A Commentary on 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 (Part Five)

The meeting in the air: a “pre-tribulational” event

In contrast with the eon-consummating coming of Christ prophesied in Zech. 14:3-4, Matt. 24:30-31 and Rev. 19:11-21 (when Christ will come “on the clouds of heaven with power and much glory,” defeat the enemies of Israel, and deliver God’s people), I believe that the event prophesied in 1 Thess. 4:15-17 will be completely distinct from – and will be occurring at least seven years prior to – Christ’s return to earth. According to this view, the meeting in the air referred to in v. 17 is not going to be immediately followed by a descent of Christ and the saints to earth. Rather, it’s going to be followed by the ascent of Christ and the saints to the heavenly realm from which we’re told, in v. 16, that Christ “will be descending.”

Since I’ve provided a more in-depth defense of this so-called “pre-tribulational” understanding of the timing of the snatching away elsewhere on my blog, I’m just going to present a few scripture-based arguments and brief remarks in support of it here. I’ll begin my summarized defense with the following argument:

1. God did not appoint those in the body of Christ to indignation, but rather to the “procuring of salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thess. 5:9).

2. The salvation to which those in the body of Christ have been appointed will involve being snatched away from the earth to be with Christ, so that we may “be living at the same time together with him” (1 Thess. 4:15-17; 5:9).

3. The snatching away is the means by which God will prevent the body of Christ on earth from going through “the coming indignation” (1 Thess. 1:10; 5:10).

What, exactly, is this “coming indignation” referred to in 1 Thess. 1:10, and how will it begin? Answer: this refers to the indignation of God that will be manifested against the inhabitants of the earth during the future “day of the Lord.” And according to Paul, the status of those in the body of Christ is such that it would be impossible for us to be on the earth when the day of the Lord arrives. Paul described the saints in the body of Christ as ”sons of the light and sons of the day,” and as being “of the day” rather than “of the night” and “of the darkness.” It is by virtue of our status as “sons of the light and sons of the day” that Paul did not think any saints in the body of Christ would be overtaken by the day of the Lord as a thief. But the only way Paul could’ve believed that those in the body of Christ wouldn’t be overtaken by the day of the Lord as a thief is if he believed that the body of Christ wouldn’t be on the earth at the time when the day of the Lord arrived. That is, Paul must’ve believed that those on the earth who have the status of being “sons of the light and sons of the day” – i.e., everyone who is in the body of Christ – will be removed from the earth before the day of the Lord comes to be present. Consider the following argument:

1. The “day of the Lord” is the period of time during which the “coming indignation” will be occurring, and will be “coming as a thief in the night” upon those living on the earth at the time when it arrives (1 Thess. 5:1-3).

2. Paul did not believe the day of the Lord would overtake those in the body of Christ as a thief (:4-5).

3. Paul did not believe the body of Christ would be present on the earth when the day of the Lord came.

In my two-part study, ”Before the Pangs Begin,” I defended what I believe concerning when, in relation to certain prophesied events involving Israel and the nations, the coming of Christ to rescue believers will be taking place. In this study, I argued that the “day of the Lord” (and the “coming indignation” associated with it) will include those prophesied judgments that we find described in the book of Revelation (including the calamities associated with opening of the first four seals of the seven-sealed scroll), and which Christ referred to in Matthew 24:8 as “the beginning of pangs.” When we understand that the future events of which Christ prophesied in Matthew 24 will be occurring during the future day of the Lord/coming indignation, we can conclude that Christ’s coming to rescue those believers who constitute his body from the coming indignation must occur before these events begin. Consider the following argument:

1. According to what is revealed in 1 Thess. 5:1-3 and Rev. 6:1-4, the day of the Lord will begin at a time when peace has not yet been taken out of the earth (and when “extermination” is still “standing by” people “unawares”).

2. The warfare between nations and kingdoms referred to by Christ in Matthew 24:8 (which will be part of the “beginning of pangs”) corresponds to the peace-removing judgment associated with the opening of the second seal in Rev. 6:3-4.

3. The day of the Lord will begin before the warfare between nations and kingdoms referred to by Christ in Matthew 24:8 (which will be part of the “beginning of pangs”) begins.

From this conclusion it follows that the snatching away of the body of Christ must take place before the “beginning of pangs” referred to by Christ in Matt. 24:8 begin to occur. Moreover, when we realize that the “beginning of pangs” referred to by Christ will coincide with the first 3 ½ years of the final, 70^th heptad prophesied in Daniel 9:27, we can further conclude that the body of Christ is going to be snatched away before the 70^th heptad begins:

1. The events that Christ referred to as “the beginning of pangs” (Matt. 24:8) will coincide with the first half of the prophesied 70^th heptad (i.e., the seven-year time period prophesied in Daniel 9:27).

2. The snatching away is going to occur before the “beginning of pangs” begin to take place.

3. The snatching away is going to occur before the prophesied 70^th heptad begins. 

In my follow-up study, “The Timing of the Snatching Away in Relation to the 70^th Week,” I provided additional reasons for believing that the snatching away is going to be occurring before the 70^th heptad prophesied in Daniel 9:27 begins. Here are two related arguments defended in this study:

1. The day of the Lord is going to begin with what Paul referred to as “the apostasy” and “the unveiling of the man of lawlessness” (2 Thess. 2:2-3).

2. The unveiling of the man of lawlessness (as well as, I believe, the apostasy) will begin the fulfillment of Daniel 9:27, and is thus the prophesied event with which the 70^th heptad will begin.

3. The body of Christ is going to be snatched away before the prophesied 70^th heptad begins.

1. The man of lawlessness cannot be unveiled – and the 70^th heptad cannot begin – until after the “present detainer” has been removed from the earth (2 Thess. 2:1-8).

2. The “present detainer” to which Paul referred in 2 Thess. 2:7 is the body of Christ (i.e., the company of saints referred to in 2 Thess. 2:1 by the word “our”).

3. The body of Christ is going to be snatched away from the earth before the 70^th heptad begins.

The meaning of “meet”

Among those who disagree with the position briefly defended above, some have appealed to Paul’s use of the word translated “meet” in 1 Thess. 4:17 (apantēsis) in defense of the view that, after believers meet Christ in the air, Christ will then descend all the way to earth with believers in his company. Their appeal to the word apantēsis is based on the belief that, rather than simply meaning “to meet,” the word means something like, “to meet and then continue in the direction in which the person being met was going before the meeting took place.” But is this, in fact, what the word means?

According to the Concordant Literal New Testament’s “Keyword Concordance,” the elements of the word apantēsis are “FROM-INSTEADING.” The word is then defined simply as, “meeting, to meet” (the related word apantaō is, similarly, broken down into the elements, “FROM-INSTEAD,” and is defined as, “meet”). Strong’s defines apantēsis as follows: “a (friendly) encounter: - meet.” It defines the related word apantaō  as, “to meet away, that is, encounter: - meet.” Based on these definitions, the most that could be said – and what I am perfectly happy to concede as being the case – is that, in the Greek Scriptures, apantēsis conveys the idea of a friendly meeting/encounter between two parties coming from opposite directions.

Significantly, the word apantēsis appears twenty-five times in the Septuagint (or LXX) translation of the Hebrew scriptures (1 Sam. 4:1; 6:13; 9:14; 13:10, 15; 15:12; 16:4; 21:1; 25:32, 34; 30:21; 2 Sam. 6:20; 19:25; 1 Chr. 12:17; 14:8; 19:5; 2 Chr. 12:11; 15:2; 19:2; 20:17; 28:9; Est. 8:12; Jer. 27:3; 41:6; 51:31). This translation was commonly read in Paul’s day, and is believed by some scholars to have been the primary version of Scripture read and used by both Paul and Christ.[1] And while, in the LXX, the word was always used to refer to some sort of meeting taking place, the exact nature of the “meeting” in view was not necessarily a friendly one (in a few instances, the word was used to refer to two armies meeting in battle, or to a messenger going out to meet an approaching army). And even when the context makes it clear that the meeting was friendly, it did not necessarily involve one party being escorted by the other (although this was sometimes the case). Nor is it always clear where (or in what direction) the two parties went after the meeting took place. The fact is that, according to its usage in the LXX, the word apantēsis was clearly neutral with regard to the exact nature of the meeting in view, or with regard to what took place after the meeting in view occurred. The only shared meaning between the various occurrences of the word in the LXX is that of a meeting between two parties.

In E.W. Bullinger’s Critical Lexicon and Concordance, apantēsis (“meet”) is defined as follows: “To come or go from a place towards a person; and so to meet face to face from opposite directions; esp., to meet and come back with the person.” Even allowing that Bullinger’s last definition (“to meet and come back with the person”) is a possible definition of apantēsis, it is evident that even Bullinger did not consider this to have been the exclusive definition of the word. In any case, I would argue that, with regard to the last part of his definition, Bullinger was simply making the same mistake as those who appeal to this word in support of their position. That is, because two of the three contexts in which apantēsis is found in Scripture (Matt. 25:6 and Acts 28:15) unambiguously involve the person being met remaining in the company of the other party while continuing on his way (or imply this), Bullinger thought it legitimate to attach this contextual information to the actual definition of the word. But again, to do this is to force the word to do the work of the context in which it is used. The word, by itself, need (at most) denote only a friendly encounter between two parties coming from opposite directions. Given such a meaning, it’s no surprise that it would be used in the contexts in which it is found. 

In light of the above definitions – as well as its usage in the LXX – I submit that those who are basing their understanding of what happens after believers “meet” Christ in the air on Paul’s use of the word apantēsis are making a single word do the work that only the context in which the word is used can do. It is the context in which the word is used – and not the word in itself – which should inform our understanding of what, exactly, takes place after whatever “meeting” is in view. This follows from the fact that the argument that is based on the use of the term “meet” in other contexts necessarily relies on the various contexts in which the word is used for its perceived strength (that’s precisely why those who use this argument appeal to other contexts in which the word appears). In the other examples in which apantēsis is used, the reason we know for sure what happens after the meeting in view takes place is because it’s clearly evident (or can be inferred) from the context in which the word is used. If the other instances in which the word is used were as contextually ambiguous as is 1 Thess. 4:17, the argument would lose all of its perceived force. So those who argue that apantēsis tells us what happens after the meeting in view takes place are erroneously ascribing information and meaning to a word that only the context in which the word appears can provide.

After quoting the four passages in which the word apantēsis appears in the Greek Scriptures, one proponent of the “post-tribulational” interpretation of 1 Thess. 4:15-17 (Danny Russino) writes, “In every case this word ‘meet’ does not mean continuing on into the place from where the one being met came. On the contrary, it means to go out and meet the one coming to the place from which those meeting him came.” Contrary to Russino’s assertion, however, there’s simply no good reason to believe that the word apantēsis actually means either of these things. The word, by itself, simply doesn’t tell us what happens after a meeting takes place. Nor does it tell us what the exact intent or purpose of the one being met is. Russino is letting additional information that is not inherent in the meaning of the word apantēsis (and which simply means “to meet”) redefine the word so that he can then claim that it means what he wants it to mean in 1 Thess. 4:17. But that which is said to happen after two parties “meet” doesn’t change the meaning of the word apantēsis. The word still means “to meet.”

It should also be noted that, in the very statement in which Russino is quoted as using the word “meet,” above, he used the word in accord with its standard, neutral meaning (“...it means to go out and MEET the one coming…”). So it seems that Russino and others can’t even make their point concerning the meaning of a word that is, without exception, simply translated “meet” in 1 Thess. 4:17 without using the neutral – and correct – meaning of the word “meet.” Again, the term apantēsis need, at most, be understood as referring to a friendly encounter between those coming from two different directions. Given this meaning of the word, it makes perfect sense that apantēsis would be used in the context of bridesmaids meeting a bridegroom, or of the brothers from Rome meeting Paul. They’re all examples of a friendly meeting taking place between two parties coming from different locations. What happens after these meetings is simply not inherent in the meaning of the word itself. It is the context in which the word occurs – and not the word in itself – which alone can provide this information. If what is said (or not said) in the immediate context makes it unclear as to what exactly takes place after the meeting (as I believe to be the case in 1 Thess. 4:17), some other broader contextual considerations will have to be appealed to in order to determine this.

Thus, while Paul’s use of apantēsis in 1 Thess. 4:17 may be consistent with the position that Christ is going to continue descending all the way to earth after the meeting in the air takes place, it is also consistent with the position that, after descending from heaven to the earth’s atmosphere and snatching away the saints in the body of Christ from the earth to meet him in the air, Christ is then going to return to heaven with them in his company. Apart from contextual indicators, the word by itself is simply inconclusive with regard to what is going to take place afterwards. And since the immediate context of 1 Thess. 4:17 doesn’t tell us what happens after the meeting takes place (unlike the other instances in which the word is used in Scripture), we have to let other broader contextual considerations inform our understanding of what is going to take place. 

Some who believe that Christ is going to descend to the earth immediately after the snatching away claim that the expression eis apantēsis is actually a technical (or semi-technical) term that denotes the formal reception/welcome of a visiting dignitary. In an article written in 1930, German scholar Erick Peterson wrote that apantēsis “is to be understood as a technical term for a civic custom of antiquity whereby a public welcome was accorded by a city to important visitors.” And in their work on extra-biblical use of Greek vocabulary around the time of the writing of the Greek scriptures (also published in 1930), Moulton and Milligan similarly noted that the word apantēsis “...seems to have been a kind of technical term for the official welcome of a newly arrived dignitary.” Those who believe that the future scene described in 1 Thess. 1:16-17 will involve Christ’s post-tribulational return to earth to establish the kingdom then claim that, since (historically) the residents of a city would go out to meet the honored guest/dignitary and then escort him back to their city, its use by Paul in 1 Thess. 4:17 supports their position.

However, it is doubtful as to whether “eis apantēsis” did, in fact, have such a fixed, technical (or “semi-technical”) meaning in Paul’s day, or that Paul’s use of the term should be understood as conveying such a meaning.[2] And even granting that the term did (or could) have this technical/semi-technical meaning – and that Paul used it for this reason – its use by Paul would still not necessarily support the position that Christ is going to descend to the earth after the snatching away takes place. For, again, according to the more “technical” definition provided above, nothing is said about where those who welcome the arriving dignitary go after the meeting takes place. It must also be emphasized that neither Peterson nor Moulton and Milligan say that the term apantēsis includes the notion of returning with the dignitary to the place from which the greeting party came from (in fact, it’s evident that Milligan himself did not believe that the term implies that the dignitary necessarily return back with the greeters, as noted in his commentary on 1 Thessalonians: “The thought is that the 'raptured' saints will be carried up into the 'air,' as the interspace between heaven and earth, where they will meet the descending Lord, and then either escort him down to the earth in accordance with O.T. prophecy, or more probably in keeping with the general context accompany Him back to heaven.”).

Moreover, while there may be certain similarities between the event described in 1 Thess. 4:13-18 and the arrivals of earthly dignitaries/magistrates to certain cities, there are also important differences that cannot be overlooked. The fact is that what Paul described in this passage has no exact parallel or correspondence with anything that has ever happened in this world with any earthly dignitary/magistrate. For example, believers are not simply going to depart on their own accord to meet Christ after he descends from heaven into earth’s upper atmosphere. There is no volitional, premeditated action on the part of the saints during this event. Instead, the saints in the body of Christ are forcefully – and without any preparation on their part – “snatched away” by Christ to meet him in the air. There are, of course, more differences that could be noted, but the point is that any analogy that may exist between what is described in 1 Thess. 4:15-17 and events of a more mundane nature that involved the arrival of dignitaries on earth in ancient times cannot be pressed too far.

The only reason anyone can argue from the more technical definitions that Christ will be descending to earth with believers in his company is because it is assumed that Christ's intended purpose is the same as when an earthly dignitary would meet the residents of a city outside of the city. But when apantēsis was used in reference to a meeting that takes place between the residents of a city and a visiting dignitary, it would be clear from the context that the intent of the visiting dignitary was to visit the city of the residents who are coming out to meet him. However, what Paul wrote in 1 Thess. 4:13-18 does not make it clear what Christ’s intended purpose and destination is after believers are snatched away to meet him in the air. This must be determined by other considerations (among which are, I believe, what Scripture reveals concerning the nature and duration of the “coming indignation” from which Christ, our Rescuer, is going to be rescuing us).

---

[1] See http://www.biblestudytools.com/bible-study/tips/what-bible-did-jesus-use-11638841.html and http://www.theopedia.com/Septuagint.

[2] See, for example, Michael Cosby’s excellent article refuting this position: “Hellenistic Formal Receptions and Paul’s Use of Apantesis in 1 Thessalonians 4:17,” Michael R. Cosby, Bullentin for Biblical Research 4 (1994) 15-34 (https://www.ibr-bbr.org/files/bbr/BBR_1994_02_Cosby-Apantesis1Thes.pdf). See also the following articles: https://www.raptureready.com/featured/ice/sky.html and https://withalliamgod.wordpress.com/2014/04/10/evaluating-eis-apantesin-eschatological-hope/