Why The Pre-Tribulation Rapture Is Wrong

Many believe that Jesus will come and take away His church before a final period of Tribulation. This video explains why He doesn't come until after the Tribulation. --- Pre-tribbers please watch this video before you go on the attack!

CORRECTION TO PART OF THE VIDEO: ​ @michellebehr7669 After reading your comment last night I went back and read the Olivet Discourse in all three of its versions. Now I’m reading them again today. I am now realizing that the pre-tribber and the post-tribber arguments presented in my video concerning Jesus’ reference to the Sodom story are both wrong. In Matthew’s version, there is no reference to Sodom at all. Those taken away by the flood (24:39) are the point of comparison for those taken from the field and the mill (24:40-41). Mark has no reference to Sodom nor any reference to two in the bed/field/mill.

Luke alone has the Sodom reference – and he does not (much to mine and the pre-tribbers’ surprise) make it a point of analogy with those taken from the bed and the mill. He takes the destruction of the flood along with the destruction of Sodom and then makes the point of his analogy plain: “so will it be one the day when the Son of Man is revealed. On that day, let the one who is on the housetop, with his goods in the house, not come down to take them away, and likewise let the one who is in the field not turn back. Remember Lot’s wife. Whoever seeks to preserve his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life will keep it” (17:30-32). The explicit point of the flood and Sodom analogies is to show the destruction of those who love this life and are not prepared. He does suggest there are two parties in each story (Noah and the destroyed; Lot and the destroyed) that must be correlated with the two parties present in the bed and the mill. I think this confusion has arisen (including in myself) because right after he completes the analogy with the flood and Sodom with those who love this life, he then moves on to give the saying of the two in the field and the mill. But the saved person in this saying (whether the one taken or the one who remains) is not compared to the saved party in the Flood or Sodom stories in any way at all. Rather, in Luke’s version we can only identify the saved person in how the discourse concludes. Jesus says someone is going to be taken away and the disciples ask “where Lord?” and Jesus responds with the language of death (vultures and corpses, v. 37). They are being taken away to their destruction, similar to Matthew’s version where the taken party is explicitly compared to those carried away by flood waters.

So, Matthew compares the taken party as the one destroyed by flood waters, and makes no mention of Sodom. Luke says those who love this life are to be compared to Lot’s wife and to those destroyed in the flood, and makes no conceptual connection to those taken or left in the field. The way the pre-tribber has described this passage – and the way I described it in this video – are both wrong. We have been wrangling over which person in the field correlates with which party in the Sodom story, and Jesus makes no such comparison. The net result is that pre-trib is even less plausible in this passage than I thought, and post-trib still works better - just not in the way I supposed.

Whether or not you agree with this analysis I will just say that your objection was a good one and it drove me to reassess and change my view. Thank you for that! 😊 I am going to post this in the video’s description since it is too late to change the video.

Book of Revelation Playlist:
   • In-Depth Study of Book of Revelation  

Book of Daniel Playlist:
   • In-Depth Study of Daniel