Should the doctrine of imminence be second tier in a pretrib Statement of Faith? I occasionally come across contra-pretrib articles which make me blink for their sheer lack of self-awareness and audacity.
One writer claims there are no explicit imminence statements in Scripture (actually he has a small window of imminence within his system). He asserts that the imminence statement [quote] is given the impression that it is equaled in value to the orthodox teaching of the “personal, physical, visible return of Jesus,” where the latter is explicitly taught in Scripture.
This person is posttrib-prewrath. Hence, he’s committed to argue against imminence—whether it is biblical, and questions its efficacy in a Christian’s life. Take away the possibility of imminence and you remove a vital component of the pretrib rapture theory. Note that his view is also built on inferences derived from a set of texts. There are no explicit biblical statements supporting his system.
Qualified men who differ
He states that there are “qualified men of God” who affirm premil futurism but aren’t pretrib. We’re given the example of Charles Cooper who lost his job at Moody because of his prewrath view. He complains,
Are you seriously telling me, Mr. Pretrib Church, that you will alienate this person from leadership or even as a member of your church because they don’t believe in an any moment rapture? Where is your perspective? What do you think God thinks about this?
Well, I’ll tell you what I think of it. I’m sorry the man lost his position. I’m not privy to the details, but do have some questions based on his polemical writings and statements about pretribulationism. Did he rattle cages? Marv Rosenthal thought pretrib was a satanic deception and aimed at converting his FOI colleagues. Van Kampen associated pretrib with the rise of Jehovah’s Witnesses and other cults.
These attitudes will not endear you to others. I can provide personal anecdotes about proponents of this system which I’ve come across as a Social Media admin over the years. They love to endlessly argue and debate secondary matters, and insist they are right. This is not healthy in any organization or church.
A dose of reality
Fact is that I see folk in Facebook groups constantly asking where they can find a prewrath church to worship in. Obviously rapture timing is important to them—just as it is to the writer of the article I mention above. He’d be happy to reduce “imminence’ to some second tier level in a pretrib statement of faith. But where would he place his own rapture timing view in his “statement of faith”—the view he dedicates his entire ministry to promote?
I attend a Reformed Baptist Amil church. Some members are premil. The pastors align themselves to the Reformed Catechisms and a particular Statement of Faith. The Board selects pastors which will support that SoF. Although this church has a close relationship with John MacArthur’s organization, it is unlikely to employ a futuristic-premil pastor from GCC who insists on regularly delivering his own brand of eschatological sermons.
But spin Cooper’s and Rosenthal’s situations around. Now imagine a Prewrath Bible Institute or a Church org. There will be an eschatological Statement of faith which its pastors and elders and members will be asked to support. It will not tolerate a vocal pretrib dissenter who insists on upsetting the applecart by trying to convert others.
That’s just the way it is.
Second tier?
Should the doctrine of imminence be second tier in a pretrib Statement of Faith? I think it would be helpful if SoF’s delineated between essentials and certain tenets. But why is this so important to someone? Clearly, the original question is loaded against pretrib, and betrays the bias of the person who posed it.
Maranatha!
Further reading
Why a Pretribulational Rapture?
Spurgeon – The Need for Living with an Imminent Mindset
Sharing is caring!
