“With his Saints” or “For his Saints.”

“With his Saints” or “For his Saints.”

One of the arguments put forward in support of a pre-tribulation rapture is that there are verses that speak of Christ coming “for his saints” and there are verse saying he comes “with his saints.”

The verses in question are as follows:

This first group describe his coming “FOR his saints.”

1 Thessalonians 4:15-18:
"For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming [parousia] of the Lord, shall not precede those who have fallen asleep [died]. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel's call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words."

This has a parallel in 1 Corinthians 15:51,52:
"Lo! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed."

John 14:3:
And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to myself so that where I am, there you may be also.”

There are others, but these are sufficient.

One point that it is absolutely vital to note is that, in none of these scriptures referring to the “going of the church to be with Christ” at the end of the age, is the actual phrase “coming for his saints” used. This may not seem significant but it is.

The next group describes his coming “With his saints”:

1Thess. 3:13
"...so that he may establish your hearts unblamable in holiness before our God and Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all his saints.

Jude 14
Speaking of the Second Coming: “See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones…”

The word “saints” is, in the Greek, hagios and it means, literally, “separate, holy (ones)”.  The Hebrew has several related words based around the same root idea of separation. It is used regularly of God’s people in both the Old and New Testaments.

I know Christians are “saints” so we could substitute one word for another but to do so is not necessarily going to give the right answer. Evangelicals believe in the Divine inspiration of Scripture and this inspiration extends to the actual words used in particular places so it is not necessarily legitimate to simply substitute one idea for another. This is a case in point.

The word hagios is also used in another way, referring to the holy angels. During the inter-testament period “Holy Ones” became a common name for angels. This is evidenced by the Apocryphal “Book of Enoch” where angels are always called “Holy Ones”. Enoch is directly quoted in Jude 14 speaking of the Second Coming: “See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones…” The translators of the NIV have correctly translated it “Holy Ones” because that is the meaning of it in Enoch, and there it means “angels.” It is not a reference to the redeemed saints of God.

Thus, in fact, one of the two references in the New Testament to “the Saints/ holy ones” coming WITH Christ at the end of the age (Jude 14) is actually talking about angels, not about redeemed men and women.


Thus Jude is in synch with other passages of scripture that speak of Christ coming with the angels at the end of the age such as:

MATT 13:41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out

of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil.

MATT 13:42 They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be

weeping and gnashing of teeth.

MATT 24:31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they

will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to

the other.

1THES 4:16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud

command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God,

and the dead in Christ will rise first.

2THES 1:7 and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well. This

will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire

with his powerful angels.

 Arguably the other (1 Thess 3:13) could mean the same – angels and not men which is probably why the NIV translates it “holy ones”.

The normal rule of interpreting scripture (the law of comparison) is that when we are faced with a choice of meanings (i.e. Does hagios mean people or angels in 1 Thess 3:13) we should give weight to the other scriptures that seem to be talking about the same thing and use the definitions we derive from them in the place where there is debate. Jude is clearly angels (one only has to read Enoch to see this) and there are several other clear references to Jesus coming with angels. The law of comparison dictates that 1 Thess 3:13 is most likely to be understood as “angels”.

So besides there being NO actual instances of the phrase “coming FOR his saints” in the New Testament there is probably no actual use of the phrase “Coming with his saints” – meaning redeemed people – in the New Testament either.

But there is a lot of talk about Jesus coming “with the angels” and when he does that he will take his followers to be with him.

So the argument put forward that: “there is a difference between Christ coming FOR his saints and his coming WITH his saints” actually has no place in Biblical interpretation as neither phrase actually occurs in scripture. One can hardly build a doctrine of a pre-tribulation rapture of the church on the basis of two fabricated phrases that don’t actually appear in scripture.

Now I presume that the “dead in Christ” will come with Christ at the time of the rapture so that they can receive their resurrection bodies – but this does not help the pre-tribulation argument here and the “coming with his saints” that they are arguing for is actually at the END of the tribulation, on the day of the Lord.

The Tribulation is NOT the wrath of God.

The Wrath of God is NOT the Tribulation.

“We are not Destined to Wrath.”

This is, of course, a quote from 1 Thessalonians 5:9.

Dispensational interpreters argue that this proves we do not go through the Tribulation. Their argument is as follows:

The (Great) Tribulation is the Wrath of God.

Christians are exempted from the Wrath of God (1 Thess 5:9).

Therefore we must be raptured before the Tribulation starts.

As an argument it sounds good, but it all hinges on the truth of one statement: “The (Great) Tribulation is the wrath of God.” Is this true? If it is true then obviously the rapture happens before the Tribulation starts, if it is not true then we need to be sure on what the Wrath of God really is so we don’t end up arguing faulty positions.

So, to find the answer, I did what I recommend you all do. I went to my trusty Young’s Bible Concordance and did a word study on “Wrath.” If you have computer software you will find this easier to do than I did, back in the primitive past (only 30 years ago – B.C. – before computers).

What I found is the following:

1.                   The word “wrath,” when used as meaning “the Wrath of God,” has two distinct meanings:

(a)                God’s settled attitude towards sin and its effects. This is the primary meaning we find in Romans 1:18, “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against (sin).” Basically this usage means “God is angry at sin.” It’s not a very common usage of the word “wrath,” but it is there.

(b)               The Second meaning is more active and this is the primary usage in Scripture. Every now and then things get so bad that God has to actively judge mankind to halt the slide into evil. In this sense “Wrath” means “the direct action of God in judging and punishing sin.” These actions of God are “outbursts of wrath in time.” Some events that can be identified in Scripture as outbursts of “the Wrath of God” include the Flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the Destruction of Israel and Judah by the Assyrians and Babylonians and the Death of Christ.  There is also a less dramatic “outburst” attested to in Romans 1, where we are told “God gave them up…,” the result being worse sin and hence worse suffering. As Martin Luther said, “Sin is also the punishment for sin.” Also in this list falls the “End Time Wrath of God.”

2.                   When looking at the “outbursts of God’s wrath” in Scripture there is a clear pattern in both the Old and New Testaments. It is not hard to discern between the “Wrath of God” which will come at the end of the Age and other outbursts of “God’s wrath.” Most of the references are to the end of the Age. The ones that aren’t are pretty clear as to what they do refer to.

3.                   When the “Wrath of God” is talked about, meaning “the End Time Wrath” it is nearly always connected with the “Day of the Lord,” the day God will come with his Messiah, rescue his servants and judge the evil of the earth – all of this culminating in the setting up of his eternal kingdom. Nearly always “wrath” is directly said to be “on that Day” (The Law of Context in operation). So tight is that identification, that the Day of the Lord is sometimes called “the Day of Wrath.” Where the Day of the Lord is not mentioned in connection with “wrath,” we are compelled to make the connection because of parallel cross references (The Law of Comparison in operation).

So the only conclusion we can come to from Scripture, is that the end time “wrath of God” falls on “the Day of the Lord,” and only then. It does not come before that date. In fact, Ezekiel 38:18 tells us that it is “in that day…my wrath will be aroused.” It is not aroused fully until then.

The "Day of the Lord" is the last day of the Great Tribulation, the day Christ appears and wraps it all up. The Day of the Lord is NOT the Tribulation – it is never identified as such in the Bible, even if some interpreters have tried to make that connection.

This guides us in interpreting Revelation. I have already argued in this blog for a cyclic interpretation of Revelation where the Seals, Trumpets and Bowls run concurrently, the seventh of each being the same event. The Seventh Seal and Seventh Trumpet are the “Wrath of God” and this is expanded in the seven Bowls, all of which are the “wrath.” You will find, in examining Revelation, that “wrath” is only mentioned in connection with the seventh seal, the seventh trumpet and the seven bowls. This also tells us that the first six seals and the first six trumpets are not actually direct judgments of God, they are something else.

Actually the Seals, which run through the Tribulation as far as I can tell, directly indicate that they are not the wrath of God as such. This is clear when the Wrath of God is referred to in the sixth seal, "Then the kings....called to the mountains and the rocks, 'Fall on us and hide us from the wrath of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb. for the great day of their wrath has come.'"
We need to think logically about this to hear what they are saying. This is the sixth seal and it is clearly the morning of the day of the Lord at the end of the tribulation. They use Old Testament terminology ("the day of his wrath") to describe the day of the Lord. Their call is that the mountains and the rocks would fall on them to hide them from the wrath of God. The clear implications of this are as follows:
(1) They know what is about to happen - the preaching of the saints in the tribulation has informed people so they know what is going to happen at the end of the age - the wrath of God is going to come. They can even recognise signs that indicate that the actual day has come.

(2) It is obvious that, though the day of wrath has come, the wrath itself has not yet come. This is logically correct because they are calling out for the mountains and rocks to hide them from the wrath. If the wrath had already come they would be already dead, the wrath would have already destroyed them.

So here we have a situation where we have arrived at the day of the Lord and the wrath of God has not yet come. It does come on the day of the Lord - the Old Testament makes that clear but at the time of the sixth seal it has not yet come. It comes with the seventh seal - the seventh seal is the wrath.

The same thing happens with the trumpets - no mention is made of wrath until the song of the seventh trumpet (Rev 11:18). The wrath itself is described in 8:5, 11:19 and ch 16 "flashes of lightening, loud noises, thunder, heavy hail, hail, an earthquake" - this list of events is taken straight from the many Old Testament descriptions of the wrath of God and is a sort of signature description of the wrath of God.

So the wrath of God does not appear until the day of the Lord and as a logical consequence of this fact the Tribulation is NOT the wrath of God. Whatever the bad things that happen in the Tribulation are, they are not the wrath of God.

So this leads to the following conclusion: All that is required for 1 Thess 5:9 to be true is that the Church be raptured BEFORE the wrath of God falls on the Day of the Lord. So Christ could appear at 11:59:59am on the Day of the Lord, rapture the Church and then pour out his wrath at Midday, one second later. 1 Thess 5:9 would then have been literally fulfilled. He could, if he wants to, cut it finer than that!

So the Dispensational interpretation of 1 Thess 5:9 fails because it makes a false assumption, namely that the “wrath of God” is the same thing as “the (Great) Tribulation.” At the same time the implication concerning the rapture is shown to be false. Sloppy thinking does not lead to good Biblical interpretation. It will not matter how many times a Dispensational teacher says, "The Tribulation is the wrath of God" - it will never make it so.

Check it out for yourself. Get out your concordance.That's what I did. After all our doctrines and teachings should be based on the statements of scripture and not on our assumptions.