In his video critiquing the pre-tribulation rapture view, Servus Christi raises some thought-provoking points regarding the “missing church” argument often used by pre-tribulationists. While his critique deserves careful consideration, there are some important counterpoints to examine as well. Let’s explore this issue with nuance and charity.
Understanding the “Missing Church” Argument
The “missing church” argument, as Servus Christi correctly summarizes, is based on the observation that the Greek word “ekklesia” (typically translated as “church”) does not appear in Revelation chapters 4-22, after being used prominently in chapters 2-3. Pre-tribulationists argue this indicates the church has been raptured before the events of the tribulation described in those later chapters.
Servus Christi rightly points out that this is an argument from silence – the absence of a word doesn’t necessarily prove the absence of the concept. He makes a valid point that we should be cautious about building major doctrinal positions solely on what is not said.
Considering the Broader Context
However, it’s important to note that pre-tribulationists don’t base their entire position on this single argument. The “missing church” observation is typically part of a broader case involving multiple lines of evidence from Scripture. As Dr. Mark Hitchcock notes:
“While these Scriptures seem to clearly present the idea of imminency or an anymoment coming of Christ, there are some who challenge this notion and argue that the New Testament does not teach that Jesus could come at any time. Three main arguments against imminency are commonly given.”
Pre-tribulationists argue their view best harmonizes various biblical teachings about Christ’s return, the nature of the tribulation, and God’s plans for Israel and the church. The “missing church” argument is just one piece of that larger picture.
The Significance of “Ekklesia” in Revelation
While Servus Christi correctly observes that “ekklesia” is absent from many New Testament books, the pattern in Revelation is still noteworthy. The term is used prominently in the letters to the seven churches (Rev. 2-3), then disappears for the rest of the book describing end-time events. This shift in language is at least worth considering, even if it’s not definitive proof on its own.
Dr. Robert Dean offers this perspective:
“The obvious answer lies in the fact that the church will not be on the earth during this horrific time period having already been raptured to heaven before the Tribulation even begins.”
The Nature of Revelation’s Prophecies
Servus Christi makes a fair point that we shouldn’t read Revelation in isolation or assume it provides an exhaustive eschatological timeline. However, the book does claim to reveal “what must soon take place” (Rev. 1:1) and follows a generally chronological structure. The absence of clear references to the church during the tribulation descriptions is at least noteworthy, even if not conclusive on its own.
The Church’s Role in Revelation
It’s worth noting that while “ekklesia” may be absent, believers are clearly present during the tribulation events of Revelation. They’re described as “saints” and “those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus” (Rev. 14:12). Pre-tribulationists argue these are new believers who come to faith after the rapture, not the church.
Dr. H. Wayne House explains:
“While it is true that one of the elders in heaven tells John that the robed believers ‘are the ones who come out of the great tribulation’ (7:14), the focus of this section of Revelation is on their martyrdom, while living in that great tribulation.”
The Importance of Hermeneutics
Ultimately, much of this debate comes down to hermeneutics – how we interpret prophetic literature. Pre-tribulationists generally favor a more literal approach to prophecy, while other views may take a more symbolic or allegorical stance. Dr. Thomas Ice notes:
“The literal interpretation of prophecy has been a constant belief of the church from the beginning… A good eschatology cannot produce unethical fruit of the magnitude that has come about by means of replacement theology.”
Maintaining Humility and Charity
While the pre-tribulation view has strong scriptural support, we must approach end-times debates with humility. No single argument, including the “missing church” observation, should be treated as definitively proving one eschatological system. Christians of good faith can and do disagree on these matters.
Dr. David L. Larsen wisely cautions:
“Could it be that some of our present conservative drift, our financial and moral scandals, our lethargy and worldliness are due to the recession of confidence in imminency?”
Regardless of our rapture timing view, all believers should live with an expectation of Christ’s return and a commitment to faithful service.
Conclusion
While Servus Christi raises valid points about the limitations of the “missing church” argument, the pre-tribulation rapture view remains a biblically defensible position supported by multiple lines of evidence. The absence of “ekklesia” in Revelation 4-22 is noteworthy, even if not conclusive on its own.
As we engage these debates, let’s do so with grace, humility, and a shared commitment to understanding God’s Word. Our ultimate focus should be on living faithfully for Christ, eagerly awaiting His return – whenever and however that may unfold.
