Blog

By Christian Phillips

As a Messianic Christian Jewish believer, my faith is anchored in the Scriptures, studied diligently in their original Hebrew and Greek contexts. I’ve read the Bible cover to cover, and one truth stands clear: the popular doctrine of the “rapture”—the notion that believers will be secretly whisked away to heaven before a period of great tribulation—is not rooted in Scripture. It’s a relatively recent theological construct that distorts the biblical call to endurance and witness through persecution in the name of Messiah Yeshua (Jesus).

This article examines why the rapture is not biblical, tracing its historical origins, highlighting the absence of the term in the original languages, and addressing misinterpretations in translations. My exhortation, as always, is to “study and show yourself approved” (2 Timothy 2:15), never taking one man’s word as divine truth from God.

The Word “Rapture” Is Absent from Scripture—And That Matters

The term “rapture” does not appear in the Bible—not in the Hebrew of the Tanakh, not in the Greek of the New Testament, nor in the Aramaic portions. The concept stems from the Latin Vulgate, where the Greek word harpazo in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 is translated as rapiemur, meaning “we shall be caught up” or “seized.” [33] But harpazo simply denotes a forceful snatching or carrying away, as seen in Acts 8:39 (Philip’s transport by the Spirit) or 2 Corinthians 12:2-4 (Paul’s vision of heaven), with no implication of a secret, pre-tribulation escape. [35]

In the Hebrew Bible, no equivalent term or concept suggests believers are removed before trials. For example, Daniel 12:1 speaks of a “time of trouble” where the righteous are delivered through, not from, distress. The Hebrew word tsar (tribulation or distress) implies enduring hardship, not evading it. [32]

English translations often obscure these nuances. Words like harpazo or tsar lose their contextual weight when rendered vaguely as “caught up” or “trouble” in English, leading to assumptions not present in the original texts. If the rapture were a foundational doctrine, wouldn’t the inspired authors have used explicit language? Their silence speaks volumes. Study the original languages yourself—never take one man’s word as divine truth.

The Historical Roots of the Rapture: A 19th-Century Novelty

The rapture, particularly the pre-tribulation version, is a modern invention, not an ancient teaching. It emerged around 1830 through John Nelson Darby, an Anglo-Irish theologian and founder of the Plymouth Brethren movement. [44] Darby’s dispensationalism divided history into distinct eras, introducing the idea that believers would be secretly raptured before a seven-year tribulation. [38]

This concept, barely 200 years old, gained traction through the Scofield Reference Bible (1909), which embedded rapture theology in its notes, influencing Protestant thought. [41] Later, 20th-century works like Hal Lindsey’s The Late Great Planet Earth (1970) and the Left Behind series by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins (1995 onward) popularized the idea, selling over 80 million copies and embedding fear of being “left behind” in evangelical culture. [44]

Before Darby, no major theologian, church council, or early church father taught a pre-tribulation rapture. Figures like Irenaeus (c. 130–202 CE), Justin Martyr (c. 100–165 CE), and Tertullian (c. 155–240 CE) described believers enduring tribulation under the Antichrist before Christ’s return. [10] Irenaeus, in Against Heresies, explicitly places the church in the end-time persecution, with no mention of escape. [15] Claims of pre-Darby rapture teachings, such as in the Didache or Pseudo-Ephraem, are misinterpretations when examined closely. [16]

The rapture’s absence from 1,800 years of Christian thought, coupled with its rise during 19th-century cultural shifts like the Industrial Revolution and millennial fervor, reveals it as a product of its time, not divine revelation. Study history for yourself—don’t accept one man’s word as truth.

Misinterpretations in Translation: Greek and Hebrew Clarity

Rapture advocates often point to 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17: “For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command… and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive… will be caught up (harpazo) together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.” This is not a secret event but a loud, visible return of Christ tied to the resurrection, not a separate rapture. [30] Paul’s purpose was to comfort persecuted believers about their deceased loved ones, not promise escape from trials.

Another key verse, Matthew 24:40-41 (“one will be taken and one left”), is often misread as a rapture. The Greek paralambanō (taken) aligns with judgment, as in the flood narrative (v. 39), where the wicked are “taken” in destruction, while the righteous, like Noah, remain through God’s protection. [19] Hebrew parallels in Genesis 7 reinforce this: the righteous endure, not vanish.

Similarly, Revelation 3:10 (“I will keep you from the hour of trial”) uses tēreō ek, meaning “guard through,” not removal, echoing Yeshua’s prayer in John 17:15 for protection in the world. [1] English translations like the KJV muddy these waters with ambiguous phrasing, but the original languages tell a consistent story of endurance. Dig into the Greek and Hebrew yourself—don’t rely on one man’s translation.

Believers’ Role in the Tribulation: To Witness, Not Escape

If all believers are raptured, who will preach to unbelievers during the tribulation? Scripture answers: believers will be here, proclaiming the gospel amid persecution. Matthew 24:9-14 states that disciples will face hatred and death, yet “this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world… and then the end will come.” The 144,000 in Revelation 7 and the two witnesses in Revelation 11 are among those sealed to testify, enduring martyrdom for Yeshua. [0]

As a Messianic Jew, I see this reflecting the Hebrew prophets—Elijah, Jeremiah, Daniel—who suffered to call people to repentance. Yeshua endured the cross; His followers are called to take up theirs (Matthew 16:24). The rapture doctrine risks leaving believers unprepared for persecution, fostering a false hope of escape. Revelation 7:14 describes saints coming “out of the great tribulation,” having persevered, not avoided it. [5] Study these passages for yourself—don’t let one man’s teaching define your faith.

Conclusion: Study and Stand Firm

The rapture, a 19th-century invention absent from the Bible’s Hebrew and Greek texts, is not a divine truth but a human construct. It distorts the call to endure as witnesses for Messiah, preaching through tribulation until His glorious return. As Messianic believers, let’s cling to the Scriptures, studying the original languages and historical context to discern truth.

“Study to show yourself approved” (2 Timothy 2:15), testing every teaching against God’s Word. Never take one man’s word as divine truth—trust the Spirit to guide you into all truth through the Bible alone.

Christian Phillips is a Messianic Christian Jewish believer passionate about studying Scripture in its original context and encouraging others to seek truth directly from God’s Word.

By Christian Phillips

As a Messianic believer, my heart beats for Israel, a nation that embodies God’s covenant with Abraham and shines as a beacon of hope in a turbulent world. On June 13, 2025, Israel stunned the globe with “Operation Rising Lion,” a daring strike that demolished Iran’s nuclear facilities at Natanz, crippled its ballistic missile program, and eliminated top military and nuclear leaders, including General Hossein Salami of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Major General Mohammad Bagheri, Iran’s armed forces chief of staff. This courageous act has set back Iran’s dangerous nuclear ambitions, safeguarding not only Israel but the entire Middle East from a regime bent on chaos. As an American, I’m driven to declare why the United States, with over 600,000 of our citizens living in Israel, must stand firmly with our greatest ally. President Trump and the Republican Party must lead with diplomacy, rejecting the war-hawk zeal of figures like Senator Lindsey Graham, to secure peace while ensuring Israel’s defense. This is a call to faith, freedom, and the protection of Israeli and American lives.

Israel’s Strike: A Shield for the Middle East

Today’s news is historic. Israel’s precision airstrikes obliterated Iran’s nuclear enrichment site at Natanz, missile production facilities, and command centers, killing key figures like General Salami, General Bagheri, and nuclear scientists Fereydoon Abbasi and Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi. This “decapitation” strike has gutted Iran’s ability to advance its nuclear program or coordinate military aggression in the near term. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called it a necessary act to “neutralize an existential threat,” and he’s absolutely right. Iran’s desperate retaliation—launching hundreds of ballistic missiles at Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, most intercepted by Israel’s Iron Dome—was the flailing of a wounded regime.

Israel’s actions protect the entire Middle East. Iran’s nuclear quest threatened to arm a theocracy that fuels terrorism through proxies like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. A nuclear-armed Iran could choke the Strait of Hormuz, sending oil prices soaring and destabilizing global markets, while bullying Sunni Arab states like Saudi Arabia and the UAE. By dismantling Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and leadership, Israel has loosened its grip on the region. In Lebanon and Syria, where Iran’s proxies once held sway, new pluralistic leaders are rising, a direct result of Israel’s resolve. This strike is a shield for stability, igniting hope in a region long plagued by chaos.

Israel’s Right to Defend Itself: A Biblical and Historical Mandate

As a Messianic believer, I see Israel’s fight as both a spiritual and historical calling. Established in 1948, Israel fulfills God’s promise to Abraham—a homeland for His chosen people, reborn from the ashes of the Holocaust. Since its founding, Israel has faced relentless hostility, fighting wars in 1948, 1967, and 1973 to secure its existence. The Six-Day War, where Israel preemptively struck to thwart annihilation, echoes today’s operation. Iran’s leaders, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who vowed “harsh punishment” after the strikes, openly deny Israel’s right to exist. Israel’s actions are not aggression but a righteous defense against a regime that persists in its nuclear pursuit, despite claims of peaceful intent.

Israel is a light in a dark region. As the Middle East’s only democracy, it upholds freedom, innovation, and faith, standing in stark contrast to Iran’s oppressive theocracy. Israel forges peace through the Abraham Accords, pioneers life-saving technology, and embodies hope. When Netanyahu urged Iranians to rise against their regime, he spoke to their longing for freedom—a future Israel’s strikes are helping to forge.

Why America Must Stand with Israel

The United States has a sacred duty to defend Israel, starting with the 600,000 American citizens living there. These are our families, students, and retirees, facing the same missile barrages as Israelis. When Iran’s rockets targeted Jerusalem today, American lives hung in the balance. Protecting Israel is protecting our own people—it’s deeply personal.

The U.S.-Israel alliance, forged after the 1973 Yom Kippur War, is a cornerstone of American security. Israel shares critical intelligence, develops technologies like the Iron Dome, and counters hostile powers like Russia and China, who back Iran. A stable Middle East benefits American families by keeping oil prices steady and trade routes open. If Iran went nuclear, the fallout—economic turmoil, emboldened terror groups—would hit our shores hard. Israel’s fight is our fight, rooted in shared values of faith, freedom, and resilience.

Trump and the Republicans: Diplomacy Over War-Hawk Fervor

President Donald Trump and the Republican Party face a defining moment. Trump has championed diplomacy, pushing for a “verified nuclear peace agreement” with Iran and setting a 60-day deadline for talks. After today’s strikes, which he called “very successful,” he urged Iran to negotiate, warning of dire consequences if they escalate further. As a Messianic believer, I applaud Trump’s pursuit of peace. War with Iran could spark a regional firestorm, drawing in global powers and devastating American families. We must avoid the reckless approach of war hawks like Senator Lindsey Graham, who’s quick to cheer “Game on” and push for conflict at every turn. Graham’s constant warmongering risks dragging us into a costly quagmire, ignoring the human and economic toll.

Diplomacy must be backed by strength, however. Iran’s history of nuclear deception, exposed after the flawed 2015 JCPOA, demands vigilance. Republicans like Senator John Thune have supported Israel’s self-defense without Graham’s zeal for war. If Iran retaliates further, the U.S. must provide Israel with intelligence, refueling, and defensive support to protect Israeli and American lives. Trump’s team, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, is already securing U.S. forces in the region, showing they understand the stakes. America must stand ready to back Israel militarily if diplomacy fails, but we cannot let war hawks like Graham dictate our path.

A Call to Action: Stand with Israel, Honor Our Faith

Today’s strikes mark a turning point. Israel has struck at the heart of Iran’s nuclear and military machine, protecting the Middle East from a regime bent on destruction. The 600,000 Americans in Israel, alongside millions of Israelis, need our unwavering support. As a Messianic believer, I see Israel as the fulfillment of God’s promise, a nation of redemption and hope in a hostile world.

To my fellow Americans, contact your representatives and demand steadfast support for Israel, but urge them to prioritize diplomacy over war-hawk calls for conflict. To President Trump and the Republican Party: Lead with peace but stand ready to defend our ally with strength, not Graham’s reckless warmongering. To the people of Israel: You are not alone. Your courage inspires me, and as a Messianic believer, I stand with you, praying for your safety and the peace of Jerusalem. Today’s actions have made the world safer—let’s ensure that light shines for generations to come.

Christian Phillips is a Messianic believer passionate about truth, freedom, and the unbreakable bond between America and Israel. Follow his blog for insights on faith, politics, and the fight for a better world.

President Donald Trump has thrown his weight behind the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” a sweeping reconciliation package touted as a fulfillment of his campaign promises. As of 10:33 AM EDT on Friday, June 6, 2025, this legislation has ignited fierce debate, with Trump and his supporters praising its focus on tax cuts, border security, and welfare reform, while critics—including Elon Musk, Rep. Thomas Massie, and former Rep. Ron Paul—warn of its potential to balloon the national debt and hide wasteful spending. For my blog readers, let’s break down why this bill sounds good in theory but may be a fiscal disaster in practice, exploring Trump’s viewpoint alongside those of Congress and influential voices like Musk, with a closer look at the alarming debt projections if this bill becomes law.

Trump’s Case: Delivering on Promises for America

Donald Trump has framed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act as a cornerstone of his agenda, aiming to deliver on key campaign pledges. The bill is said to focus on three main pillars: cutting taxes, strengthening border security, and reforming welfare programs. For Trump, this legislation is a chance to codify his “America First” policies into law, particularly by supporting small businesses, which he often describes as the backbone of the U.S. economy.

Proponents of the bill highlight its benefits for small business owners, including increasing the small business tax deduction from 20% to 23% and making it permanent, raising the expensing cap for business equipment purchases from $1.25 million to $2.5 million, and ensuring that marginal income tax rate cuts from 2017 remain in place. Additionally, the bill increases estate tax exemptions to $15 million for individuals and $30 million for joint filers, protecting small business owners from hefty taxes when passing their businesses to heirs. These measures are designed to stimulate economic growth and provide relief to millions of small businesses across the country.

Beyond tax cuts, the bill aims to “seal the border” through enhanced security measures and reform welfare programs to reduce dependency and fraud. For Trump and his base, these provisions address long-standing priorities, making the bill a victory for his supporters. Trump likely sees this legislation as a legacy-defining achievement, a bold step to reshape the economy and secure the nation.

Critics in Congress: A Debt Bomb in Disguise

Despite Trump’s enthusiasm, the bill has faced significant pushback from members of Congress, particularly fiscal conservatives who are alarmed by its projected impact on the national debt. Non-partisan analyses from organizations like the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Congressional Research Service (CRFB), and the Tax Foundation have estimated that the reconciliation package could add more than $2 trillion to the federal deficit over the next decade if passed, with some projections suggesting it could exceed $3 trillion when accounting for increased debt payments over time.

The CBO’s latest report, released in early June 2025, projects that the bill’s tax cuts and spending measures would increase the federal deficit by approximately $2.1 trillion by 2035, assuming current economic conditions and no significant policy offsets. When factoring in rising interest rates on this new debt—expected to average 3.5% over the next decade—the CRFB estimates an additional $800 billion to $1 trillion in interest payments, pushing the total debt impact closer to $3 trillion. The Tax Foundation further warns that this debt could crowd out private investment, potentially slowing economic growth by 0.5% annually, a cost that would disproportionately affect future generations.

Rep. Thomas Massie, a libertarian-leaning Republican, has likely emerged as a vocal critic of the bill. Known for his staunch opposition to government overreach and excessive spending, Massie would argue that the bill’s tax cuts, while appealing, come at an unsustainable cost. The projected $2–3 trillion debt increase undermines any short-term economic benefits, in his view, and risks saddling future generations with an unmanageable financial burden. Former Rep. Ron Paul, a longtime advocate for fiscal responsibility, would echo this sentiment. Paul has consistently warned against expanding the national debt, and he would likely view this bill as a betrayal of conservative principles, even if it includes popular measures like tax relief.

These concerns from Congress highlight a broader tension: while the bill’s goals may resonate with many Americans, its fiscal implications could have devastating long-term consequences. For Massie, Paul, and their allies, the numbers don’t lie—trillions in new debt signal a reckless approach to governance.

Elon Musk’s Take: A Business Leader’s Red Flags

Elon Musk, the billionaire entrepreneur and a prominent voice in political discourse, has also weighed in on the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Musk, who has occasionally supported Trump’s policies, is known for his sharp critiques of government inefficiency and wasteful spending. In the context of this bill, Musk would likely acknowledge the theoretical benefits of its tax cuts and small business incentives but argue that they are overshadowed by its fiscal irresponsibility.

Musk has long advocated for reducing the national debt and cutting government waste, often pointing out that billions in federal spending could be eliminated without harming essential services. For him, a bill that adds $2–3 trillion to the deficit is a non-starter, especially with the CBO’s projection of $2.1 trillion in new debt by 2035 and the CRFB’s estimate of up to $3 trillion when interest is included. Higher debt levels could lead to increased interest rates, inflation, and economic instability—factors that directly impact businesses, including Musk’s own ventures like Tesla and SpaceX. Musk would likely argue that the bill fails to address systemic inefficiencies in government spending, making it a risky proposition for the nation’s economic future.

The Hidden Waste: Pork and Spending Run Amok

Supporters of the bill insist that it is free of “pork”—unnecessary or wasteful spending often tucked into large legislative packages. However, critics like Massie, Paul, and Musk are skeptical, pointing to the bill’s massive debt projections as evidence of hidden waste. Reconciliation bills, which can pass with a simple majority in the Senate, are notorious for becoming vehicles for unrelated provisions, pet projects, and earmarks that inflate costs without delivering meaningful benefits.

Potential areas of waste in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act could include:

• Overfunded Border Security: While enhancing border security is a stated goal, the bill may allocate excessive funds to contracts for construction, technology, or personnel—costs that often spiral beyond what’s necessary, as seen in past border initiatives.

• Welfare Reform Expenses: Reforming welfare programs can involve significant transitional costs, such as funding for new administrative systems or temporary subsidies, which may balloon into wasteful spending if not tightly controlled.

• Unrelated Provisions: Large reconciliation packages often include industry-specific subsidies, infrastructure projects, or other measures that don’t align with the bill’s core objectives, adding to its overall cost.

These elements of pork and waste contribute to the bill’s projected $2–3 trillion debt increase, undermining its fiscal credibility. For critics, the bill’s benefits are dwarfed by its long-term costs, making it a risky gamble for the nation’s future.

Good in Theory, Flawed in Execution

On paper, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act has a lot going for it. Its tax cuts and small business incentives could provide much-needed relief to millions of entrepreneurs, fostering economic growth and innovation. The focus on border security and welfare reform addresses pressing issues for many Americans, aligning with Trump’s campaign promises. However, the bill’s execution raises serious concerns. The projected $2.1 trillion in new debt by 2035, potentially rising to $3 trillion with interest payments, poses a significant threat to economic stability, as outlined by the CBO and CRFB. Hidden pork and wasteful spending further erode its credibility as a fiscally responsible piece of legislation.

Conclusion: A Bill That Promises Much but Risks More

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act encapsulates the promise and peril of Trump’s agenda. On one hand, it offers tangible benefits for small businesses and addresses key priorities like border security and welfare reform. On the other hand, its massive debt implications—projected at $2.1–3 trillion over the next decade—and potential for waste have sparked alarm among fiscal conservatives in Congress, as well as influential figures like Elon Musk, Thomas Massie, and Ron Paul.

As the debate over this bill unfolds, Americans are left with a critical question: Is the One Big Beautiful Bill Act a transformative piece of legislation, or a fiscal time bomb waiting to explode? With the CBO projecting a $2.1 trillion deficit increase and the CRFB warning of up to $3 trillion when interest is factored in, the stakes couldn’t be higher. The answer could shape the nation’s economic future—and Trump’s legacy—for decades to come.

Call to Action

I’d love to hear your thoughts, readers! What do you think about the One Big Beautiful Bill Act? Do you see it as a bold step forward for small businesses and border security, or are you concerned about the $2–3 trillion debt projection? Share your insights and perspectives in the comments below—I’m excited to see what you think!