The Threshing Floor

After walking through our study on the End Times, examining the relevant portions of Scripture related, and finding what we feel are solid conclusions, it appears there remains somewhat a body of understanding that remains outside of our scope, ‘sola scriptura’.

In that sense, this is a bit like sweeping the floor after threshing the wheat. We have addressed all the relevant portions of Scripture, we have extracted all the necessary kernels of wheat, and what we have left, is, well… When you’re done threshing, you have the chaff. Psalms 1 says the wind drives it away.

Let us look, then, simply for the sake of a “clean house”, that these are not overlooked, they are simply not relevant after all of our discussion.

The Rapture

The word ‘rapture’ is derived from the Greek ‘harpazo’, or ‘caught up’.

Then we who are alive and remain will be caught up [harpazo] together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord.

1 Thessalonians 4:17, emphasis added, with editing for clarity

This is, to us, speaking of Christ’s Second Coming, which we see in Revelation 20:11-15. When Christ comes back, those who are still alive will be caught up to meet Him in the air. Plain and simple.

The whole concept of a rapture is derived from this concept. Further scriptures are emphasized in the discussion of this concept, but the definition of it remains wholly extra-Biblical, in our estimation.

Consider one of the parables of Jesus, commonly thought to emphasize a coming rapture.

But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

Matthew 24:37-41, emphasis added

What many point out in this parable is that it is the identity of those who are taken and those who are left is in order. When we consider the parables of Matthew 13, Matthew 13:30 indicates that the weeds are gathered first and burned, and then the wheat is gathered into the barn. In consideration of these parables, it seems a rather weak case to build the doctrine around the parable above, where for the example of Noah, it was the wicked who were ‘taken’. It then stands to reason that, in the examples that follow, it is not a being “taken” in a rapture, but a being “taken” in judgment, as with Noah.

Yet, for many, the idea of a rapture is so central to their understanding of the Great Tribulation of Matthew 24. What does that look like to us? 70 AD. So, what of a rapture? At the point of argument, it becomes rather irrelevant, anyway. If the Great Tribulation is already past, and we see no Biblical case for a rapture anywhere (John 4:1-2 already being explained elsewhere as merely the mechanics of the vision, not the content itself), we find the entire discussion of the Rapture to be, well, absolutely meaningless.

The Antichrist

Further, we can consider the concept of a future antichrist.

This is really, in our opinion, a work of the flesh on one hand and sober warning mislabeled on the other, both of which conditions are bad.

On the first, we see many texts typically related to the antichrist as already having been fulfilled, or having other applications.

The term antichrist comes only from John’s epistles. Three times in 1 John, and once in 2 John. In all of these instances, it is not addressing a person, but a spirit of evil.

Other references that are typically attributed to a future antichrist are simply misplaced, such as the 2 Thessalonians 1-2 man of Lawlessness which we discussed earlier. This was most likely one of the rebel leaders at the time of the 70 AD destruction. The apostasy, or rebellion, spoke of the Jewish rebellion leading to the destruction of the city. The structure of the argument follows that principle of the Olivet Discourse, that the 70 AD destruction must occur first, before the Second Coming. Hence, 2 Thessalonians 1 speaks of the Second Coming while 2 Thessalonians 2 speaks of the 70 AD events. The man of sin is said to be destroyed by the breath and destroyed with the glory of His coming, in that he both died, and will be completely destroyed eventually at Christ’s second coming. The mysterious restrainer would have apparently been the priesthood. When the rebels killed the priests, the destruction of the city was virtually sealed. These rebels set themselves up in the very temple of God as their headquarters.

And, as with the characters of Daniel 7 and Revelation 13 & 17, we find Domitian fits them perfectly well.

Beyond this, though, we find a larger body of work regarding antichrist. Works such as AW Pink’s “The Antichrist” attempt to study of all the scriptures they identify as pertaining to the antichrist. These include Psalm 2’s “the fool” who says in his heart there is no God, as well as a host of other scriptures.

What is done is simply collecting every negative reference or character in the whole of the Word and attempting to create some ultra evil super-villian, of sorts, which may or may not in any frame exist.

Now, consider our study.

We have demonstrated the place of Babylon in history. Babylon was the greatest, and each kingdom after was inferior. Yet, in all of his glory, Nebuchadnezzar had to acknowledge that it was God that made him great. Even his sovereignty was God-given, and that was precisely as punishment upon God’s own people, Israel.

Not only that, but not once in the whole of the Word of God is there any government of evil that ever exerted power and dominion above what God intended, nor was it able or allowed to rise above any level.

There was only one reason Babylon was great, and that was because God exalted it. And, whenever man exalted himself above God, whether it was Nebuchadnezzar or the tower of Babel, God brought them low.

Collecting, then, the worst traits of every evil character in the Word of God, then, seems a dubious task at best to claim that this future super evil will be in any way capable of doing what all evil does: kill, steal, and destroy. Again, the only reason evil has ever been able to cooperate in itself for any length of time was simply the dominion God Himself gave, and that in response to punishing Israel. Without God empowering him, even the devil can only deceive people into breaking things.

So, we have to ask ourselves. Does the Bible support the notion that this super-evil character will actually appear on the world stage? Well, at this point, we offer a careful reply. We recognize on the one hand, that there is no future anti-christ in relation to the prophecies of Daniel or Revelation. These are all already accounted for. Further, the many characteristics of evil through the Word are not prophecies, but merely words. But, the world did see Hitler, and the world did see a host of other evil people.

So, as we said in the beginning, much of the study of antichrist appears to be a misguided work of the flesh, and on the other, a horribly mis-categorized warning. Even with the expectation of a Gog Magog conflict, there will most likely be a type of horrible evil in command. Might it resemble the characteristics given? In so far as much as all the others have. But, this doesn’t make him “the antichrist” any more than it made any of the previous ones.

Many of the traits described will most likely describe any future evil leader, and we do well to study to recognize evil when it appears. But, we do wrong to categorize all this as an antichrist figure with specific fulfillment as a Revelation or Daniel beast, simply because, it actually lowers our expectation of the many antichrists that have come along.

Textual Support

One Preterist writer cutely wrote regarding some of these, apparently attempting to avoid some conflict, that whether or not there was a future rapture of the church is beside the point, his point was that the Text does not speak of it.

Cleverness aside, this does need to be the basis for study. We simply see no real textual support for these things. Many things, such as the Millennium, as we have seen, are simply the supposition that all of these texts need to apply to a certain Millennial Reign. But, the only thing needed is that they are fulfilled. Since, in our minds, Revelation 20:10-11 fits them better, we prefer that.

But, with several of these other concept, there is no need for the fulfillment of something that just isn’t there. We don’t see a promise of a yet future beast of Revelation 13, simply because it already happened. Yet, to the contrary of those who would be at ease over such news, we constantly remind people of Jesus’ command, “Watch!”

But, in the study of the End Times, we do exactly that. We study, and we study the text.

These things, then, are the things that simply are mere cultural icons, and in the end of our analysis, have little or nothing to do with Eschatology.

In Review

We get things backwards, sometimes, when we think this is all about us. As Paul wrote, godliness with contentment is great gain. If we have food to eat, and clothes to wear, is that not sufficient? Is this life not a passing vapor, and the world to come more glorious?

The other point about Revelation is that it doesn’t really make a great movie. That is, often, the point. Movies point to man, and the glory goes to man. Even with the concept of the antichrist, one of the greatest works on the subject, detailing all the supposed names for this character, was written by a man in a gnostic cult. The whole idea of the antichrist is more about the spirit of man than it is anything else, and is it any wonder that the devil would love to promote such an idea? Really, the concept of the antichrist, with all its fascination and attention an draw feels more antichrist simply as an idea than most other concepts.

What way, other than to roll all evil into one, and to build up in one’s mind the idea of a great evil, could the enemy so divert the attention of the believing Christian away from the reality of the authority and power of the Kingdom in their midst? What way to get and keep one’s eyes off from the name of Jesus, and to prevent one from truly understanding that at the name of Jesus every knee must bow? And, if you lose your head in the process, so be it, but don’t fear men.

It is a vanity to divert too much attention onto what was, at the expense of what God has promised. It is right to study to show onesself approved, to know what the Scriptures say for ourselves, but when our eyes become focused on events, on the news, on the media, and on the things of the Earth, more than the things of God, we can know that there is little meaning to our endeavor.

I am for study, and I am for searching any and all topics of Scripture, as the Lord leads. But, the work of the antichrist of John’s epistles is to replace Jesus with something else. Even good things can take the place of the best, and in the end, each one of us must hear from heaven ourselves.

It is our firm belief that many great, and dire things are coming upon the Earth shortly. This is true. Yet, the prayerful heart should never be discouraged. As God led the children of Israel by a cloud and by a fire, He will guide us. As He fed them with the bread of heaven, He will feed us. All we have to do is trust Him.

Consider again, who the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven is. It isn’t the one with the greatest revelation of who the next evil world ruler is. It is the one who is like a little child. It is the one who humbles himself and learns to follow the guidance of the Holy Spirit in all things. That inward witness, that constant leading. This one is the one who will be kept safe from all harm.

Romans 8:14 says, “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.” So, let us be led forth, not with fear or a focus on the evil of the world, but with our eyes upon Christ, knowing that there is nothing that will ever prevail against His church.

Summary

The Rapture isn’t a Biblically based doctrine.
Rapture comes from Harpazo, from 1 Thessalonians 4:17, and simply refers to Christ’s coming.
The parable of Matthew 24:37-41 actually seems to indicate against a rapture.
John 4:1-2 doesn’t indicate a Rapture either.
A future antichrist is not supported by Scripture, by our analysis.
The other various references frequently attribted to it are either misapplied or misinterpreted.
The only reason Babylon existed as great as it was was to punish Israel, not the wickedness of sin.
Every time man exalts himself, he is abased.
There may be yet another great evil leader, and probably will be. But, it wont be the antichrist of Revelation or Daniel. We should simply obey the warning to Watch!
Armaggeddon also is past, as well as the first resurrection.
Textual support is the only basis for study.
Everything else is something else.