Pre / Post Tribulation

I'll answer your question by going in a round-about way through the genre of sci-fi or (as we say in film) "speculative fiction".

I've never been much of a fan of what's sometimes called "alteranate reality stories." And that's one of the reasons why the highly acclaimed anime film Howl's Moving Castle completely turned me off (it was an odd mix of dirigibles, bi-planes, Tudor-England, and space ships). Most alternate realities now adays are based off of video games and are just laughable.

I wanna stipulate the difference between alternate reality and future dystopia: an alternate reality takes place either in the present or else the past, or (sometimes) the very very near-future, and the setting (not the plot but the setting) relies upon our being able to swallow the idea that something here in real life concerning events from our real past history is somehow different. One alternate reality that I did very much dig (not the book but the film--I never read the book) was Fatherland which takes place in the 1960's in the nation of Germania--the nation that Hitler was able to build after America refrained from entering the war in Europe back in the 1940's (maybe they didn't refrain,maybe they just plain lost). Hitler is shown to be an old man in the 1960's, like Fidel Castro. As another example, Children of Men is NOT an alternate reality because nothing up through the year 2006 (the year of film's release) is required to have been historically altered in order to make the story to take place in the year 2027.

I do like sci-fi in general, though, but MANY alternate realities are (to me) lazy writing. Instead of doing factual historical research and sticking with historical truth, the writer would rather invent his own truth to fit his already ridiculous story. But I did enjoy Fatherland because the "What if..." of that story was frighteningly compelling. (And as a disclaimer, our resident poster Judg is writing an alternate reality right now which I think sounds WAY cool, and is most likely going to also be a valid and respectable "What if..." like Fatherland.)




To answer your question ......





I think most Christians are pretty set in their views on what the correct theology of End Times is all about. And, in my estimation, the current majority opinion amongst American Christians is that Pre-Trib is the way to go. So you're already at a disadvantage by trying to put forth what is presently a minority position.

And so you would essentialy be proposing an "alternate reality" for them to try and accomodate. You're asking them to suspend disbelief about something that they feel is a fact--a dearly held one too.

I don't find alternate realities to be very popular, except amongst the hard-core sci-fi, comic book, graphic novel, and video game crowd. (Comic books in particular are just bursting with alternate realities. One famous "What if..." example is "What if the baby Kal-El's space ship had crashed on a farm in the Soviet Union instead of the United States?" And so an entire comic series about the Soviet Superman fighting for "truth, justice and the Communist way" was conceived.)

I'm gonna say something a little harsh here about American Christians: I don't think they're "open minded" enough to embrace an alternate reality (one that flies in the face of what they feel is the truth).

The only people who would probably buy your book are the disgruntled Post-Trib minority who hate the Left Behind series' Pre-Trib bent and want affirmation of their own views via a post-trib alternative.

I have no real opinion about pre- or post-Trib. [whispers] I wonder if the Trib really did = Nero's time, based on my admittedly limited study of Revelation, and then next thing we all see will simply be Jesus, sans-Trib.

That being established, III, if you can craft 3-D characters I can give a crap about, a plot I CAN'T drive a Mack truck through, and in general a book written above a 4th-grade level, I'd read it.

Harsh, I know. Under the umbrella of "let's see what all the fuss is about,"I forced myself to read LB 1, 2, one other in the middle, and Glorious Appearing--at which point I was so disgusted I went on a strict diet of Dickens, Tolkien, and Lovecraft to improve my literary nutritional intake.

I'm an oddball Lily.

I don't think most people got their ideas about the Tribulation from Left Behind. Most of the churches I'm familar with have taught pre-Trib for the last 40 years. (That's not to say that LB hasn't helped it along!)

That being said, I think a majority believe in pre-Trib, not from some philosophical stance, but just because they believe that's how it's going to be. A lot of people don't even know there's an alternative.

What this says to me is that a bunch of people will read it, scratch their heads, and say "No. That's not right. That's not how it's supposed to be."

The legitimacy of their belief aside, at the very least, it's going to pull them out of the story. That's something you never want to do. Perhaps instead, you should incorporate it into the story. Show how one of the characters thought the Rapture would be pre-Trib but now realizes it's not. Nothing so heavy-handed as a lecture, but working it into the story will allow the reader to get used to the idea and hopefully suspend disbelief.

Roger J Carlson said:

Perhaps instead, you should incorporate it into the story. Show how one of the characters thought the Rapture would be pre-Trib but now realizes it's not.

Click to expand...

I was so totally going to suggest that. But then I thought ..... hmmmmm .... maybe it will look like he's DELIBERATELY trying to be oppositional to Pre-Trib, as opposed to merely offering an alternative possibility. Then it might look like he's trying to be contentious, or worse, subversive!


BTW, I have loosely read of a concept called "the pre-wrath rapture" which is technically a mid-trib position, except it doesn't pin it down to a precise 3.5 year landmark of exactly in the middle of an exact 7 years. It keeps it pretty open-ended.

I haven't read a left-behind book, thought all of Revelation was just figurative/symobls until I began actually studying it.

I think it would turn off Pre-Tribs to read a book about them going through the tribulation. If you had escaped a very traumatic situation (e.g. kidnapping and the kidnapper was still on the loose and was stalking you) would you want to read a story about a kidnapper or about a stalker.

I don't think so.

I don't think I would enjoy Pilgrims Progress now as much as I did when I was a child. John Bunyan's book is more of a work-to-get-to-Heaven approach than I now believe. I have picked it up and thought about reading it to my kids (like my mother did to me) but I just couldn't buy in to it.

M.A. Sempine
www.masempine.blogspot.com

III said:

The funny thing is, the idea of a pre-trib rapture is only a hundred years old (give or take), and preterism and mid-trib rapture ideas have been around much longer. If I had written this book a hundred years ago this would have been much easier. Of course I couldn't type as fast back then.

Click to expand...

I'd always read that American Christian fundamentalism as we know it today is a little over a hundred years old, along with the bulk of modern end-times terminology and Rapture fixation that comes with it. This is what we learn as Catholic boys and girls. So it's an interesting change of perspective to see the "it's only a hundred years old" criticism of one fundamentalist concept in contrast with another fundamentalist concept understood as being more traditional.

"Most Christians I know are pretty staunchly pre-trib" in the OP similarly raised my eyebrows. Again, quite a perspective difference. Most Christians I'm aware of are neither pre-trib or post-trib -- most Catholics, mainstream Protestants, and various others 'round the world. I've known many exceptions, of course, but they were always raised in fundamentalism or affiliated with a modern fundamentalist/evangelical church that happened to concentrate on rapture/tribulation interpretations of the Book of Revelation.

At first I typed an explanation for why I'm not an eschatologist nor share the pop take on Revelation, but it was long and boring so I erased it. It sounded too much like a religious argument I didn't intend to bring up. Better to aver that in the end, one side is no more Christian than the other based on anyone's hair splitting. And in the context of that last statement, the hot-button division you were concerned about between pre-tribs and post-tribs belong to the same side.

It's been repeated many times on this forum how badly written the Left Behind series is. I won't dispute that, but I'll put in a positive word for a change. I enjoyed reading the first book of the series and got something out of it. Sure, I noticed the writing wasn't tops and I didn't appreciate the cliffhanger ending (indicating a commercial-driven structure that kept me from getting past the third book, along with a steady drop in writing quality as far as I could tell), but it was good enough for me most of the time that I spent reading that first book.

So what did this devil-horned liberal Catholic get out of a story girdered on a mythology he rejects? A real emotional reminder of why Jesus' original description of the Rapture has always been important to us Christians. We truly never know the day nor the hour. Every day must be lived and loved as the last. Whether that last day for each us literally fits the description of the popular Rapture scenario -- clothes suddenly dropping to the ground, unmanned cars crashing together, whatever -- doesn't really matter as far as the personal point is concerned. Obviously I believe it's far more likely for that last day to be any of our typical deaths -- or conversely the typical deaths of our loved ones while we're left behind. Those scenarios are real and we will all really deal with them -- and those of us who believe will also face whatever that means beyond death. It deeply affected me to consider the horror of people disappearing around me that way, losing the last chance to share in their love based on whatever stupid choices I've made before. In these relationships, I include of course my relationship with the Lord; but I understand the Left Behind series was also bought by plenty of non-believers as well who might have found some relevance in the core message of never knowing when the end will come. The device of the Rapture, then, made the book an effective fantasy story by touching some points I recognized as real and could wonder about in my real life.

Don't be offended if I suggest that any end-times book dealing with supernatural experience should be treated as a fantasy story. I submit to you that it would have to be just that no matter how many firm religious beliefs are plugged into it -- it remains speculative fiction. You'll be making up characters and making up events. All the religious aspects your mind is set on will have to be described with all kinds of made-up details. Why not trust your readers to appreciate it as a creative work rather than as aligning with every detail of their religion?

In other words, it can't be possible that your intention is to accurately predict and describe the tribulation, etc., since you know your book won't do so. As nonfiction, it wouldn't have to have a point beyond providing and documenting such description. As the fantasy fiction it must be instead, its strengths are quite different even if you consider them to be evangelical in purpose. You obviously have some other primary purpose for it, whether that is to inspire people in hard times, or to urge them to find their faith, or to apply the command to love others, or whatever. If you put that focus over and above whether it fits someone else's narrow interpretation of the apocalypse, your work will appeal to everyone to the degree real life and real humanity can be recognized within it.

AzBobby said:

Most Christians I'm aware of are neither pre-trib or post-trib -- most Catholics, mainstream Protestants, and various others 'round the world.

Click to expand...

Ah, you beat me to it!

My only comment would be what was said above -- write an interesting, plausible-sounding story, and you should be fine.

I'm not a private detective but I sure do dig Raymond Chandler. I'm not a murdering adrenaline junkie in an alternate future but A Clockwork Orange was still a good read.

Story first, message second, maybe third. If there are some Christians who don't like your book because of disagreement with the underlying philosophies, then they aren't your audience, are they? If you write a really good book then it won't matter, a bunch of people will read it anyway.

The only things that stop me reading a book are boredom and bad writing. So write well about something interesting and, at the very least, people like me may buy your book.

III said:

Hi Maurice,

I think you've just encapsulated the problem. (I'm stepping on my soapbox so look out!) As Christians, we're not supposed to be afraid of persecution or even torture; we're supposed to be greatly encouraged by it. 2 Thessalonians and James are great examples of it, but the whole NT is full of it. The authors said it was "pure joy" and "a priviledge" to suffer for Christ. There's nothing in scripture that hints otherwise.

Okay, I'm intentionally stopping myself there because I could totally rant for pages, but I'm sure you guys can see where I'm going with this. I don't think the writers were exaggerating - it really is a blessed thing to suffer for Christ, not something to be feared and avoided. (stepping off soapbox now).

But I get your point of people not wanting to read about things where they have had a negative experience. My wife was mugged and beaten in our garage when she was 6 months pregnant and I was on the other side of town. I can't really stand to watch brutal mugging scenes on TV or movies anymore.

Click to expand...

My son once summed up his position by saying, "I don't think God wants a bunch of wimps in Heaven." He was kidding of course; he's deeper than that.

(Really sorry about your wife's experience, III. Man, how do you deal with something like that? Rhetorical question, of course, not expecting you to relive it.)

III said:

The Catholic and Lutheran churches have always held to a Post-Trib eschatology (not that that necessarily makes it correct), with the exception of groups of full Preterists (those who believe the 2nd coming happened in 70 A.D.) It's only been in the last hundred years that the pre-trib view has become popularized, mostly because of novels like The late, great planet earth and the LB series. Partial Preterism (the belief that some eschatological prophecies were fulfilled in 70 A.D.) is also making a comeback.

Click to expand...

There's a relatively new angle on preterism called "partial preterism" that has the 70 AD event as pivotal to much of what's in Revelation, but not the actual Parousia. Hank Hanegraaff and Sigmund Brouwer's The Last Disciple series, written as a counterpoint to the Left Behind series takes that view, as they explain in their Epilogue. Good reading, I thought.

III said:

And Bruce, that leads to the answer to your question - how do you deal with your pregnant wife getting mugged and beaten? Through the faith and grace that God alone provides (not that I'm telling you anything you didn't already know, my older, wiser friend ). Some people view the Tribulation as God pouring out his wrath on everyone, but that's not what Scripture says. God never forsakes his people. Sure, they may have to live through difficult times (anyone read Fox's book of Martyrs?) but He provides the faith and grace to make it to the end of this life and gives us the secure hope of the life to come.

Now if I could just find a way to break my AW posting addiction and actually work on writing the book . . .

Click to expand...

Wonderful answer. Thought you might say that.

I Remember When We Just Called Ourselves Pre-Millenial

I really don't want this to sound too smart or cute.

You should write the book. During the tribulation, if you're correct about a post-trib rapture, it should really sell. There won't be any pre-trib believers then to reject the premise of your book.

If the Christians are all gone from the earth (except for the new believers durinng the tribulation) we'll find you up in heaven and tell you we were right all along.

From the discussion above, there appears to be enough of a post-trib audience to buy the book and enjoy it if it's well written and a good story.

Just thinking about the millenium as we pre-tribbers picture it, you'll have a thousand years to explain why you 'got it wrong.' Almost makes me hope you're right.

As for you tough guys who want tribulation's suffering--I admire your devotion and desire to do those things for Him. I admit that I would need a whole lot of His Grace to make it through anything close.

For His Glory
Maurice

I'd read a Mid-trib or Post-trib book, IF it was written better than most Christian fiction that's currently on the market. I don't have a staunch view on the Tribulation either way. Call me Pro-Rapture.