The Rapture

I believe the rapture will follow the tribulation. Since the Second Coming and the rapture are described together in Scripture without any statement about an intervening time gap, it is natural to assume both to be posttribulational. If the rapture were pretribulational we would expect to see some clear indication to that effect in the passages that teach about the rapture. I find no such statements in Jn.14:3, 1 Co.15:51,52 or 1 Thes.4:13-18. In fact, I find the opposite. References to the last trumpet (1 Co.15:52, 1 Thes.4:16) call to mind the posttribulational coming of Christ (Mt.24:31), as do other similarities between the rapture passages and the Olivet Discourse (a heavenly event with angels, clouds, the gathering of God’s people, etc. See also Isa.27:12,13, which must also be posttribulational). Given the fact that the rapture and the Second Coming seem to be spoken of as happening together, the burden of proof is upon those who would suggest a time gap. I have not found the arguments for a pretribulational rapture compelling (see below for my responses to 50 pre-trib arguments).

1. The warnings to the churches

I believe the letters to the churches in Rev.2,3 imply that the Church will experience the tribulation described later in the book. While the comments to each church vary, one constant in all seven letters is the fact that the promises regarding eternal life are extended only to those who “overcome” (2:7,11,17,26, 3:5,12,21). Later, the martyrs are described as those who “overcame” (12:11, 15:2). Finally, in the description of the New Jerusalem, the Lord restates the fact that it is the one who overcomes who will inherit it (Rev.21:7). At the end of the Apocalypse, after many chapters about the Tribulation, the Lord points out that this information is directed not to some other category of tribulation saints, but to the Church (Rev.22:16).

2. The warnings to the disciples

According to the pre-trib view the many warnings regarding the Tribulation do not apply directly to us. They apply, rather, to the “Tribulation saints” who will be on earth during the Tribulation after the Church is raptured. These warnings are prolific in the New Testament and are quite emphatic. In each of Jesus’ major discourses directed to believers (with the exception of the Sermon on the Mount), the Lord devotes a substantial percentage of the discourse to warnings regarding the Tribulation, and calls for perseverance to the end.[1] The purpose of these warnings about the Tribulation is to exhort believers to be prepared so they do not go astray (Jn.16:1).
When Jesus speaks so earnestly and so often and so passionately about a warning, we should be very cautious about any doctrine that would dismiss those warnings as non-applicable to us unless something in Jesus’ words would indicate they are not for believers in general. But just the opposite is true. Jesus speaks regarding the coming Tribulation in Lk.17:22-18:8, a lesson that applies to the disciples (18:1) and is a teaching regarding the perseverance of believers through the difficult period preceding the Second Coming (17:30, 18:6-8).

3. The chronology in the Epistles

Paul told the Thessalonians that deliverance from their opponents would come on the day when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels (2 Thes.1:7), and that our being gathered to him will not take place until the man of lawlessness is revealed (2 Thes.2:3). The Day of the Lord will not surprise believers and overtake them like a thief – not because they will have already been raptured, but because they will be alert (1 Thes.5:4-6).

4. The nature of our “meeting” Him

In 1 Thes.4:17 we learn that at the rapture we will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. The word translated “meet” (ἀπάντησις) is a technical term that refers to the ancient custom in which people from a town would go out to “meet” an approaching dignitary for the purpose of accompanying him back to the town they had just come from.[2] While the word does not have to always mean this, it is the normal use, and it is consistent with the only other times the term is used in Scripture (Mt.25:6, Acts 28:15).

5. Jesus placed the rapture after the Tribulation

Finally, I believe the most natural way to interpret Mt.24:31-42 (particularly v.31) is as a reference to the rapture. Verse 39 refers to those taken away (αἴρω) by the flood. The idea of this term is to pick up and carry away. The term, “taken” in vv.40,41 however (παραλαμβάνω), is more naturally translated, “to take with” than “to bring along.” The term “left” often means “to be left behind.” I believe v.31 and vv.41,42 both refer to the rapture.

What about imminence?

Even though I believe the revelation of the Antichrist will precede the rapture, I still hold to the importance of the doctrine of imminence. The fact that Christ will come soon is a theme that is repeated in the NT, and we are to look to that event with an eager expectation (Ro.13:12, 1 Co.1:7,8, Php.3:20, Tit.2:13, Jas.5:8-9, 1 Jn.2:18, Rev.22:7,12,18,20). While these passages refer to His coming as “almost here,” “near,” and “soon;” and to this time as the “last hour,” there is no passage I am aware of that indicates that His coming can be any second. The Rapture (and Second Coming) is impending and could happen soon. I think it is going too far, however, to say that “near” must mean “any split-second.” In fact, Scripture speaks of clearly posttribulational events as being “near” and “about to begin” (1 Pe.4:7, 5,17).
As convinced as I am that the rapture will follow the Tribulation, I also believe that the primary point of the Olivet Discourse is that since apocalyptic prophecy is not intended to give us exact precision in setting times and dates, every believer of every age at every moment must be prepared for Christ’s return.

Response to Arguments for a Pre-Trib Rapture of the Church

These arguments for a pretribulational rapture were given to me by someone who said they came from John Walvoord. The 50 arguments presented to me in this paper are in this font, and my responses are in this font. I did not respond to arguments against the mid-trib view, as I agree with those arguments.

1. The early church believed in the imminence of the Lord’s return, which is an essential doctrine of pretribulationism.

It’s true that they looked for an imminent return, and rightfully so. The NT says that His coming is “near” (Jas.5:8).
However1Pe.4:7 says The end of all things is near. Obviously the end of all things would have to be after the Tribulation. So the biblical definition of imminent (near) doesn’t mean “any moment” – it can refer to something that is after the Tribulation.

The detailed development of pretribulational truth during the past few centuries does not prove that the doctrine is new or novel. Its development is similar to that of other major doctrines in the history of the church.
I do not argue against pretribulationism based on its recent development.

Hermeneutics

3. Pretribulationism is the only view, which allows literal interpretation of all Old and New Testament passages on the great tribulation.

No view of the rapture can or should interpret figurative passages as literal.

Only pretribulationism distinguishes clearly between Israel and the church and their respective programs.
This is incorrect. The promises made to ethnic Israel will be fulfilled in the Kingdom period regardless of the timing of the rapture. Whatever distinctions are made in Revelation between Israel and the Gentile Tribulation saints in the pre-trib. view can also be true of the distinctions between Israel and the Church in the post-trib view.

Nature of the Tribulation

5. Pretribulationism maintains the Scriptural distinction between the great tribulation and tribulation in general which preceded it. II Timothy 3

So does Post-trib.

6. The great tribulation is properly interpreted by pretribulationists as a time of preparation for Israel’s restoration (Deuteronomy 4:29,30; Jeremiah 30:4-11). It is not the purpose of the tribulation to prepare the church for glory.
The post-trib view does not deny that God will use suffering to bring Israel to repentance. There is no passage that indicates the Church will be preserved from trouble (in fact, just the opposite). The Tribulation will be a time of testing. In Rev.3:10 it is called the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth.

Is it not possible that God could accomplish both purposes (restoration of Israel and testing of everyone) imultaneously? Neither Dt.4:29,30 nor Jer.30:4-11 say anything that would exclude God from accomplishing another purpose at the same time. The first statement in point 6 does not exclude a post-trib rapture, and the second statement is without foundation or support.

7. None of the Old Testament passages on the tribulation mention the church. (Deuteronomy 4:29,30; Jeremiah 30:4-11; Daniel 9:24-27; 12:1,2)

None of the Old Testament passages about the first coming of Christ mention the Church either. The Church was a mystery in Old Testament times.

Besides, that argument from silence does not prove anything. If it did, how would the pre-tribulationalist explain the fact that the term “Israel” never appears in the entire Olivet Discourse (Mt.24,25) – Jesus’ explanation of the end times, and the only place in the Bible where the term Great Tribulation appears? Does this prove that Israel will not be in the Tribulation or the Kingdom?

8. None of the New Testament passages on the tribulation mention the church. (Matthew
24:15-31; 1 Thessalonians 1:9,10; 5:4-9; Revelation 4-19)

Revelation 4-19 mentions the saints repeatedly. Throughout the NT, “the saints” always refers to the Church. We see the saints 15 times in Revelation after chapter 3 – in almost every chapter. There is no textual reason for assuming these saints are any different from the saints referred to everywhere else in the NT. That assumption is made purely for the purpose of conforming the book of Revelation to fit a certain theological system.
It is possible to refer to the Church without using the word “church,” just as it is possible to refer to Israel without using the term “Israel” (the term “Israel never appears in chapter 20, which describes the Millennial Kingdom – does that mean there are no Jews in the Kingdom?)

So even if the word “church” never appeared after chapter three, it would not be evidence that the Church had been raptured. The actual term, however, does appear after chapter three. If we want to know to whom the book of Revelation is directed, the Lord Himself tells us: Rev.22:16 I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches.

So the churches are sent letters warning them to be overcomers (a warning repeated to every one of the seven churches – 2:7,11,17,26, 3:5,12,21), then the book goes on to define the overcomers as those who are faithful through the coming tribulation (12:11, 15:2). Finally, in the description of the New Jerusalem, the Lord restates the fact that it is the one who overcomes who will inherit it (Rev.21:7-8). If you received a letter like that, wouldn’t you assume He is talking to you?

9. In contrast to midtribulationism, the pretribulational view provides an adequate explanation for the beginning of the great tribulation in Revelation 6. Midtribulationism is refuted by the plain teaching of Scripture that the great Tribulation begins long before the seventh trumpet of Revelation 11.

10. The proper distinction is maintained between the prophetic trumpets of Scripture by pretribulationism. There is no proper ground for the pivotal argument of midtribulationism that the seventh trumpet of Revelation is the last trumpet in that there is no established connection between the seventh trumpet of Revelation 11, the last trumpet of I Corinthians 15:52, and the trumpet of Matthew 24:31. They are three distinct events.

There are numerous references to trumpets in prophetic passages. In the Pre-trib scheme, the very first one is the one mentioned in 1 Co.15:52, which even Walvoord admits refers to the rapture. But that very passage calls it the last trumpet. Jesus clearly taught that His Second Coming would be heralded by a loud trumpet call (Mt.24:31). Later, when writing about the end times, Paul refers to the last trumpet. Since it has the definite article (the), it refers to the trumpet that is associated with the end times. This, combined with the fact that it is the last trumpet would most certainly call to mind Jesus’ words. The most natural interpretation is to take this as the reference to what Jesus was talking about in His definitive sermon on the subject.

11. The unity of Daniel’s seventieth week is maintained by pretribulationists. By contrast, midtribulationism destroys the unity of Daniel’s seventieth week and confuses Israel’s program with that of the church.

The Nature of the Church

12. The translation of the church is never mentioned in any passage dealing with the second coming of Christ after the tribulation.

This argument is circular in that it assumes its conclusion. It is assumed by pretribulationists that any passage that refers to the rapture cannot be talking about the Second Coming, and any passage that is talking about the Second Coming cannot be talking about the rapture. Then it is asserted that no passage talks about both together.
The truth is, every passage that talks about the rapture connects it with the second coming.

1Th.4:13-5:1
According to the Lord’s own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord (The most natural reading of the phrase the coming of the Lord is to understand it as a reference to the Second Coming. Certainly if Paul wanted us to think of something other than the Second Coming he could have used some other phrase besides the coming of the Lord. The only reason that phrase wouldn’t be taken to refer to the Second Coming is because of a theological bias.) will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, (same language of Mt.24, where the Second Coming is in view) and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.

(What foundation is there for making v.17 suddenly refer to 7 years earlier?)

1Co 15:50-54
Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed- 52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. (Jesus talked about that final day when He appears at His second coming being announced with a trumpet. If this trumpet is 7 years prior, in what sense could it be the last trumpet?) For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable…

So the most natural interpretation is to take the rapture and second coming as a single event that all occurs at the same time.

Is it possible that there is a hidden 7 year gap in the middle that we can’t see because of the telescoping of the prophecies? I do not believe there can be a 7 year gap for the following reasons:

1. When something is hidden, it’s truly hidden. If this were a hidden gap, no one would know about it. Truths that were hidden in the OT were not known by anyone until they were clearly revealed in the NT. At any given time, a truth is either revealed or it is hidden.

2.In 2 Thes.1:7 Paul told the Thessalonians that their deliverance from their opponents would come on the day when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels. The Thessalonians were part of the Church, and their deliverance was to come not seven years prior to the Second Coming, but at the Second Coming.

3.2 Thes.2:3 our being gathered to him will not take place until the man of lawlessness is revealed. This rules out an any-moment rapture before the man of lawlessness is revealed.

4.(most important – and the reason why I now believe this is a doctrine worth debating) The Church is repeatedly warned to persevere through the Tribulation. The Lord Jesus gave us many, very strongly worded warnings urging us to be prepared for the Tribulation. We should be very slow to develop any doctrine that would cause us to disregard all of them and say, “That doesn’t apply to me.” If Jesus considered the warnings that important, the consequences for the pretribulationist who disregards them will be dire if the warnings are indeed intended for the Church. Perhaps this is why Jesus said when the trouble comes, the love of most will grow cold (Mt.24:12). They will be unprepared for the suffering.

In each of Jesus’ major discourses directed at believers (with the exception of the Sermon on the Mount), the Lord devotes a substantial percentage of the discourse to warnings regarding the Tribulation, and calls for perseverance to the end (the commissioning of the twelve in Mt.10:17-36, the Olivet Discourse in Mt.24:1-25:46, The Upper Room Discourse in Jn.15-17). The purpose of these warnings about the Tribulation is to warn believers to be prepared so they do not go astray (Jn.16:1).

Jesus did the same thing in smaller discourses as well. In Lk.17:22-18:8 Jesus talks about the Tribulation. This is clearly a lesson that applies to the disciples (18:1) and is a teaching regarding the perseverance of believers through the difficult period preceding the Second Coming (17:30, 18:6-8).

13. The church is not appointed to wrath (Romans 5:9; 1 Thessalonians 1:9,10; 5:9). The Church therefore cannot enter “the great day of their wrath” (Revelation 6:17).

The believers in Rev. are never the object of God’s wrath. In fact, they will be kept from God’s wrath (18:4). Every believer, including Tribulation saints, is saved from God’s wrath (Ro.5:9,3:25). If the only way to be delivered from God’s wrath is to not be present on the earth, then how do we explain the Tribulation saints being present on the earth at the Tribulation and still being saved from God’s wrath?

Rev.3:10 says Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth.

We know from the similar uses of the terms in the NT that the phrase keep you from means “preserve while in the sphere of.”

Jn.17:15 My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you keep them from the evil one. (the only other use of the identical phrase) Here Jesus clearly teaches the doctrine of preservation without physical removal, and He uses this very same phrase to do it.

Ac 15:29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to keep yourself from these things.

Things like sexual immorality will always be a threat, and you can’t totally remove yourself from the presence of it. However it is possible to keep yourself from it even while the temptation is present in your midst.

As for the argument that they are delivered from the time period itself, which can only mean removal – Jn 12:27 says “Now my heart is troubled, and what shall I say? `Father, save me from this hour’? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour. That is not a reference to a time period but to the suffering that would take place in that time period.

14. The church will not be overtaken by the Day of the Lord (I Thessalonians 5:1-9) which includes the tribulation.
The Day of the Lord will not surprise believers and overtake them like a thief, not because they will be absent, but because they will be alert (1 Thes.5:4-6).

15. The possibility of a believer escaping the tribulation is mentioned in Luke 21:36.
Again, even the Tribulations saints can escape the tribulation. Escaping the tribulation means enduring it without turning away from the faith.

16. The church of Philadelphia was promised deliverance from “the hour of trial, that hour which is to come upon the whole world, to try them that dwell upon the earth” (Revelation 3:10).

See the answer in #13.

17. It is characteristic of divine dealing to deliver believers before a divine judgment is inflicted upon the world as illustrated in the deliverance of Noah, Lot, Rahab, etc. (II Peter 2:6-9)

The greatest act of God’s deliverance in the OT was the deliverance from Egypt, where the Israelites, while delivered from the judgments, were present at the time, and were inconvenienced by them to say the least.

18. At the time of the translation of the church, all believers go to the Father’s house in heaven (John 14:3), and do not immediately return to the earth after meeting Christ in the air as posttribulationists teach.

John 14:3 does not say that we immediately go to heaven right at the time of the rapture, nor does it say that there is no return to earth. Obviously, not every prophecy mentions every detail of what happens. For example, Jn.14:3 doesn’t mention the resurrection either, but we do not conclude from that that there is no resurrection.

19. Pretribulationism does not divide the body of Christ at the rapture on a works principle. The teaching of a partial rapture is based on the false doctrine that the translation of the church is a reward for good works. It is rather a climatic aspect of salvation by grace.

20. The Scriptures clearly teach that all not part, of the church will be raptured at the coming of Christ for the Church (I Corinthians 15:51,52; I Thessalonians 4:17).

21. As opposed to a view of a partial rapture, pretribulationism is founded on the definite teaching of Scripture that the death of Christ frees from all condemnation. (Romans 8:1)

22. The godly remnant of the tribulation are pictured as Israelites, not members of the church as maintained by the posttribulationists.

Actually, they are pictured as the Church. The term used to describe them (saints) only refers to the Church in the rest of the NT.

23. The pretribulational view as opposed to posttribulationism does not confuse general terms like elect and saints which apply to the saved of all ages with specific terms like Church and those in Christ which refer to believers of this age only.

The term elect is used of the Church specifically and not believers of other ages in 2 Ti.2:10, Tit.1:1 and 1 Pe.1:1.

The term saints is used of the Church specifically and not believers of other ages in Rom. 1:7, Rom. 8:27, Rom. 12:13, Rom. 15:25, Rom. 15:26, Rom. 15:31, Rom. 16:2, Rom. 16:15, 1 Co. 1:2, 1 Co. 6:1, 1 Co. 6:2, 1 Co. 14:33, 1 Co. 16:1, 1 Co. 16:15, 2 Co. 1:1, 2 Co. 8:4, 2 Co. 9:1, 2 Co. 9:12, 2 Co. 13:12, Eph. 1:1, Eph. 1:15, Eph. 1:18, Eph. 2:19, Eph. 3:8, Eph. 3:18, Eph. 4:12, Eph. 5:3, Eph. 6:18, Phil. 1:1, Phil. 4:21, Phil. 4:22, Col. 1:2, Col. 1:4, Col. 1:12, Col. 1:26, 1 Thess. 3:13, 2 Thess. 1:10, 1 Tim. 5:10, Phlm. 1:5, Phlm. 1:7, Heb. 6:10, Heb. 13:24, Jude 1:3, Rev. 5:8, Rev. 5:9, Rev. 8:3, Rev. 8:4, Rev. 11:18, Rev. 13:7 and Rev. 13:10.

One example is Col.1:26
I have become its servant by the commission God gave me to present to you the word of God in its fullness– 26 the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the saints. 27 To them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.

Here the saints are distinguished from the believers of the OT era.

Doctrine of Imminence

24. The pretribulational interpretation is the only view which teaches that the coming of Christ is actually imminent.

The word “imminent” is not used in the Bible. The words that are used in the Bible describe an imminency that includes events that everyone agrees take place after the Tribulation (see answer # 1).

25. The exhortation to be comforted by the coming of the Lord (I Thessalonians 4:18) is significant only in the pretribulational view, and is especially contradicted by posttribulationism.

This argument assumes that we cannot be comforted if suffering will come before deliverance. Such an idea is flatly contradicted by Scripture (2 Co.1:3-7). The Second Coming is the reason we can even rejoice in suffering (1 Pe.1:6 See also Ro.5:3, Col.1:24 and 1 Pe.4:13, all of which speak of rejoicing in suffering).

26. The exhortation to look for “the glorious appearing” of Christ is His own (Titus 2:13) loses its significance if the tribulation must intervene first. Believers in that case should look for signs.

Jesus commanded us to look for signs (Mt.24:32). The idea that we can only watch for one or the other is a false dichotomy. We see the signs, they give us hope, then we see His coming.

27. The exhortation to purify ourselves in view of the Lord’s return has most significance if His coming is imminent (I John 3:2,3).

Our job is not to determine how an exhortation may seem to have more significance. Rather we should obey all exhortations – both those that call for purification and those that call for preparation for the Tribulation.

28. The church is uniformly exhorted to look for the coming of the Lord, while believers in the tribulation are directed to look for signs.
The Church is directed to look for signs in Mt.24.

The Work of the Holy Spirit

29. The Holy Spirit as the Restrainer of evil cannot be taken out of the world unless the church, which the Spirit indwells, is translated at the same time. The tribulation cannot begin until this restraint is lifted.
The Holy Spirit cannot be taken out of the world period. He is omnipresent. There is no reason to assume 2 Thes.2:7 is talking about the Holy Spirit, and the view that it is is highly questionable.
If the Holy Spirit wanted to stop restraining evil in the world, is He not capable of doing so without leaving the world completely? And if the Holy Spirit is not present in the Tribulation, how is it that the Tribulation Saints are saints (holy ones)? According to Romans 8:9, everyone who belongs to Christ has the Holy Spirit within them. All of the ministries of the Holy Spirit described in the NT we observe taking place in the Tribulation.

30. The Holy Spirit as the Restrainer must be taken out of the world before “the lawless one,” who dominates the tribulation period, can be revealed (2 Thessalonians 2:6-8).
See answer # 29.

31. If the expression, “except the falling away come first,” be translated literally, “except the departure come first,” it would plainly show the necessity of the rapture taking place before the beginning of the tribulation.
The word, “falling away” (APOSTASIA) means apostasy, rebellion, falling away. The most natural meaning of this verse is that that day will not come until either the rebellion of the antichrist occurs, or the great Apostasy occurs. To suggest that the Holy Spirit will be removed from the world, and then to refer to that removal as an apostasy is highly questionable.

Necessity of an Interval Between the Rapture and the Second Coming

32. According to 2 Corinthians 5:10, all believers of this age must appear before the judgment seat of Christ in heaven, an event never mentioned in the detailed accounts connected with the second coming of Christ to the earth.
Actually, it is (Mt.25:32), however even if it were not – that would not prove a gap between the rapture and Second Coming.

33. If the twenty-four elders of Revelation 4:1-5:14 are representative of the church as many expositors believe, it would necessitate the rapture and reward of the church before the Tribulation.
The word “elder” is often used to refer to leaders or rulers. Since the context points in that direction (seated on thrones with crowns), and they are distinguished from human in Revelation, and since Scripture routinely speaks of spiritual beings who are rulers in the heavenly realms (Col 1:16, Eph 3:10, 1 Pet 3:22) there is no reason to assume they are men.

34. The coming of Christ for His bride must take place before the Second Coming to the earth for the wedding feast (Rev. 19:7-10).
Both the Pre and Post Tribulational views hold that the rapture precedes the Second Coming. But nothing in Rev.19 requires that it be 7 years prior. Why could it not be immediately prior?

35. Tribulation saints are not translated at the second coming of Christ but carry on ordinary occupations such as farming and building houses, and they will bear children (Isa. 65:20-25). This would be impossible if the translation had taken place at the Second Coming to the earth, as posttribulationists teach.
Nothing in Isa.65 identifies the people as tribulation saints or as being connected with the Tribulation at all. Furthermore, there is good reason to believe that in the eternal state, on the new earth, there will be farms, houses, etc.

36. The judgment of the Gentiles following the Second Coming (Matt. 25:31-46) indicates that both saved and unsaved are still in their natural bodies. This would be impossible if the translation had taken place at the Second Coming.
The text says nothing about natural bodies. It simply describes the separation of the wicked and the righteous like the separation of sheep and goats.

37. If the translation took place in connection with the Second Coming to the earth, there would be no need of separating the sheep from the goats at a subsequent judgment, but the separation would have taken place in the very act of the translation of the believers before Christ actually sets up His throne on earth (Matt. 25:31).
It is possible that there could be a number of aspects to the separation. In fact, there is already a separation even in this age, as the Church is holy and set apart. It could also be that the Judgment will take place at the same time as the rapture.

38. The judgment of Israel (Ezek. 20:34-38), which occurs subsequent to the Second Coming, indicates the necessity of regathering Israel. The separation of the saved from the unsaved in this judgment obviously takes place sometime after the Second Coming and would be unnecessary if the saved had previously been separated from the unsaved by translation.
It is not obvious that this must take place sometime after the Second Coming. All the passage says is that Israel will be gathered and judged. This is consistent with the idea that Judgment Day will take place at the time of the Rapture and Second Coming.

Contrast Between the Rapture and the Second Coming

39. At the time of the Rapture the saints meet Christ in the air, while at the Second Coming Christ returns to the Mount of Olives to meet the saints on earth.
The description of the Lord standing on the Mount of Olives in Zech.14:4 is a description of His judgment on unbelievers, not his coming for Saints.

40. At the time of the Rapture the Mount of Olives is unchanged, while at the Second Coming it divides and a valley is formed to the east of Jerusalem (Zech. 14:4-5).
No passage that speaks of the Rapture states that the Mount of Olives will be unchanged.

41. At the Rapture living saints are translated, while no saints are translated in connection with the second coming of Christ to the earth.
This is a circular argument – assuming the very conclusion he is attempting to prove. I would suggest that the descriptions of the Rapture are descriptions of saints being translated in connection with the Second Coming. This is said to take place at the “last trumpet” (1 Cor.15:52) and our being taken up to meet the Lord in the air is spoken of in the context of the Day of the Lord when He returns in judgment (1 Thes.4:17-5:3).

42. At the Rapture the saints go to heaven, while at the Second Coming to the earth the saints remain in the earth without translation.
This is incorrect. At the Rapture the saints do not go to heaven; rather they go up to meet the Lord in the air and accompany Him the rest of the way to earth. This is the normal meaning of the Greek word translated “meet” – to go out and meet an approaching dignitary or VIP in order to accompany him into the city as he approaches. The word appears 3 times in the NT (Mt.25:6, Acts 28:15, 1 Thes.4:17)

43. At the time of the Rapture the world is unjudged and continues in sin, while at the Second Coming the world is judged and righteousness is established on the earth.
No passage that speaks of the rapture indicates the world is unjudged and continuing in sin. In fact, quite the opposite (1 Thes.4:17-5:3)

44. The translation of the church is pictured as a deliverance before the day of wrath, while the Second Coming is followed by the deliverance of those who have believed in Christ during the Tribulation.
The Rapture is not described as a deliverance before the day of wrath. Saints are exempted from God’s wrath on earth during the Tribulation, but they are subjected to persecution from men. (See answer to #13)

45. The Rapture is described as imminent, while the Second Coming is preceded by definite signs.
The Second Coming is also spoken of as imminent (Mt.25:1-13).

46. The translation of living believers is truth revealed only in the New Testament, while the second coming with its attendant events is a prominent doctrine of both Testaments.
Agreed, but this is not contradicted by Posttribulationalism. That there are aspects of the Second Coming that are revealed only in the NT is obvious (for example, the fact that it will be Jesus who will return is also only revealed in the NT).

47. The rapture concerns only the saved, while the second coming deals with both saved and unsaved.
Agreed, but this is not contradicted by postribulationalism either. Everyone agrees that there are some aspects of the Second Coming that apply to believers, and others that apply to unbelievers (the idea that the Second Coming will be a deliverance applies only to believers, and that it is a time of wrath applies only to unbelievers)

48. At the rapture Satan is not bound, while at the second coming Satan is bound and sent into the abyss.
There is no verse that suggests that Satan will not be bound after the rapture. He will.

49. No unfulfilled prophecy stands between the church and the rapture, while many signs must be fulfilled before the second coming.
Correct. But this is not an argument against pretribulationalism, because there is no passage of Scripture that says no unfulfilled prophecy remains before we will be with the Lord.

50. No passage dealing with the resurrection of saints at the second coming in either Testament ever mentions translation of living saints at the same time.
Incorrect. 1 Co.15, the most comprehensive passage in the entire Bible dealing with the resurrection of believers, after 50 verses about the resurrection of believers, says Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed– in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed.

51. Another Pre-trib argument offered by Gleason Archer regarding the Post-trib view that we meet the Lord in the air and immediately accompany Him to earth: “This yo-yo procedure of popping up down presents a very great difficulty…these upward-bobbing saints will only impede the momentum of His earthward charge…”

In 1 Thes.4:17 we learn that at the rapture we will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. The word translated “meet” (APANTASIN) is a technical term that refers to the ancient custom in which people from a town would go out to “meet” an approaching dignitary for the purpose of accompanying him back to the town they had just come from.[3] While the word does not have to always mean this, it is the normal use, and it is consistent with the only other times the term is used in Scripture (Mt.25:6, Acts 28:15).

Mt.25:5,6 “The bridegroom was a long time in coming, and [the virgins] became drowsy and fell asleep. 6″At midnight the cry rang out: `Here’s the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!’
And the virgins said, “Why bother? We will just be coming right back into the city anyway.”

Ac 28:14-16 …And so we came to Rome. 15The brothers there had heard that we were coming, and they traveled as far as the Forum of Appius and the Three Taverns to meet us. At the sight of these men Paul thanked God and was encouraged. 16When we got to Rome, Paul was allowed to live by himself…

If the Bible clearly says that we will go out to meet the Lord in the air, and then have the privilege of accompanying Him the rest of the way to the Earth, are we going to reject that because it seems like a waste of our time or because it will somehow impede the Lord’s progress?

There are two approaches to interpreting end times prophecy:
1. Hal Lindsey in The Late Great Planet Earth p.42: “the prophecies can be pieced together to make a coherent picture, even though the pieces are scattered in small bits throughout the Old and New Testaments.”
2. The straightforward approach. Take each passage at face value.

I take the second approach, and I believe it leads to a Post-Trib view.

The blessed hope of the return of the Lord for His church is a precious aspect of faith and expectation. While learned and devout saints have not always agreed as to the content of this hope, the present discussion has attempted to justify this important aspect of truth. May the promise of our Lord “I will come again, and will receive you unto myself,” John 14:3b bring comfort and hope to us in a modern world as it was intended to do for the disciples in the upper room on that dark night before the crucifixion, “And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely. He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.” Revelation 22:17,20

Amen. And may the Church also heed the many warnings from our Lord about the coming Tribulation.

[1] the commissioning of the twelve in Mt.10:17-36, the Olivet Discourse in Mt.24:1-25:46, The Upper Room Discourse in Jn.15-17
[2] TDNT v.1 p.380, NIDNTT v.1 p.325
[3] TDNT v.1 p.380, NIDNTT v.1 p.325