Piper Picked a Peck of Piddly Proposals

Dr. Randy White

The folks over at The Gospel Coalition are worried. Their coalition is not so much about the Gospel as it is about reformed theology (Calvinism), and so anything that has to do with the end-times, especially pre-tribulationalism, is a threat. In a few days, a new Left Behind movie, staring Hollywood heavy-hitter Nicholas Cage, will hit theaters. Will this bring about a resurgence in pre-tribulational rapture teaching? If so, the Gospel Coalition will be in danger of losing readership. To cut it off at the pass, they have brought out their own heavy hitter, John Piper, to share “Nine reasons we can be confident Christians won’t be raptured before the tribulation.” The article, with Justin Taylor as the contributor, gathers a summary of Piper’s post-tribulational theology against a pre-tribulational rapture. What follows is Piper’s nine points, each followed by my rebuttal.The Piper Nine1. The word for “meeting” the Lord in the air in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 (apantesin) is used in two other places in the New Testament: Matthew 25:6 and Acts 28:15. In both places it refers to a meeting in which people go out to meet a dignitary and then accompany him in to the place from which they came out. One of these, Matthew 25:6, is even a parable of the second coming and so a strong argument that this is the sense of the meeting here in 1 Thess. 4:17—that we rise to meet the Lord in the air and then welcome him to earth as king.

This is either a disingenuous or ill-informed argument. The English word meet is only used 13 times in all the New Testament (NASB). Three times, as Piper states, the word apantesin is used. The word is a noun (rather than to meet a literal rendering would be unto a meeting of the Lord.) This noun is based on the verb apantao, which is used in Mark 14:13, where the disciples are told that, “a man will meet you carrying a pitcher.” Again, the verb is used in Luke 17:12, in which ten lepers, “who stood at a distance met Him.” In neither occurrence of this verb is there a greeting party that returns with the honored guest to the original starting point. Further, the noun is used 36 times in the Septuagint (Greek Old Testament), and is the word used anytime there is a meeting with a dignitary, regardless of whether or not a procession is included. To state that the word describes the activity of accompanying the dignitary “to the place from which they came out” is simply poor scholarship.

2. The wording of 2 Thessalonians 1:5-7, when read carefully, shows that Paul expects to attain rest from suffering at the same time and in the same event that he expects the unbelievers to receive punishment, namely, at the revelation of Jesus with mighty angels in flaming fire. This revelation is not the pre-tribulational rapture but the glorious second coming. Which means that Paul did not expect an event at which he and the other believers would be given rest seven years before the glorious appearing of Christ in flaming fire. Vengeance on unbelievers and rest for the persecuted church come on the same day in the same event.

First, in v. 5, the believers are suffering persecution, and Paul mentions that because of this they will be “counted worthy of the kingdom of God.” Piper undoubtedly believes in some kind of inaugurated eschatology, but fails to mention that this verse presents the Kingdom as entirely future. In verse 7, Paul certainly promises rest at the day of the glorious appearing (Second Coming). He uses the same word translated “liberty” in Acts 24:23, and a word that often means “indulgence” or “license.” This is the liberty that will only come at the Second Coming. Paul’s expectation of such rest / liberty / refreshment at the Second Coming and the establishment of the Kingdom fits perfectly with Old Testament prophecy about the Kingdom of God. It is a rest that will not be experienced by the raptured during the seven years with the Lord prior to returning with Him, but will be experienced upon entering the “promised rest” of the Kingdom. An informed view of pre-tribulational premillenialism recognizes that the “times of refreshing” that come when the Kingdom is established do not come at the rapture, but at the Second Coming. Thus, under a pre-tribulational view, one would expect that Paul would place the Second Coming and the rest at the same time.

3. The wording of 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2 suggests that the “assembling to meet him” is the same as “the day of the Lord” about which they are confused. But the assembling is the “rapture” and “the day of the Lord” is the glorious second coming. They appear to be one event. Supporting this is the reference to “gathering” the elect in Matthew 24:31. Here there is a gathering (same word) but it is clearly a post-tribulational context. So there is no need to see the gathering and the day of the Lord in 2 Thessalonians as separate events.

How does Piper suggest that the assembling and the day of the Lord are the same? Paul says that, “the coming of our Lord” and “our gathering together unto him” (v. 1) are the same, but the “day of Christ” (KJV) is said to be something over which believers should not be shaken nor troubled about. I see no manner in which “they appear to be one event.” Piper’s estimation that “the day of the Lord” is the second coming is another misleading statement. A cursory and elementary review of “the day of the Lord” in Scripture will show that this day is a period of time which concludes with the second coming, but to minimize the day to the second coming alone is not being forthright.  In fact, the believers are shaken because of a fabricated letter that was teaching that they were in the day of the Lord. If the day of the Lord was the second coming, how could these believers be confused that they were in it?

As to Piper’s reference to the gathering of the elect in Matthew 24:31, he is right that this gathering in Matthew is clearly post-tribulational. Where he errs is in his thinking that this has any implication on a pre-tribulational position whatsoever. More on this in a moment.

4. If Paul were a pre-tribulationist why did he not simply say in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 that the Christians don’t need to worry that the day of the Lord is here because all the Christians are still here? Instead he talks just the way you would expect a post-tribulational person to do. He tells them that they should not think that the day of the Lord is here because the apostasy and the man of lawlessness have not appeared… .

To argue that, “Christians don’t need to worry that the day of the Lord is here because all Christians are still here” would simply be asinine logic. This is the kind of dismissive thinking that plagues ministry today. Such rancor doesn’t even fit Piper’s earlier argument that claims the day of the Lord is the second coming. If this were true, Paul would simply say, “the day of the lord is not here because Christ is not here.” Piper claims that Paul talks like one would expect a post-tribulational person to do, but this is not so. As a pre-tribulationist, I can’t think of a better argument than what Paul used here (in fact, it is 2 Thessalonians that caused me to abandon my once closely held post-tribulationist views).  If one tells me that we are in the Tribulation today, and thus there was no rapture, (which is precisely the false argument Paul was addressing), I would say, “We are not at all in the tribulation, for if we were, there would be apostasy and an identifiable man of lawlessness…” These things not being present, my pre-tribulational theology stands in-tact, and those who might doubt it can rest assured that nothing has proven it untenable.

5. When you read Matthew 24 or Mark 13 or Luke 21, which are Jesus’ descriptions of the end times, there is no mention of a rapture removing believers from the events of the end. A normal reading gives no impression of a departure. On the contrary, he talks as if the believing listeners and then the readers would or could experience the things he mentions. See Mt. 24:4, 9, 15, 23, 25f, 33, etc.

On this point, Piper is either ignorant of pre-tribulational theology or willfully misleading those who are. For a man of his stature, neither is acceptable. The reason that these passages contain no mention of the rapture, which removes believers from the events of the end, is because these words are not spoken to the church. The church was, at the time of these words, a mystery hidden within the heart of God, not revealed unto man. Piper has made the mistake of putting all mankind under the dispensation of Grace. Jesus’ words are fully in line with Daniel’s prophetic timeline and the Hebrew prophet’s description of the final days. Neither the Old Testament nor the Gospels teach a rapture, which is exclusively a matter for the church, which was not birthed until after the ascension. Using the Gospels to prove or disprove pre-tribulationalism will always be fruitless.

6. Going through tribulation, even when it is appointed by God, is not contrary to Biblical teaching. See especially 1 Peter 4:17; 2 Thessalonians 1:3-10; Hebrews 12:3-11. But even so, Revelation 9:4 suggests that the saints will be in some measure protected in the time of distress by the seal of God.

No pre-tribulationalist teaches that believers will not go through tribulation. They teach that the church will not go through “the Tribulation,” also known as, “the wrath to come”  (1 Thessalonians 1:10) or the “hour of testing which is about to come upon the whole world” (Revelation 3:10).

7. The commands to “watch” do not lose their meaning if the second coming is not an any-moment one. See Matt. 25:1-13 where all ten maidens are asleep when the Lord returns. Yet the lesson at the end of the parable is, “Watch!” The point is that watching is not gazing up for an any-moment-return of the Lord; it is the moral vigilance that keeps you ready at all times doing your duty—the wise maidens had full lanterns! They were watchful!

I’ve yet to find the pre-tribulationist who teaches that watching is “gazing up for an any-moment-return of the Lord” and not a “moral vigilance that keeps you ready at all times.” This is simply unacceptable straw-man argumentation.

Nor does the teaching that the second coming will be unexpected lose its force if post-tribulationism is true. See Luke 12:46 where the point is that if a servant gets drunk thinking that his master is delayed and will not catch him-that very servant will be surprised and taken off guard. But as 1 Thess. 5:1-5 says, “You (believers) are not in darkness for that day to surprise you like a thief.” We still teach that great moral vigilance and watchfulness is necessary lest we be lulled asleep and fall prey to the deceits of the last days and be overtaken in the judgment.

The second coming does become precisely timed after certain events take place, with any literal reading of the text.

8. The strongest pre-tribulational text, Rev. 3:10, is open to another interpretation without any twisting. It says, “Because you have kept my word of patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial which is coming on the whole world, to try those who dwell upon the earth.” But to “be kept for [fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=“yes” overflow=“visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=“1_1” background_position=“left top” background_color=“” border_size=“” border_color=“” border_style=“solid” spacing=“yes” background_image=“” background_repeat=“no-repeat” padding=“” margin_top=“0px” margin_bottom=“0px” class=“” id=“” animation_type=“” animation_speed=“0.3” animation_direction=“left” hide_on_mobile=“no” center_content=“no” min_height=“none”][sic] the hour of testing” is not necessarily to be taken out of the world during this hour, and thus spared suffering. Compare Gal. 1:4 and Jesus’ prayer for his disciples in John 17:15where to “keep from” does not mean physical removal. And notice the inevitability of martyrdom in Rev. 6:9-11. The promise is to be guarded from the hour in the sense of being guarded from the demoralizing forces of that hour.

It is interesting that Galatians 1:4 says that Jesus “gave Himself for our sins so that He might rescue us from this present evil age.” It does not say He, “has rescued us,” but that His life for our sins is that He “might rescue us.” In pre-tribulationalism, the belief is that we someday will be rescued from this present evil age, by the rapture. John 17:15 is the Lord’s prayer that His disciples would be kept “from the evil” before they are taken “out of the world.”  Because greater is He who is in you, than he who is in the world, this has been done, and is being done, just as the Lord promised. Such keeping “from the evil” has no bearing on rapture theology.  In each of the examples Piper gives, “out of” (from ek, the Greek word from which we get “exit,” there is a literal “out of” not “safe from” teaching. This is consistent with the Greek use of the word ek. Finally, the inevitability of martyrdom in Revelation 6:9-11 is not diminished in any way by pre-tribulationalism, since all pre-tribulationalists believe that there will be a great turning to the Lord in the Tribulation, namely of the Jewish nation. Many of these will become martyrs.

9. The second coming does not lose its moral power in post-tribulationism. New Testament moral incentive is not that we should fear being caught doing evil, but that we should so love the appearing of the Lord that we want to be pure as the Lord is pure, for whom we hope, as 1 John 3:1-3 says.

Piper only had eight points, so he used the ninth to defend post-tribulationalism’s moral power. I do not disagree with his belief that the Second Coming has moral power of persuasion for righteousness.

With regard to the language of being “left behind,” see Benjamin L. Merkle’s article, “Who Will Be Left Behind? Rethinking the Meaning of Matthew 24:40-41 and Luke 17:34-35,” WTJ 72 (2010): 169-79. He argues, “Although many assume that those taken in Matt 24:40-41 and Luke 17:34-35 are taken to be with Jesus and those left behind are left for judgment, this interpretation should be rejected.”

I agree. Matthew 24:40-41 and Luke 17:34-35 are not about the rapture. I’ve commented about it in this short video.

 In ConclusionIn my estimation, Piper gives the same threadbare and logic-weak argumentation of so many committed non-pretribulationalists. Rather than an honest evaluation of the position, he destroys a characterization of the position. Sadly, many will take Piper’s word rather than being a workman who has no need to be ashamed. Please study the Bible diligently to determine the timing of the rapture, mentioned in 1 Thessalonians 4:17. Avoid the weak and sickly arguments (fo