Chapter Ten

"Patchwork Exegesis"

            Dispensationalist's declare that those who do not teach PTR are teaching allegorically and figuratively. Actually, this is accusing people of making the very error that they themselves are committing. Famed Baptist theologian A. T. Robertson is alleged by Frank M. Boyd to have said, "Certainly plenty of exegesis is crooked enough (crazy quilted patterns) to call for careful cutting to set it straight." (1)

            I respectfully beg to differ with Mr. Robertson. I find no such "crooked" exegesis" in the Scriptures and I certainly do not condone the "cut and paste" method employed by dispensationalists. God's word flows with Divine Order in a seamless continuum that is easily followed. The moment one begins to "cut and paste" the Scriptures, the door is open for many aberrant interpretations.

            There is a crooked pattern in certain notorious interpretations of the Scriptures, but these interpretations are eisegesis rather than exegesis. Exegetical interpretation of the Scriptures is "critical explanation or analysis, especially of a text.  Eisegetical interpretation of the Scriptures is "that which expresses the interpreter's own ideas, bias, and the like rather than the meaning of the text." Such are the doctrines of Pretribulation Rapture and Unconditional Eternal Security. To interpret the Scriptures so that they appear to authenticate those two doctrines does indeed take some "crooked" exegesis. Consider the following statements by famous promoters of Dispensationalism.

There are also these words written by Dr. Charles Ryrie.

"Dispensationalism at heart is defined by these three things:

Finally, there is this compact, but fairly complete definition given by Dr. James R. Mook.

            By these statements, one can easily see that a dispensationalist looks at the Word of God in a different way than the early Church fathers did. This idea of a consistent Biblical distinction between Israel and the Church is not consistent with the early church and the Scriptures. The above definitions clearly prove that the dispensational interpretation of the Bible is not literal interpretation. Rather, they present a deception that snares people in an expanding and intensifying vortex of error. When one is convinced of dispensationalist claims, it becomes difficult for them to study and understand the Bible with rational consideration of the text. The Bible, when it is studied with such a preconceived notion, becomes the basis for error leading into even more error. Dispensationalists skip back and forth from error to error, weaving a tangled web of error that requires constant explaining and reaffirming to the masses who adhere to it.

            Consider that John Walvrood once wrote, "The fact is that neither Posttribulationism nor Pretribulationism is an explicit teaching of Scripture. The Bible does not, in so many words, state either."(4) However, he has now virtually recanted that statement by expressing an alternate view.

            If he rationally considered his first statement, he would have eventually rejected pretribulation rapture. But because, in my opinion, Mr. Walvrood does not read the Scriptures with an unbiased mind, he cannot possibly see that Jesus taught that the rapture is posttribulational. I agree that PTR is not an explicit teaching of the Scripture, and I beg to differ with Mr. Walvrood concerning his opinion of posttribulation rapture. It is apparent to me that posttribulation rapture is an explicit and implicit teaching in the Scripture. Here it is in very clear terms in both Matthew twenty-four and Luke twenty-one.

            Remember that Jesus taught these things to the Church, not to Israel only (see chapter eight, "The Witness of Matthew"). Therefore, there is a very good reason as to why a pretribulation rapture is not found in Jesus' teachings. It is because He explicitly and implicitly taught Posttribulation Rapture to the first members of His Church; to the first to be blood-washed, born again, and Spirit-filled; to those from whom would come much of the Canon; to those who became the foundation of His Church. Jesus told His Church in Matthew twenty-four and Luke twenty-one that He would redeem them from the world after the Tribulation. Did they get the message?

Peter got the message:

Paul got the message:

John got the message:

            Why did Darby and Scofield not understand it? Why doesn't Lindsey, LaHaye, Ice, Hunt, Hagee, Misler, Church, VanImpe, Walvrood, Jeffrey, LaLonde, and all the rest who are getting wealthy by writing, teaching and hawking pretribulation rapture materials, understand it? The reason that they do not understand what Jesus taught is because each time they study the Bible, they are searching for validation of what they already believe. If one read or studies the Bible with this method and with false doctrine as their presupposition, then they will find Scriptures that appear to give credence to their doctrine. This is why so many false teachers believe that their doctrine is authenticated by the Scriptures. By the way, none of these above mentioned men wrote any part of the Bible; thus, their words are not qualified as proof texts for Dispensationalism or pretribulation rapture. It appears that they are trying to authenticate their presumptuous errors by inserting their words into the Scriptures

            Kenneth Copeland believes that his false doctrine is authenticated by the Scriptures. The Jehovah's Witnesses believe it so strongly that they simply removed or changed all the Scriptures in the Bible that disagreed with their doctrinal positions. Think about this.....there are over 5,700 Protestant organizations, or churches, if you please, and each one of them believe that they have the complete truth.

            Each of these organizations claim that they have Biblical authentication all of their fundamental beliefs. They cannot all be correct. Legalistic and ascetic people believe that they are following literal proof texts, while liberals, who are at the opposite end of the spectrum, also believe that they have proof texts for their positions. Here-and-there hermeneutics is the root of most all false doctrine.

            It is important that all true believers in Christ follow the same standard, so that purveyors of false doctrine cannot jerk a Scripture here and there out of context and out of divine order and apply it any way they please. This standard that we all should employ is the method of proper hermeneutics which was evident in the early Church fathers before the corruption of Constantine . Applying proper hermeneutics will send Dispensationalism, which is actually quite a new doctrine, and its off shoot, pretribulation rapture, back into the oblivion from whence it came. In fact, it will send a lot of false doctrine back into the abyss of personal opinion. Again, I want to point the reader to the words of James Stalker in the following paragraph concerning the religious leaders of Jesus' time:

            Here are the major traditional views of Revelation that have been around for some time.

Four Traditional Views of Revelation:

            The fifth and newest view is Dispensationalism. Dispensationalism breaks the Bible up into seven dispensations. They are as follows:

            I said that I would prove beyond any doubt that PTR is false, and that I would do so from literal and correct hermeneutics, which is proper contextual and exegetical interpretation of the Scriptures. The reader may not understand clearly what I am about to reveal, unless he approaches this issue with an open mind, free from false teaching, with no pre-conceived notions, and with willingness to let the Bible speak for itself. I realize that this will be extremely difficult for many people who have been raised up in churches that teach Dispensationalism, but they should try anyway.

            I personally know how hard it is to dismiss something that you have been taught all your Christian life. I was not trying to prove PTR false when I began studying eschatology in the Scriptures. On the contrary, I was trying to find Scriptural support for it, and discovered that there was none. This led me to dig deeper into the history of the doctrine. As a result, I came to the realization that many have been deceived by the vain opinions of men, and that this false doctrine should be soundly rejected. This was followed by a period of silent opposition to Dispensationalism that went on for several years. I finally realized that I have to be true to my soul, and I speak what I believe to be the truth. What I am about to reveal to you is what I first discovered when I began studying God's Word concerning Pretribulation Rapture.

Literal Interpretation?

            Dispensationalists and most pretribulation rapturists declare that they are the only ones who interpret the Bible literally. Do they truly interpret the Bible literally? We shall see in this chapter if this is so as we turn to the literal interpretation of the Scriptures and compare what some leading pretribulation rapturists declare as literal interpretation. I believe that some of you will rub your eyes, and maybe even wonder if someone forgot to send 3-D glasses with your copy of God's Word. Some of the words that PTR proponents declare with great confidence are in the Bible do not appear on its pages. Could this be a wrongful application of the scripture "-- calls those things which do not exist as though they did" (Rom 4:17 NKJV)?

            Since there are no Scriptures to support the errant doctrine of Pretribulation Rapture, the promoters and advocates of the doctrine abuse the Scriptures concerning the coming of the Lord. Tim LaHaye declares that second Thessalonians 2:1-12 "contains the Rapture, Tribulation, and Glorious appearing all in one chapter" (6), a statement that I totally agree with. However, the section heading reads PRETRIBULATIONISM IN ONE CHAPTER, which is certainly not the truth.   There is no timing prefix in second Thessalonians 2:1-2, but there is a timing for the rapture and it is most certainly after the Antichrist is revealed and sets up the abomination of desolation which occurs at the mid-tribulation point. Mr. LaHaye would have the first verse to read; "Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our pretribulation gathering together to Him," which would be adding to the Scripture. What one does discover when a proper reading is applied to that chapter is unshakable proof that no pretribulation rapture is found in second Thessalonians 2:1-12.  Now read what LaHaye goes on to write, as he imposes Darbyism on the text.

Paul then follows with one of the most detailed descriptions in the New Testament of the Antichrist's activities, which he places between these two distinct events. Just as John locates the Antichrist's coming before the Glorious Appearing in the Book of Revelation, so Paul in this passage does the same. "The day of Christ" is the public appearance of Christ to the earth, which will not take place until the man of sin, the son of perdition, that lawless one will be destroyed by the Lord, "at the brightness of His coming" -- the Glorious Appearing." (7) (emphasis mine)

            Here is Mr. LaHaye's first error in attempting to add to the Scripture. He wrote; "The Second Coming refers to the two phases separated by seven years." The scriptures in question declare no such thing and neither is such a thing found anywhere in the Bible. What Paul really taught is plain for all to see. It is obvious that LaHaye does the same thing Darby and Scofield have done in that he disputes and even denies the very literal words of the Bible, and inserts his own words instead. Read carefully the verses in question, and see if you can find any of the pretribulational proofs or the words that LaHaye says are in them.

            The literal reading of these Scriptures indicates that the "coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him" is on that Day, which is the day of Christ which is His coming. Paul does not insert any events, timing prefixes or the other words LaHaye mentions between these two events, but presents them as happening simultaneously. There is no mention of "seven years" or of pretribulation rapture or of two phases in one advent. The "coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together unto Him" occurs after the Antichrist is revealed and sets up the abomination of desolation. This is absolutely and impeccably clear in the Scriptures.

            It is a bizarre and weird thing for LaHaye to insert PTR into 2 Thessalonians 2:1-3. One could almost expect him to go on to teach visualization techniques, since he attempts to convince us to read words that do not exist. Can you imagine what a farce Bible interpretation would be if this hermeneutical method were accepted across the whole of Christianity on every topic? I am beginning to wonder if this type of precedent is the reason that we have so many false doctrines today flooding the Church, all claiming to be based on the Word of God. To compound the problem, LaHaye goes on to insist that the Word of God is not true and that his interpretation is correct.

            I feel pity and embarrassment for LaHaye and other men like him though they are obviously intelligent and accomplished men. I even began to wonder about his ethics when I read his book Rapture Under Attack. I am sorry to have to say that, but he does say some things in that book that I consider unethical. He forcibly mingles PTR with the traditional posttribulation view in order to give age, tradition, and the blessings of the early Church fathers to his doctrine. In chapter eleven, I clearly show that the early Church fathers not only disbelieved PTR, but did not even consider it in any of their writings. However, they did consider a catching away or gathering together to Christ at His coming, which LaHaye erroneously labels the pretribulation rapture. I also consider it unethical for him to declare that the Second Coming and the rapture are found in one chapter, and then put as a topic heading PRETRIBULATION IN ONE CHAPTER, which is completely and obviously untrue.

            Dr. LaHaye also in my opinion preys on the past pain of Dave MacPherson to discredit MacPherson's book, and even makes insidious remarks about Marvin Rosenthal to taint his motives for writing Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church. Instead of considering that people have valid reasons for opposing PTR, he attempts to paint tawdry word pictures of everyone who makes a valid and significant effort to refute that false doctrine. He does this while, in my opinion, pretending to be sincerely puzzled as to why they would oppose a blatantly false and unbiblical doctrine.

            Pretribulation rapture proponents, such as Dr. LaHaye, wonder why they are under such an "attack," as they call it, yet there is no way one can present the truth to them without eliciting a harsh emotional reaction from them when their errors are exposed. They turn every attempt to present the truth into an attack and respond with an attack of their own.  Such a reaction borders on a persecution complex.  It is at the least fabricating a battle that was not intended to be. 

            I have never encountered a more mean-spirited group of people than pre-tribbers whose doctrine has been challenged. As I wrote previously, it is as if Darby's spiteful spirit came attached with his errant doctrine. The very title of LaHaye's book is an inflammatory attempt to rally the pretribulation masses against everyone who has a conflicting opinion. It is for these reasons that I believe his unfounded, unethical attack on MacPherson is dirty pool. If he believes that McPherson is attacking Pretribulation Rapture out of hurt, maybe he should set a Christian example to provide healing and reconciliation. Instead, he fails to heed the advice that he quotes in his book, such as this by Dr. Gearld Stanton:

            I could not have put it better,  Therefore, I hope that LaHaye and other pre-tribbers will take note, and that Stanton will also heed his own words.

            Commendation needs to be given here to Marvin Rosenthal and the wonderful Christian spirit he portrays in the writing of his book. He is certainly a man to be emulated as to the proper way to write a controversial book. Nevertheless, Tommy Ice even attacked him by comparing the spirit in him to the spirit in Hitler in his article entitled "Is the Pre-trib Rapture a Satanic Deception?" under the sub topic called "The Big Lie."

            Marvin Rosenthal is Jewish and has been one of Christianity's strongest supporters of Israel.  To make such a remark as this about a Jewish man with obvious integrity after all that the Jewish people suffered under Hitler is inexcusable. The fact is that people like Thomas Ice dismay me with their condescending ways and pretenses of supernatural knowledge. Therefore, I have to pray a lot about what I write in my rebuttal of pretribulation rapture. I cannot stress enough the un-Christlike attitudes and unethical actions of pretribulation rapture proponents. I will not relate my personal experiences with such people in this document, lest they also accuse me of improper motives.   It is most certainly not my intent to injure the godly men for whom I have great respect although I strongly disagree with them on this topic.  I cannot ignore anyone's contributions to the Body of Christ and their obvious Christian character.   Some of these men have truly stood against evil and did their best to honor God in their lives.

Shall We Suffer for Christ?      

            The fact that the Church has never been exempted from suffering should be enough to let us know that the last days will indeed be fraught with persecution.  Even now millions of Christians are suffering for their faith.  Untold numbers are imprisoned, beaten, robbed, rapped, tortured, exiled and murdered because of their faith.  These great numbers of faithful believers are already in great tribulation.  Dr. LaHaye said that their tribulation will be nothing like what the Great Tribulation will be.  I beg to differ.  All we see announced in the way of persecution for the people of God in Revelation is the merciful execution style of beheading.  Every other type of persecution that occurs during the tribulation is exactly what we see occurring right now.  Consider the scriptures in Matthew 24.

(Mat 24:9-10 NKJV)  "Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name's sake. {10} "And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another.  

            However, many leading PTR proponents continually enlist blatant departures from literal interpretation of the Scriptures in their war against the thought of having to suffer for the sake of Christ. To defend and promote PTR, they add their opinions to the Word of God in a concert of poor hermeneutics to turn Scriptures ever so slightly into Pretribulation Rapture Scriptures. The fallacy of such action is apparent, when you look at a few key Scriptures in the Bible.

            First, let us look at the following Scriptures that depict an eschatological order, and see if a pretribulation rapture is included.

            Here, Paul gives an order of eschatological events. Strangely absent is a double coming of Christ called the rapture. Here is the order:

            You will see this order concerning the coming of Christ repeated throughout the New Testament. There is no indication that Paul is changing directions in the fifty-first verse when he informs us about the coming of the Lord. The only way that verses fifty-one through fifty-seven could be interpreted to pertain to a separate event called the rapture is if someone were to come to these Scriptures with a preconceived notion of such. In a moment, we will move on to the next selection of Scriptures, because the next verses tie in very well with 1 Corinthians fifteen.

            In W. E. Blackstone's colossal book, Jesus is Coming, he puts a chart on page 101 of 1 Corinthians 15: 23-24. "They that are Christ's at his coming" is broken into two parts.

            Of course, this was an alteration of the Scriptures. There is not even a hint of this sort of interpretation or wording in 1 Corinthians 15:23-24. We can find the word "gathering" in 2 Thessalonians 2:1 pertaining to the Church, but the timing Paul presents is certainly during some part of the Tribulation. I am glad that W. E. Blackstone recanted and became opposed to the Pretribulation Rapture doctrine. For that courageous deed, he has my utmost regard. However, his book is included in the history of PTR and has therefore contributed to the dissemination of the doctrine into the Church. I feel justified in pointing out the error of Blackstone's interpretation of 1 Corinthians 15:23-24, because it is the same style of faulty interpretation that is still used today by dispensationalists.

Famous Pretribulation Misinterpretations

            When we look at the famous "pretribulation rapture scriptures", we discover that they are simply Scriptures about the coming of the Lord. Just look at them in detail, and compare them to the Scriptures that pretribulation rapturists agree are in fact Second Advent Scriptures.

            Again, let us look at the contextual setting of these Scriptures. This time we must look ahead to the following Scriptures to see the continuation of what Paul is saying in the verses above.

            The fact that he starts the first verse of chapter 5 with "But" shows that there is a continuation. He says that Christians should be watching for this coming of the Lord. If it is the pretribulation rapture, then it is immediately followed by sudden destruction. Pre-tribbers have always declared that the rapture will be followed by the man of sin being revealed, the antichrist. They declare that the Antichrist will come with false peace.

            One has to presuppose that dispensationalism is correct and impose the results on the Scripture in order to dismiss the fact that Jesus never taught Pretribulation Rapture. To do this is a hermeneutical folly. We cannot establish a doctrine and then try to conform the Bible to it. Rather, we have to accept the Word and dismiss everything that does not conform to it. PTR does not conform to the Word of God. It is a mystery how Thomas Ice, noted dispensationalist and executive director of the Pre-Trib Research Center , can make statements such as the following:

            It is unnatural to read that Mr. Ice believes that anyone who does not agree with pretribulation rapture is interpreting the Bible figuratively or allegorically. (12) I have also read in the Thomas Ice article "Literal Interpretation of Bible Prophecy: Help or Hindrance?" where Ice writes,

            When you consider how they all interpret Matthew twenty-four, these statements are confusing. In fact, there is nothing about dispensationalism that corresponds with literal interpretation of the Bible. I believe in interpreting the Bible literally. In fact, many people that I know who oppose dispensationalism and PTR do so on the grounds that these doctrines do not allow for literal interpretation of the Bible. The entire crux of dispensationalism is based on eisegetical interpretation. Eisegetical interpretation of the Scriptures is "that which expresses the interpreter's own ideas, bias, and the like rather than the meaning of the text."(14) Exegetical interpretation of the Scriptures is "critical explanation or analysis, especially of a text." (15)

            Consider how Scofield denies the words of Christ in the following passage of Scripture that seems to prove the post-tribulational rapture.

            Obviously the tares, who are the children of Satan, are gathered first into judgment by angels at the end of the world. Here are Scofield's notes concerning the same passage. Notice that these notes blatantly contradict the words of Jesus Christ.

Scofield on the 24th verse:

"The parable of the wheat and tares is not a description of the world, but of that which professes to be the kingdom."(16)

Jesus speaking the 24th verse:

"Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:

Jesus explaining the 24th verse:

"The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; the enemy that sowed them is the devil."

Scofield explaining 30th verse:

"At the end of this age the tares are set apart for burning, but first the wheat is gathered into the barn."(17)

Jesus speaking the 30th verse:

"Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn."

Jesus explaining the 30th verse:

"As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear."

            Consider how Darby denies the very words of the Apostle Paul in his Synopsis of Revelation 4:1.

Darby on 2 Thessalonians 2:

The Apostle Paul in 2 Thessalonians:

            The "falling away" in Strong's Greek dictionary is number 646, apostasia, ap-os-tas-ee'-ah; fem. of the same as G647; defection from truth (prop. the state) ["apostasy"]:--falling away, forsake. How can intelligent, university-trained people get so off the mark with their doctrine? This mystery has been a common occurrence throughout history. In fact, almost all of the false doctrine that has survived in professing Christianity has been produced by highly intelligent people. Not all were trained in a university, but their doctrine eventually was accepted and promoted by scholars.

            There is a very good reason for this phenomena. First of all, God does not place emphasis on the intelligence of people, no matter how great their intelligence may be. He places all emphasis on full surrender and total obedience to His will. The apostle Paul undoubtedly a highly intelligent man, but he did not see the truth until he fully surrendered to God's will. Although his intelligence is obvious in his writings, his full surrender is much more obvious. Paul placed the emphasis on God's wisdom rather than on the wisdom of men.

            The problem with having great intelligence is the overwhelming tendency to trust in it more than in God's wisdom, a problem which often leads people to thrust their carnal intelligence on the Scriptures. Many highly intelligent people have little tolerance for those whom they consider intellectually inferior to them. This is the pride factor at work, which is a killer of spirituality. It is difficult for intellectuals to be emotional about God. In fact, many believe that it is only the ignorant that show raw emotion. They also have difficulty receiving ministry from someone whom they consider to be too emotional or not intelligent enough. All of these factors indicate a malignant confidence in human intelligence. God's wisdom comes through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

            The Pharisees considered the disciples Peter and John to be ignorant and unlearned, though they recognized these men had been with Jesus. However, they themselves could not understand the words of Christ. The wisdom of God is made available to the believer through the indwelling of the Holy Sprit. This wisdom has maximum results only in people who are fully surrendered and totally obedient to God, whether regardless of their level of intelligence. God made our minds, and can certainly supply what is lacking (thank God!).

            Now, here is the heart of the matter. Pride in one's intelligence will circumvent the knowledge and wisdom of God. The carnal mind inflates with power, as pride infuses it with self-sufficiency. Jesus really put a pin in the balloon of pride when He said the following:

Paul reiterated Jesus' teaching by declaring the following:

            Dispensationalism is, in the words of pretribulationalist's, difficult to understand. The reason is that the doctrine has moved away from the simplicity of the gospel and into the arena of human intelligence. Here, the intellectuals have created a myriad of doctrines that need their constant help and attention to explain. They can ever learn and never come to a knowledge of the truth while supplying an endless stream of their efforts to the masses that they have kept mesmerized by their skills in "prophecy teaching."

            Whatever God has, He has for us all, not for just a gifted few. If He has not revealed it, we will only get ourselves in trouble trying to do so ourselves (i.e. the day and hour of His coming). The fact that many professing Christians do not understand and cannot explain dispensationalism is proof that the words of man have been mingled with the Word of God through the advent of reference Bibles or study Bibles. The culpability rests with those who continue to profit from the conundrum that they have helped to create instead of repenting and setting matters right before God and His people.

  Chapter Eleven