not according to Paul. OK, so he may not get any reward at the bema seat; but if we believe what Paul wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he's home and dry with the rest of the Church.

The bottom line is that the promise in Revelation 3:10—a promise that removes the Church from earth before the Tribulation begins—applies corporately to the entire undivided body of Christ.

Confusing Church Age believers with Tribulation saints is a classic post-trib error. They read passages in Revelation 6 and 7 where multitudes of martyrs are showing up in heaven during the opening of the seal judgments, and jump to the conclusion that the Church must still be on earth and suffering through the horrors of the Tribulation. Partial-Rapture advocates make the same type of mistake, and the Parable of the 10 Virgins is one example:

They assume the five wise virgins are born-again believers who are watching faithfully, and are prepared to meet the Bridegroom when He comes to "rapture" them. Of course, the five foolish virgins are not watching and are unprepared, and miss the Rapture. Boo hoo.

There are so many problems with applying this parable to the Church that I scarcely know where to begin, but here are a few salient points to consider:

• The "midnight cry" is given when the Bridegroom comes to snatch the Bride (the Church) away: This is the Rapture, and that's what "awakens" the virgins in the first place. The virgins are not the Church and have nothing to do with the Rapture—they missed it, all 10 of 'em.

• The very first verse of the parable (Matt. 25:1) is a time stamp that identifies the timing of the main events of the parable, and it is after the Second Coming (Matt. 24:29–31). Thus, it makes no sense to assume the primary focus is on the Rapture.

• The Church is the Bride (singular), not a gaggle of bridesmaids or virgins—and guess where the Bride is while the virgins are yammering about oil.

• Church Age believers have the Holy Spirit sealed within them, and so cannot "run out" of Him.

• It's not the wedding ceremony (which takes place in heaven) the virgins are granted or denied access to—it's the wedding feast (which takes place on earth) that follows it. This is the Millennial Kingdom, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the Rapture.

One of the most thunderingly obvious problems with trying to interpret the Parable of the 10 Virgins in a way that supports a partial Rapture is the simple fact that all of the virgins are sleeping when the Bridegroom arrives to snatch the Bride away, not just the five foolish. Not one of the 10 virgins is watching in any way. All 10 are fast asleep, and so the idea that the five wise virgins are faithful Christians who are dutifully watching for the Lord's return (and are thus included in the Rapture) and the five foolish are born-again sluggards who aren't (and so miss out) is pretty much out the window.

Here's a slippery one that's held up by partial-Rapture advocates as proof that Paul taught a partial Rapture:

They claim Paul is expressing his hope that he is good enough to "attain to" or "qualify" for the resurrection of the dead in Christ, which is part of the Rapture (1 Thess. 4:16). Long story short: A careful study of the language of this passage reveals that Paul is saying that he hopes he's still alive when the Rapture occurs (which he apparently expected would be the case).

There are a few other verses we could look at, but I trust the errors of the partial-Rapture theory are becoming clearly evident. I'd like to close this out, however, with an example of how partial-Rapture advocates get creative at times and just read the partial Rapture into places where it ain't:

So, obviously "all those who have loved His appearing" are faithful Christians who are watching patiently for the Lord's return (and so will be raptured), as opposed to all those lazy Christians who aren't (and so won't).

*S-i-g-h.* This is the kind of error that just leaves me speechless. It could scarcely be any clearer that Paul is talking about the rewards believers will receive in heaven at the bema seat, not the Rapture itself—which is how we get to the bema seat in the first place!

These potential rewards include at least five different crowns, one of which (the crown of righteousness) is given to those who long for and look forward to the Lord's return. So those who don't long for and look forward to the Lord's return, although they may be born-again and will be raptured along with the entire Church, won't receive this crown at the bema seat.

The bottom line is that the Rapture is not a reward for our works—our faithfulness, watchfulness, etc. Our rewards come after the Rapture, which is our ride to the award ceremony!

And our inclusion in the Rapture was guaranteed the moment we trusted Christ for our salvation, whether we're among the dead in Christ or among those who are alive and remain when it occurs.

Either way, we're there.

Watchfulness, worthiness, and works, oh my!

One reason I felt compelled to spell out in some detail why the partial-Rapture theory is unbiblical is because I sincerely believe it is yet another subtle tactic being used by Satan to divert believers' attention away from the genuine imminence of the Rapture and onto something—anything—else.

For example, in the case of the post-trib Rapture theory, the goal is to get believers to focus on how tough they are—their ability to withstand the terrors and hardships of the Tribulation, and to be physically prepared with food and guns stored in the basement.

In the case of the partial-Rapture theory, however, the goal is to get believers to focus on their state of watchfulness, their worthiness to be raptured, the quality of their works, etc. The goal is to get believers to contemplate their navels, spiritually speaking, and in the process waste time becoming bogged down with the inevitable self-doubts about their watchfulness, worthiness, and works—doubts that can cripple believers' spiritual lives.

Don't look so surprised...this has been Satan's go-to tactic for two thousand years: to suck the life out of believers by steering them onto that futile treadmill of works.

It also drives home the point that the Rapture is indeed getting close. I have never seen such venomous and varied attacks on the biblical doctrine of the pre-tribulation Rapture at any time in my life, and it tells me that Satan is pulling out all the stops to throw believers off track to buy him some time.

Understand that God's Word makes it abundantly clear that the Church is one body united in faith, and that any notion of it being ruptured at the Rapture on the basis of our works is completely alien to its pages.

The only question that matters in regard to the Rapture is whether you are ready, not whether you are worthy.

And the only way to be ready is to have faith in the only one who is worthy.

Greg Lauer — MAR '16

Top of the page

If you like this article, share it with someone!

 MAR '16 

Site Search

Powered by:
JavaScript Kit