By Mark W. Christy, PhD
A prominent view, especially among American evangelicals, is the eschatological event known as the Rapture which will occur when Christ returns to gather the living saints from the earth to meet Him in the sky. This belief, which is featured most prominently in pretribulational premillennialism, is not without its detractors. With this in view, this article will help readers determine a proper stance on the Rapture by offering biblical support for it and its timing, along with a significant discussion on its historic premillennial roots.
Biblical Support for the Rapture
In 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17, Paul begins by emphatically stating that those who are living will not proceed the dead. While Paul uses the phrase “those who have fallen asleep,” it is clear from the immediate context and from how this terminology is used elsewhere in Scripture that Paul certainly is referring to dead Christians (Matt. 27:52; John 11:11; Acts 7:60; 13:36; 1 Cor. 11:30; 15:6, 18, 20, 51; 2 Peter 3:4).[i]
When Paul says in 1 Thessalonians 4:15 that dead Christians are now “asleep,” he is not suggesting that those who have departed among the faithful are in what some call soul sleep. Unfortunately, some wrongly proclaim this concept which teaches that those who have departed are held in an unconscious state until the resurrection (or some other later point). Paul debunks this teaching in 2 Corinthians 5:8 by declaring, “we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord” (cf. Phil 1:23). Jesus Himself told the thief on the cross, “today you shall be with Me in Paradise.”[ii] During His transfiguration, Moses and Elijah were alive and able to hold a conversation with Him (Matt 17:3). In Revelation, John teaches that tribulation martyrs will be able to converse with God (6:9-11). With all of this evidence, it should be abundantly plain that those who depart remain conscious after death (cf. Luke 16:19-31).
With soul sleep ruled out as a possibility, Paul must have some other concept in mind. Significantly, Paul mentions in 1 Thessalonians 4:14 that Jesus Christ “died” (not slept) and then refers to the dead in Christ as “asleep.” Since both Christ and His departed followers have all died, it seems that Paul is differentiating between the One (Christ) who has been resurrected (“rose again”) and those (His departed followers) who await resurrection while living in a bodyless state. Paul goes on to clarify that these now dead believers will most certainly participate in Christ’s resurrection. As he writes in v.14, “Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus.” In the next verse, he adds that those who die in Christ can expect to precede the living when it comes to receiving resurrected bodies.
In v.15, Paul employs the plural pronoun “we” which apparently demonstrates his own belief that he might even still be living when the Rapture happens: “For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep.” Given Christ clearly taught that no one would know the timing of His return, it only makes sense that Paul should hold out hope that this unknown time of return could potentially be in his own lifetime (cf. Matt 24:26; 25:13; Acts 1:7). Perhaps the clearest evidence of Paul’s hope in the eminent return of Christ can be found in Romans 13:11-12: “Do this, knowing the time, that it is already the hour for you to awaken from sleep; for now salvation is nearer to us than when we believed. The night is almost gone, and the day is near. Therefore let us lay aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light” (cf. 1 Cor 10:11; 15:51-52; 16:22; 1 Thess 1:10; 3:13; 5:23; Titus 2:13).
For Paul, the Rapture (the awakening from bodily death) could arrive in the very hour of his penning of these words. His belief in the eminency of Christ’s return compelled him forward in his duties and made him insistent that all Christians maintain obedient fervency in their followership of Christ. Despite his positive outlook on Christ’s return, his awareness that His return could not be determined prevented him from any sort of absolute certainty that it would occur before his demise. Knowing this, he says, “Christ will even now, as always, be exalted in my body, whether by life or by death” (Phil 1:20). When at a later point his own death was all but certain, he offers Timothy these words which suggest that at the end of his life he had become aware that his passing would precede the Rapture, “For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith; in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing” (1 Tim 4:6-8).
In 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, Paul comments on the events of the Rapture. In v.16, Paul declares that the Rapture will be a momentous occasion and not some secretive endeavor: “For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.” Echoing his point in v.15, Paul once again states that the dead saints (who are asleep in Christ) will participate in the Rapture first (before those who are still living). All of this will begin when Jesus returns to the earth with a shout, a voice of an archangel, and God’s trumpet. This trumpet, according to John MacArthur, has nothing to do with the Revelation 8-11 trumpets and instead simply serves the purposes of calling to assembly (cf. Ex 19:16-19) and deliverance (cf. Zech 1:16; 9:14-16).[iii]
In v.17, Paul explicitly depicts the rapture by observing that both departed saints and those still living “will be caught up together…in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we shall always be with the Lord.” Interestingly, Paul does not make mention of the souls of the living arising to the clouds when Jesus comes, but rather suggests that they will somehow take their position with Him in bodily form. During this time, it would seem that those who are mortal will be transformed into a state of immortality with their new resurrected body (cf. Phil 3:20-21; 1 Cor 15:35-37). From that point forward, whatever happens to God’s saints, Paul assures believers that they will remain with the Lord forever (1 Thess 4:17).
So far, this brief analysis on the biblical teachings on the Rapture has only considered aspects that are least debatable among the majority of those affirming the Rapture. Unlike these, more widespread disagreement exists as to the exact timing of the rapture. While no reputable person should strive to fix an exact date and time as Christ clearly taught this to be unknowable (cf. Matt 24:36-40), scholars can at least discuss a given time period for a Christ’s return.
A Comparison of Premillennial Views on the Timing of the Rapture
For many American evangelicals, the position most commonly taken on the timing of Christ’s return is known as pretribulational premillennialism (or dispensational premillennialism). Those who support a pretribulation rapture point out that none of Rapture texts (John 14:3; Rev 3:10; cf. 1 Cor 15:51–52; Phil 3:2–21) mention judgment (Matt 13:34–50; 24:29–44; Rev 19:11–21), so it is at least conceivable that these two eschatological themes do not coincide. By making this distinction, it would seem more appropriate to conceive of the Rapture occurring before the various eschatological judgements discussed in Scripture. Further evidence for this can be found in Revelation where the Church appears exalted in heaven in Chapter 4 before God’s judgements begin to unfold in Chapter 6. As these judgements continue to unfold from Chapters 6-18, John makes no mention of the Church, so one can easily assume that the Church at that time will be removed from the scene until the Second Coming when the Elect will appear with Christ at His Second Coming (Rev 19:14; cf. 1 Thess 3:13). So far, this understanding of the eschatological timeline of the Church has them united with Christ beginning with the Rapture, remaining with Him for the seven-year tribulation, and returning with Him during Second Coming so as to participate in His millennial kingdom. This sequence adheres closely with 1 Thessalonians 4:17 which declares that Raptured believers will “always be with the Lord.”
Proponents of this view point out that Revelation 19, where the Second Coming appears in John’s unfolding eschatological timeline, fails to mention the Rapture and thus gives evidence against those who would support a post-tribulational occurrence. Along with this, they add that the Rapture becomes essentially superfluous since it would occur in direct conjunction with the Second Coming of Christ. Not only that, this post-tribulation timing of the Rapture leaves the millennial kingdom of Christ without an earthbound population because all believers would have been raptured and any remaining non-believers would have been slaughtered (cf. Rev 19:11-21).
Another compelling argument against the post-tribulational view can be made from the larger context of the New Testament (NT). Throughout this part of Scripture, a sense of urgency is given to being prepared for the return of Christ as opposed to being ready for the onset of the tribulation period. While Paul and the other NT writers warn about false teaching and false teachers (Acts 20:29-30; 2 Pet 2:1; 1 John 4:1-3; etc.), disobedience (Eph 4:25-27; 1 Thess 4:3-8; Heb 12:1), temporal suffering (1 Thess 2:14-16; 2 Thess 1:4; 2 Peter), and even apostasy (Matt 7:21-23; 24:10-12; John 6:60-66; Gal 1:6; 1 Tim 1:18-20; 4:1; 5:8, 10-11; Heb 6:4-8; 2 Pet 3;17; 1 John 2:19), they fail to offer any warning about the coming tribulation period in the end times.
Beyond the aforementioned differences between the pretribulation Rapture and the post-tribulation Rapture which happens in conjunction with the Second Coming, one finds further support for the pretribulation view by examining the details of the Rapture texts and those about the Second Coming. During the Rapture, the Elect are gathered by Christ Himself (1 Thess 4:16-17), but at the Second Coming, they will be gathered by angels (Matt 24:31). While the Rapture texts feature the resurrection and Christ’s rewarding of believers (1 Thess 4:15-17), Second Coming texts focus on Christ as a coming Judge (Matt 25:31-46). As opposed to the Rapture texts, those which focus on the Second Coming speak of unbelievers being taken and not remaining and believers remaining and not ascending to the clouds (Matt 24:37-41).
This connection between earthbound believers who remain temporarily unresurrected at the Second Coming during the onset of Christ’s millennial reign and their total separation from nonbelievers who would have otherwise still remained earthbound themselves finds some additional support in Christ’s parables. In the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares for example, unbelievers (tares) are slaughtered (reaped) by angels (reapers) for the purposes of judgement, while believers (wheat) are left unharmed (Matt 13:24-30; cf. 13:47-50; 24-25).
Finally, the pretribulational view finds perhaps its most solid support in Christ’s statement to the faithful Philadelphians in Revelation 3:10, “I also will keep you from the hour of testing, that hour which is about to come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.” This strong evidence taken together with that previously offered seems to adequately tilt the scales in favor of pretribulationalism among those who adhere to the broader millennial position. Nevertheless, it is important to cover two other positions within the premillennial camp.
A small fraction of premillennialists argue that the Rapture will occur at two separate points beginning with the more faithful among the Christians before the tribulation period and ending with a second Rapture either during or after the tribulation. Given that this view is widely rejected by even those who uphold premillennial eschatology, this article will move on to briefly consider the views of those advocating a mid-tribulation Rapture.
Among those who adhere to the mid-tribulation position, some have reacted to the pretribulational view by claiming that it suffers from several difficulties: “These included the secret aspect of the [R]apture, the revival to be experienced during the tribulation despite the removal of the Holy Spirit, and the reduction of the importance of the church involved in dispensational eschatology.”[iv] Before proceeding with addressing the central tenets of the midtribulational position, it may help to speak to these concerns.
First, it should be noted that Scripture plainly teaches that God is secretive on some matters even while He chooses to reveal some things to us. As Deuteronomy 29:29 records, “The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever.” Paul himself remained secretive after visiting the third heaven (cf. 2 Cor 12:2-4). In 1 Corinthians 15:51, Paul even refers to the Rapture as a mystery.
As for the second concern among midtribulationists, their argument against the pretribulationists for upholding the idea that the Holy Spirit will be removed during the end time tribulation events is non sequitur. While some pretribulationists may retain this faulty belief based on a misreading of 2 Thessalonians 2:7, a careful study of that passage reveals that only the contemporary restraining work of the Holy Spirit against evil will be removed and not the Holy Spirit Himself.
The third argument against pretribulationists by midtribulationists seems to be entirely subjective and somewhat Arminian in nature. While the removal of the Church in a pretribulation Rapture could conceivably affect the Church’s stature, it could not do so apart from the will of God who has already determined the extent of the Church’s role. The ongoing presence of the Holy Spirit will only add further assurance to those saved after the Rapture that God’s purposes will indeed win out.
Now that these three detractions against the pretribulational view have been addressed, it is worthwhile to briefly consider the arguments of those adhering to midtribulationalism. Basically, this position draws from Daniel’s mention of an interruption in the seventieth week, or the final seven years of tribulation referred to in Revelation (Dan 7:25; 9:27; 12:7, 11; cf. Rev 12:14). In these texts however, no clear indication of the Rapture is provided during this break in the tribulational period at the midway point. With this in view, the midtribulational perspective ends up being essentially an argument from silence and remains completely disassociated from the primary texts on the Rapture.
So far, this article has focused entirely upon premillennialism since the biblical teaching on the Rapture is most relevant to that view. For its competitors, amillennialism and postmillennialism, the Rapture becomes subsumed in the Second Coming. To better understand these competing views, the conversation will now turn to brief discussion on the historical formation of premillennialism, amillennialism, and postmillennialism.
The Historical Development of Premillennialism, Amillennialism, and Postmillennialism
The first identifiable adherent to premillennialism, according to Eusebius, was Papius, an Early Church father and contemporary to Polycarp and possibly the Apostle John, who claimed to receive his knowledge about Christ’s future millennial reign from unwritten sources.[v] In particular, Eusebius contends that Papius said “there will be a period of some thousand years after the resurrection of the dead, and that the kingdom of Christ will be set up in material form on this very earth.” Surprisingly, he immediately disparages Papius’ eschatological comments as “a misunderstanding of the apostolic accounts.” Apparently, he understood Papius to be taking a more literal approach in his end-times views because he adds that Papius was “not perceiving that the things said by them were spoken mystically in figures.”
In opposition to the concerns of Eusebius, Irenaeus (A. D. 180), who preceded Eusebius by approximately 150 years and also was himself a contemporary of Polycarp, supported premillennialism and a more literal eschatological stance.[vi] Writing against the Gnostic heretics and their interpretation of end-times prophecies, he said, “If, however, any shall endeavour to allegorize [prophecies] of this kind, they shall not be found consistent with themselves in all points.”
Several decades before Irenaeus made his remarks on premillennialism, Justin Martyr, in Dialogue with Trypho (A. D. 155-160), writes, “I and many others are of this opinion [premillennialism], and [believe] that such will take place, as you assuredly are aware; but, on the other hand, I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise.”[vii] Following Papius, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus, Tertullian in Against Marcion, which was penned around A. D. 208, also affirmed the premillennial interpretation. He wrote, “But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem.”[viii]
Around A. D. 250, a Christian poet named Commodianus affirmed a literal thousand-year reign for Christ after the Second Coming.[ix] In his brief remarks, he appears to believe that the resurrected saints will somehow assist Christ in governing work during His millennial reign and that non-resurrected saints who survive the Great Tribulation will populate the earth at that time. At the end of that period, Commodianus envisions a judgement of the human population where some will be faithful Christians and those remaining will be numbered among the heathen.
In apparent agreement with Commodianus, Lactantius in The Divine Institutes, written around A. D. 311, affirms the Second Coming of Christ and the corresponding judgement upon humanity (the living and dead). Afterward, he writes, “But [Christ], when He shall have destroyed unrighteousness, and executed His great judgment, and shall have recalled to life the righteous, who have lived from the beginning, will be engaged among men a thousand years, and will rule them with most just command….Then they who shall be alive in their bodies shall not die, but during the thousand years shall produce an infinite multitude, and their offspring shall be holy, and beloved by God; but they who shall be raised from the dead shall preside over the living as judges. But the nations shall not be entirely extinguished, but some shall be left as a victory for God, that they may be subjected to perpetual slavery. About the same time also the prince of the devils, who is the contriver of all evils, shall be bound with chains, and shall be imprisoned during the thousand years of heavenly rule in the world, so that he may contrive no evil against the people of God.”[x]
At the end of Christ’s millennial reign, Lactantius adds these reflections: “But when the thousand years shall be fulfilled, and the prince of the demons loosed, the nations will rebel against the righteous, and an innumerable multitude will come to storm the city of the saints. Then the last judgment of God will come to pass against the nations.”[xi] Echoing, Lactantius’ eschatological framework, Venantius also supported the literal view of a coming millennial reign of Christ together with His saints and the eventual uprising of the nations when Satan is released a final time from his bondage, culminating in God’s final judgment.[xii]
In modern times, this position gained popularity in the 1800’s primarily in America and England and morphed into pretribulational premillennialism, which offers a precise treatment on the timing of the Rapture, the Great Tribulation, and the Second Coming. Those who support this view argue that Christ will make an initial return to gather the Elect in the clouds before the start of the Great Tribulation which ends with His Second Coming. To arrive at their interpretation, they strive to adhere to a strictly literal interpretation of the Bible whenever possible. With this approach, they carefully delineate between the roles of Israel (as an ethnic group) and the Church. Instead of viewing Israel as having been dissolved into the Church, as those who uphold what is known as covenant theology (and new covenant theology) do, premillennial dispensationalists believe that the promises made specifically to Israel in the Old Testament are to be considered as promises which are now inherited by the Church as the new spiritual Israel.
Taking a firm stance in this position, John MacArthur opines,
“The Bible calls God the God of Israel more than 200 times. There are more than 2,000 references to Israel in Scripture, and not one of them means anything but Israel, including Romans 9:6 and Galatians 6:16, which are the only two passages that amillennialists go to, to try to convince us that those cancel out the other 2,000. There is no difficulty in interpreting those verses as simply meaning Jews who were believers, the Israel of God. Israel always means Israel, never means anything but Israel. Seventy-three New Testament uses of Israel always mean Israel.”[xiii]
In making his comments, MacArthur refers to an alternative end-times view known as amillennialism. This view, which is also sometimes labelled as Replacement Theology or Supersessionism, associates Old Testament promises to Israel (i.e., considered by dispensationalists to be referring exclusively to Israel) with the Church to the extent that Israel becomes superseded by the Church, and those among Israel who are saved simply melt into the Church. Strangely, this position apportions the Old Testament blessings that were given to Israel to the Church and yet at the same time neglects to apportion the curses that were frequently mentioned. This happens, of course, because the amillennialists fail to uphold the strictly literal hermeneutic employed by the dispensational premillennialists.
To better understand amillennialism, its basic tenets will now be considered. As its name suggests, this view denies an end-time millennial reign of Christ and instead supports the idea that the millennial reign began on the onset of the Church Age immediately following Christ’s ascension and ends with the Second Coming. The Rapture, according to this view, simply will not occur. Instead, the texts commonly associated with the Rapture by those upholding premillennialism are typically used in support of their belief in an ongoing resurrection of believers which continues until Christ’s Second Coming. As to other end-time events like the Great Tribulation and the coming of the Antichrist, these are typically morphed into the current, spiritualized millennial reign of Christ. By employing this non-literal hermeneutic, they contend that the various end-time events in Revelation that lead up to the Second Coming are to be rendered as a contemporary growth in lawlessness in this present Church Age when Christ reigns spiritually for a non-literal thousand years. As this lawlessness spreads, many Christians and their churches will apostatize, the spiritual kingdom of the Antichrist will expand, and great tribulation will ultimately fall upon the faithful.
Historically, Augustine is most often accredited with the establishment of amillennialism. In his book, The City of God, he considers Revelation to be a spiritual allegory, and this contention thereby allows him to unfold a nonliteral interpretation of the events recorded therein. Since the time of Augustine who lived from A. D. 354 to 430, the amillennial view held sway over the majority of Christendom, including both the Roman Catholic Church and the Greek Orthodox Church. While it still maintains a strong base of adherents, the rise of Protestantism caused some during the Reformation to defect to a position known as postmillennialism.
According to this view, the Church will increasingly win most of the world’s inhabitants to Christ. As the world becomes more Christianized, much of its political power will fall into the hands of the saints leading to the establishment of an earth-wide peace, an end of poverty and disease, and a practical absence of crime. At some point, all of this will culminate with the onset of a ‘golden age’ where Christ will reign either physically or spiritually for a thousand years. Within the postmillennial fold, some do hold out hope for Christ’s return at the initiation of the ‘golden age,’ but most see His Second Coming as occurring at the end of that period. To arrive at their views, postmillennialists, like the amillennialists, are forced to adhere to a non-literal translation of the related Scriptures. Representing this position, Lorraine Boettner admits, “It is generally agreed that if the prophecies are taken literally, they do foretell a restoration of the nation of Israel in the land of Palestine with the Jews having a prominent place in that kingdom and ruling over the other nations.”[xiv]
Conclusion
As noted in somewhat detail above, premillennialism is the most historic of all eschatological positions. While the concept of the Rapture was left largely undeveloped by its adherents, this biblical teaching, which has been developed more fully by dispensational premillenialists (and other premillennialists) since the 1800s, is well-supported by multiple texts in the Bible for those who apply a consistently literal hermeneutic throughout both testaments. As has been discussed, some differences exist as to the exact timing of the Rapture, but the evidence seems to suggest most persuasively that the Rapture will occur before the Great Tribulation. Support for this contention comes from the many urgent appeals in Scripture for Christians to be always ready for Christ’s return, the internal details of passages purported to be discussing the Rapture, and Christ’s own statement in Revelation 3:10. This evidence in combination with historical support from Early Church believers, some of whom had close contact with disciples of John, the writer of Revelation, provides a solid basis for those who claim the Rapture to be a clear biblical teaching.
[i]All Scripture references are taken from NASB1995.
[ii]Paradise in this verse refers to heaven (cf. 2 Cor 12:4; Rev 2:7).
[iii]John MacArthur, 1 &2 Thessalonians, in The MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago: Moody, 2002); John MacArthur, “The Mystery of the Resurrection, Grace to You (Nov 14, 2010); available at: https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/90-412/The-Mystery-of-Resurrection; Anthony C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, in The New International Greek Testament Commentary, eds. I. Howard Marshall and Donald A. Hagner (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 1296. In his sermon covering 1 Corinthians 15:52, MacArthur notes that trumpets, although often associated with the end time events in Revelation, are also “associated in Israel’s history with battles and festivities and triumphs.” Thiselton adds, “the manifestations of God are associated with the sound of the trumpet (Exod 19:16; Zech 9:14; 1 Thess 4:16).”
[iv]R. G. Clouse, “Rapture of the Church,” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984), 909.
[v]Eusebius of Caesarea, “The Writings of Papius,” in ch. 39 of Church History (A. D. 340), available at: https://documentacatholicaomnia.eu/03d/0265-0339,_Eusebius_Caesariensis,_Church_History,_EN.pdf.
[vi]Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book V, chs.34-36, available at: https://fourcornerministries.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Saint-Irenaeus-Against-Heresies-Complete.pdf.
[vii]Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 60, available at: https://d2y1pz2y630308.cloudfront.net/15471/
documents/2016/10/St.%20Justin%20Martyr-Dialogue%20with%20Trypho.pdf.
[viii]Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., “Tertullian Against Marcion,” Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian I. Apologetic, II. Anti-Marcion; III. Ethical, in vol. 3 of The Writings of the Father Down to A.D. 325: Ante-Nicene Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995), 342.
[ix]Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., “The Instructions of Commodianus in Favour of Christian Discipline against the Gods of the Heathens (Expressed in Acrostics.),” Tertullian, Part Fourth; Minucius Felix; Commodian; Origen, Parts First and Second, in vol.4 of The Writings of the Father Down to A.D. 325: Ante-Nicene Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995), 218.
[x]Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., “The Divine Institutes, Book 7,” Lactantius, Venantius, Asterius, Victorinus, Dionysius, Apostolic Teaching and Constitutions, 2 Clement, Early Liturgies, in vol. 7 of The Writings of the Fathers Down to A. D. 325: Ante-Nicene Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995), 219.
[xi]Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., “The Epitome of the Divine Institutes,” Lactantius, Venantius, Asterius, Victorinus, Dionysius, Apostolic Teaching and Constitutions, 2 Clement, Early Liturgies, in vol. 7 of The Writings of the Fathers Down to A. D. 325: Ante-Nicene Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995), 254.
[xii]Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., “Commentary on the Apocalypse,” Lactantius, Venantius, Asterius, Victorinus, Dionysius, Apostolic Teaching and Constitutions, 2 Clement, Early Liturgies, in vol. 7 of The Writings of the Fathers Down to A. D. 325: Ante-Nicene Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995), 358-359
[xiii]John MacArthur, “Excursus: Why Every Self-respecting Calvinist Must Be a Premillennialist,” Luke 1 -5, in The MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago: Moody, 2009).
[xiv]Loraine Boettner, “A Postmillennial Response [to Dispensational Premillennialism],” in The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views, ed. Robert G. Clouse (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1977), 95.