y the scriptures that it is about are being interpreted.
This is a very disturbing possibility, of course, when dealing with a concept so central to Dispensationalism as the Rapture, but if there is a real problem here, it must be solved, not swept under the rug, especially when the eternal salvation of human beings is at stake. (Let it be noted here that there is some popular misunderstanding of the term ôRapture.ö It derives from the Greek root that means, ôto catch,ö as in velociraptor and modern raptors such as falcons, not from the emotional ecstasy that presumably would result from actually meeting the Lord.)
One could argue that it is actually not the timing of the Rapture that is the real issue. Instead, the issue is the understanding of the nature of the church. If the Rapture is pretribulational, then the church, consisting of those caught up, will not suffer the wrath of God during the Tribulation. Conversely, if it is posttribulational, then the church, consisting of the faithful and perhaps not-so-faithful, will be purged; and at the end of the Tribulation, those remaining will be caught up to their reward.
This timing issue also affects oneÆs concept of the Second Advent. A pretribulational position requires the Lord to come for the church during the Rapture, withdraw from the world during the Tribulation, return to rule the world during the Millennium (unless the Millennium is ruled by the saints of the church, as some seem to believe), and then assume full rulership at his FatherÆs side in the Heavenly Jerusalem.
There is no compelling theological reason why the Lord could not do it this way if he so chose. He reached out gradually--to Peter, to the next three, to the rest of the Twelve, to the seventy disciples, and so on--during his earthly ministry. There is no essential reason why he could not make his Return gradual as well.
However, there is obviously not much in the way of persu...