Within premillenialism two camps have arisen: the pre-tribulational and the post-tribulational views.  The pretribulational, or dispensational, type of premillennialism has become very popular since the 19^th century.  In contrast to the historic view, this more modern version of premillennialism teaches not only that Christ will return pre, before, the millennium occurs, but also that Christ will return before the tribulation period takes place.  The historic view, however, would take issue with the concept of Christ returning prior to the tribulation period, for many reasons, but in essence because they only believe in “one” second coming (further, the much less common mid-tribulational view holds that Christ returns during the seven year tribulation period, just prior to the great tribulation (i.e. the last 3½ years).

The issues dividing these two views are vast and cumbersome, as they often spill into various views of covenant and dispensational theology.  Yet, a basic core issue at the center of this debate is the issue of the tribulation and the “rapture.”  Premillenialism teaches that in the end times, following our current church age, there will be a seven year tribulation period where in the Anti-Christ will be made known and come to power (cf. Dan 9:24-27; Rev 11:3; 12:6; 13:5), followed by the second coming (advent) of Christ when in He will establish His earthly kingdom and reign for a thousand years.  The pretribulational view teaches not only that Christ will do all those things “after” the tribulation (Matt 24:21) but that He will also have a “secret coming” just prior to the seven-year tribulation where He will rapture all the believers (drawing from: 1 Thess. 4:17).   One of the pillar texts that “pretribulationers” use is Rev 3:10 where Jesus states that He “…will keep [them] from the hour of trial which is coming on the whole world.”  They take the “hour of trial” to be in reference to the tribulation, which does seem to have good support, and that that to be “kept” from that hour must then necessarily involve being taken out of the world via the rapture.

There is a vast number of arguments that each side could present, however the historical view (post-trib) seems to carry with it, in my opinion, more textual weight in terms of biblical evidence.  In response to the argument from Rev 3:10, a post-tribulationist would see no reason to stretch the concept of being “kept from” the hour of trial to involve a physical removal; rather, it could be understood as being kept from the evil and demoralizing influences that will overtake the entire world.  Inference could be drawn from Gal 1:4 where it is said that Christ gave Himself to keep us from this “present evil world,” where the same word is used and certainly doesn’t imply being “removed” from the evil world, but to be spiritually preserved from its evil corrupting power while in it.  Yet, quite frankly, any direct evidence that would suggest a pre-tribulational rapture is lacking, and the majority of the arguments are drawn by inference that believers are preserved from the wrath of God, and thus that must mean they can’t go through the tribulation period.

When Paul speaks of the revelation of Jesus Christ (the second coming), in 2 Thess 1:5-7, he suggests that it is at this same time that he himself will receive rest from earthly sufferings (assuming he was alive for the second coming).  Since the revelation of Jesus Christ he is speaking of is talking about the actual second coming to earth, to punish the wicked and set up His kingdom, Paul is not expecting some “secrete coming” prior to the tribulation.  Finally, it seems quite plain in 2 Thess 2:1-2 when Paul discusses our “assembling to meet Him” (rapture) and the “day of the Lord” (second coming) that he refers to them as happening in one event (on the same day).

Will Uminn, Kevin Farmer, Phil Meade, Dana Arledge