Page 181 - The Rapture Question by John F. Walvoord

The Rapture in the Gospels
rablc, literal translation, translated paralambano in Luke xvii.
31-5, by seize. The use of this word in the N.T. is absolutely
opposed to this; it is a good word; a word used exclusively in
the sense of‘take away with’ or ‘receive,’ or ‘take home.’”9 As
Reese and others have pointed out, the same word, paralam­
bano. is used in Matthew 24:41 and Luke 17:34-35 and is used
of the Rapture in John 14:3.
The fact is that paralambano is a common word and is not,
in itself, a theological concept. The argument by Reese that it
is always used in a friendly sense, however, is destroyed by the
fact that the same word is used in John 19:16-17 in reference to
taking Jesus to the cross, an obvious act of judgment that
contradicts the statement that the word is always used in a
friendly sense. Gundry was more cautious in his treatment of
this passage and noted that two different words appear,
namely, airii (v. 39) and paralambanff (vv. 40-41), and con­
cluded quite dogmatically, “But granting that the context in­
dicates judgment, wc arc not forced to conclude that ‘one will
be taken’ in judgment and ‘one will be left’ in safety. The
reverse may just as easily be understood: ‘one will be taken’ in
rapture and ‘one will be left’ for judgment.”10 Careful readers
will note that Gundry came to the conclusion purely from a
dogmatic standpoint without offering any evidence. While
Gundry thought it quite impressive that paralambano is used
for the Rapture several days later in John 14:3, he was
unwilling to treat the immediate context as determinative in
this case. It should be obvious to the impartial reader
that the posttribulationists simply have not made a case.
At the second coming of Christ, indeed, many will be taken
in judgment and some will be left to enter the millennial
kingdom. This is exactly the opposite of what happens at
the Rapture.
Gundry attempted to evade the force of this argument by
pointing out that the judgment of the nations, which occurs
later, is a different judgment. The problem is easily resolved
189