Page 132 - The Rapture Question by John F. Walvoord

The Rapture Question: Revised and Enlarged Edition
however, he quoted without distinction passages referring to
the Rapture and passages referring to the Second Coming.
Payne did note that there are certain predictions that have
already been fulfilled, such as Peter’s predicted execution, the
statements that there would be a long period between the first
and second comings of Christ, and the prediction of Paul's
death. He also held that the destruction of Jerusalem has
already been fulfilled, and accordingly all these prophecies arc
no longer hindrances to imminency. In this he would agree
with pretribulationists.
The most serious problem that Payne faced is the fulfill­
ment of Daniel 9:27. This he solved following the pattern of
amillennial interpretation by applying it to the past as already
fulfilled, cither in the destruction of Jerusalem at A.D. 70 or
later. Accordingly, he did not expect any literal future fulfill­
ment of the last seven years predicted in Daniel 9:27. Even
the problem of the rise of the Antichrist was understood by
Payne to relate to some contemporary leader. In 1962 when
he wrote his major work on the subject, he thought Nikita
Khrushchev would be a good candidate for the Anti­
christ.17 Actually. Payne was not concerned as to who ful­
fills it, but he felt that some contemporary character would
fit into this role.
In support of his position, Payne also offered an analysis
of the Book of Revelation in which he attempted “a synthesis
of the preterist, historical, and futuristic systems of interpreta­
tion, employing each method at those points where it would
seem best suited to the context concerned.”18 Any' interpreter
of the Book of Revelation should realize that such an approach
is quite illogical and subjective and does not provide any rea­
sonable explanation of the entire Book of Revelation. In gen­
eral, the classic view requires spiritualization of all conflicting
prophecies in a selective way to support his conclusions. For
this reason, most posttribulationists today' reject Payne’s
classic view. His view is all the more inconsistent because he
138