Customer Reviews

The Rapture Question

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Walvoord does a good job of defending the pretribulation rapture position. He admits that this doctrine is more of an inference based on dispensational ecclesiology than on exegetical considerations. Having said that, Walvoord does try mightily to defend the exegetical basis of pretribulationism. He seems to gear much of his argument against Robert Gundry's well written 1973 posttribulational book, "The Church and the Tribulation," and this dates Walvoord's book a little. But it's still a good read.

He concludes by presenting 50 arguments for pretribulationism, which he himself admits is formidable primarily because of the sheer number of arguments and not due to any one powerful argument. At any rate, the overall case Walvoord makes for the pretribulational rapture is persuasive. If you are still trying to make up your mind, I'd make this the first book about the rapture I would read.

This book is the most extensive pre-trib treatment available regarding the issues surrounding the timing of the rapture of the church as described in I Thess. 4. Walvoord is thorough, charitable, and persuasive. This expanded edition includes direct responses to the novel dispensational post-trib position of Robert Gundry. The author does not dodge Gundry's issues, but answers them in point-by-point fashion (while raising some formidable issues of his own against Gundry's assertions). If you've read Gundry, and find yourself swayed by his arguments in favor of a post-trib rapture, then you owe it to yourself to read this book before making any decision on the matter. Hear what BOTH sides have to say. You may be quite surprised at the veracity of pre-tribulationism in the able hand of Walvoord. I highly recommend the book.

For the second time now I've allowed negative Amazon reviews to influence my decision in buying a book. I finally came across the updated version in a local store and was impressed enough to buy it. This is a great book and should be read alongside the more recent, Dr R. Showers' Maranatha - Our Lord, Come.

Even though Walvoord doesn't address Gundry's latest effort or the more recent pre-wrath rapture view, his arguments are still valid and cogent, and a lot of territory is covered. The limitations with any book of this nature are the sheer volume of possible opposing arguments that makes it difficult to address everything.

I note some of the accusations (use of assumptions, leaps of logic etc) leveled at Walvoord by other reviewers. I've also read and examined their works - mentioned at the end of their respective reviews - and found strong elements of these same issues within their own materials and conclusions, and criticisms of pretribulationism.

Let me cite just one example. I'm confounded by one particular criticism of Walvoord and pretribulationism in one review regarding how many times Jesus returns. The reviewer affirms that the Bible clearly teaches that Jesus returns once, not twice. I find it ironic and telling that this same critic espouses a rapture view that actually teaches a multi-phase return; has elsewhere admitted this and actually attempted a defense of it.

My upbringing wasn't evangelical nor was I spoon fed pretribulationism and I tend to be skeptical of any doctrine until I've looked at it from different angles. I've spent my fair share of time trudging through most of the arguments and rapture views. Having said that, for my money, Walvoord does a great job keeping "assumptions and leaps of logic" in check when making his points.

I highly recommend the book.

I was very frustrated while reading this book. Not only is there assumption after assumption when attempting to interpret certain passages, there's flat out misrepresentation of scripture. Example:

"The situation described in 2 Thessalonians 2 indicates that the teaching that the church would go through the Tribulation was already being advanced by certain teachers whom Paul opposed in this passage (p. 238)."

Walvoord inserts the word "Tribulation," when the passage in question says no such thing. 2 Thessalonians speaks of "the Day of the Lord." In altering the phrase from "Day of the Lord" to "Tribulation," Walvoord misleads many readers into believing the apostle Paul is teaching the Thessalonians that they should "not be quickly shaken from [their] composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the [Tribulation] has come (2 Thess. 2:2)."

Walvoord then explains that Paul is telling the Thessalonians to not be deceived by any message saying that the tribulation has started, because the tribulation could not have begun because the pre-rib rapture has not taken place! Walvoord actually says that Paul is teaching them that post-trib is a false teaching.

Concluding that the "Tribulation" is the same thing as the Day of the Lord is one of many poor conclusions within this book. But I do appreciate the fact that Walvoord admits that there is no single passage that directly teaches a pre-trib rapture, and that the theory is primarily concluded based on inferences. This sets him apart from most pre-trib teachers.


Dave Bussard, author of "Who Will Be Left Behind And When?"

This book is an excellent source for defending the Pretribulation Rapture. My only problem is that I purchased a used copy of the book and it was an older edition so it didn't have the expanded details like the latest edition. If you purchase this book, buy it new so you have the latest and greatest. I may well do that since I find the edition I have to be a good source. I can only imagine the latest edition is even better!

3/29/2011

Finally, many years later I bought the 1979 edition - the revised and expanded copy. It's the only edition that has the NIV translation of the Bible unless otherwise quoted. Although it took me many years to get around to this book, it was definitely worth it. The author does a great job of infering that the rapture is before the tribulation and that's the best anyone can do is infer vs. being dogmatic.

This book is truly timeless as the same arguments still exist today. I'm amazed that even though the Pre-Wrath Rapture isn't mentioned (because it hadn't exploded on the scene yet), the case against it is still in there! I believe it's in there simply because the Pre-Wrath Rapture is nothing more than a modified Post-Trib view. The author stated that himself years later before he died. Well worth the read!

This book, revised from a 1957 edition, has got to be considered written by the best scholar on the subject of the Rapture of his time. Opposing viewpoints are outlined in a well-delineated manner. Walvoord uses the authority of Scripture as a mathematics professor solves an equation. He takes each question and analyzes each variable before the solution is announced. He includes in the solution both the Hebrew and Greek components. For example, in interpreting Revelation 19, the components of the Hebrew wedding as well as the meaning of the Greek words to describe it are evaluated by Walvoord. There is an excellent endnote section in the back and the references are impressive for a book written in 1979. It should be the first book read by those interested in the future event that will usher in a time of great trouble.After the Rapture: Passing the Torch

The book is thorough and consistently uses grammatical, historical, literal interpretation of the Scriptures. I was only vaguely in agreement before I read the book but am convinced now. It should be read along with "The Millenial Kingdom" by the same author.

This is a well written and researched study on the so called "Rapture" event. There is some controversy over this issue by some church leaders. I think this book will go along way to answering many of the questions raised. By using the scripture Dr. Walvoord makes a strong argument for the doctrine of the Rapture of the Church. I highly recommend this book for a serious study of the Rapture Issue.

very well researched book, great arguments with scriptural reasoning. gives opposing views as well with scriptural basis.

I had trouble rating this book because John Walvoord is universally recognized as one the great biblical teachers of our time -- a godly man who is to be greatly respected. For this, and his great passion for the coming of Christ -- the glorious hope of all believers -- I have the utmost respect for him. However, when it comes to the discussion of end-times subjects, this work like his other end-times works shows how even godly men can rely more on assumption, unfounded leaps of logic, and inference than on direct teachings of scripture.

My pages of The Rapture Question are scrawled in the margins with phrases like, "assumption...," "why? substantiate?" and "yes, but..." Many of Walvoord's arguments sound good until you look closely at the context, compare his interpretations to other scriptural passages, or look critically at the arguments he's making. His books are a great example of how a position can be argued on a passage-by-passage basis, but when you stand back and look at all of the passages together, a clear pattern emerges: the author has come to his conclusions only by reinterpreting and changing the clear, straightforward message of the text.

I've done extensive reading on the pretrib position and I actually find Walvoord's arguments to be among the weakest. They rely too heavily on assumption, sweeping generalizations that do not hold up under scrutiny, and the need to read between the lines.

Like other pretrib teachers, Walvoord never tackles the larger picture, which is that the Bible clearly teaches that Jesus returns once, not twice; that at His one and only return, He comes in bodily form (not spiritual form -- Acts 1:9); that the expectancy taught in scripture is not the same as an "any moment, nothing must happen first" coming; that God's wrath does not start at the beginning of the 70th Week, or even during the Great Tribulation, but later, during the Day of the Lord; and that God does put His people through intense periods of persecution and testing. Not to mention the chronological sequence of the seals, trumpets, and bowls described in Revelation, which places the return of Christ in Matt. 24:30-31 at the sixth seal, before the end of the 70th Week, not at Armageddon as Walvoord teaches.

H. L. Nigro, author of Before God's Wrath: The Bible's Answer to the Timing of the Rapture