As we continue our examination of Servus Christi’s critique of the pretribulational rapture view, we turn our attention to his arguments regarding typology. Servus Christi raises important questions about the consistency of typological interpretations used by pretribulationists. While his points are thought-provoking, a closer look at Scripture and scholarly perspectives suggests that his critiques may not fully account for the nuances of pretribulational theology. In this article, we’ll address the main arguments presented, particularly focusing on the use of typology and the consistency of pretribulational interpretations.
The Use of Typology in Pretribulational Arguments
Servus Christi argues that pretribulationists inconsistently apply typological arguments, particularly regarding Noah, Lot, Enoch, and Jewish wedding customs. He suggests that these analogies are conveniently used when they fit the pretribulational narrative but discarded when they don’t. However, this critique may oversimplify the pretribulational approach to typology.
Firstly, it’s important to understand that typology in biblical interpretation is not meant to be a one-to-one correspondence in every detail. As Dr. Gary Gromacki explains, “A type is a historical reality (an Old Testament person, thing, event) that finds its antitype in the New Testament.” He further notes that the essential characteristics of a type include “analogical correspondence, historicity, forward pointing, escalation and retrospection” . This understanding allows for nuanced interpretations that don’t require every aspect of a type to perfectly align with its antitype.
Regarding the Noah typology, Servus Christi questions why mass evangelism would occur after the rapture if the ark represents a complete destruction. However, pretribulationists like Dr. John F. Hart have thoughtfully explained this. Hart argues that in 1 Peter 3:20-21, the ark is actually a type of the invisible church entered by Spirit baptism, not necessarily a type of the rapture itself . This interpretation allows for a more nuanced understanding of the Noah typology that doesn’t require a one-to-one correspondence with post-rapture events.
Similarly, the Lot typology is not dismissed by pretribulationists but is often seen in conjunction with the Noah typology. As Richard J. Bauckham notes, “Since the Flood and the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah are prototypes of eschatological judgment, the situations of Noah and Lot are typical of the situation of Christians in the final days before the Parousia” . This perspective allows for a more comprehensive understanding of these types without requiring every detail to align perfectly with the pretribulational view.
The Jewish Wedding Analogy
Servus Christi also critiques the use of Jewish wedding customs as a typological argument for the pretribulational rapture. While it’s true that not every detail of ancient Jewish weddings corresponds directly to the rapture and second coming, many scholars find value in this analogy.
Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, for instance, describes the Jewish wedding system as having three main stages: the arrangement, a period of preparation, and the actual marriage ceremony . This pattern is seen by many pretribulationists as analogous to Christ’s relationship with the Church, with the rapture corresponding to the groom coming for his bride.
It’s important to note that pretribulationists don’t typically argue that this analogy proves their position, but rather that it illustrates and supports it. As with other typological arguments, the wedding analogy is not meant to be a perfect one-to-one correspondence but a helpful illustration of spiritual truths.
The Chronology of Revelation
Servus Christi points out that the marriage supper of the Lamb isn’t mentioned until Revelation 19, suggesting this contradicts the pretribulational view. However, this argument doesn’t fully account for the complex nature of apocalyptic literature and the various ways scholars interpret the structure of Revelation.
Many pretribulational scholars argue that Revelation is not strictly chronological. For example, the silence about the church on earth in Revelation 4-18 is often seen as evidence for the pretribulational rapture. The mention of the marriage supper in chapter 19 doesn’t necessarily mean it only occurs at that point in the chronology.
Furthermore, pretribulationists often distinguish between the rapture, the marriage of the Lamb, and the marriage supper. Dr. John Walvoord, for instance, suggests that the marriage feast could be on earth in connection with the second coming of Christ, even if the rapture occurs earlier.
Conclusion
While Servus Christi raises interesting points about the consistency of pretribulational arguments, a closer examination reveals that many of these critiques may not fully account for the nuanced approaches taken by pretribulational scholars. Typological arguments, including those involving Noah, Lot, and Jewish wedding customs, are generally understood by pretribulationists as illustrative rather than definitive proofs.
It’s also worth noting that the pretribulational view doesn’t rest solely on these typological arguments. Scholars like Dr. Mark Hitchcock present a range of biblical arguments for the pretribulational position, including the nature of the church, the concept of imminence, and specific promises in Scripture .
Ultimately, while the debate over the timing of the rapture continues among sincere believers, it’s important to approach these discussions with humility and a commitment to careful biblical exegesis. As we eagerly await Christ’s return, we can be encouraged by the words of Paul: “Therefore encourage one another with these words” (1 Thessalonians 4:18).
