Bible Prophecy Under Siege: Responding Biblically to Confusion About the End Times

by Ron Rhodes

Understanding and Answering False Claims about Prophecy Many people today cast doubt on the promises God gives his church in Bible prophecy, as predicted by Scripture “Scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, ‘Where is the promise of his coming?’” (2 Peter 3:3-4).Bible Prophecy Under Siege provides a thorough survey of the misunderstandings and misguided thinking people sometimes have about the last days. Prophecy expert Ron Rhodes offers you careful guidance through these differing viewpoints, and you will learn the ways Bible prophecy is under siege and how to respond to false claims biblically gain helpful historical insights about the rapture and other prophetic issues be emboldened to hold firmly to prophetic biblical truth during trying times be encouraged to live with conviction rooted in God’s Word With a perspective grounded in the Bible, you will be equipped to discern flawed views on prophecy, rest secure in immovable truth, and grow in anticipation of the day when Christ will make all things new.

241 pages, Kindle Edition

Published February 13, 2024

Reviews

[Yibbie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Somehow, the title misled me. I guess I was expecting a defensive book bitterly defending a particular understanding of Bible prophecy applied to current events. I don’t even know why I thought that. It certainly isn’t what this book is. Don’t get me wrong it was a strong defense of the Dispensational interpretation of Scripture – but it was a beautifully gracious explanation of that view point as contrasted quite fairly with various other interpretations. It explains from the Bible why the simple study of prophecy is so vital to every believer, why the author believes what he does, and the history of dispensationalism, but with the focus always on Christ. Never does it get sidetracked into sensationalism or politics.
I would strongly recommend it to every believer.

[Carilyn · Rating 2 out of 5]

So, to be fair, this is not a subject that I have a lot of passion for... Hence the low rating. I read this as part of a book club and although it is a comprehensive detailed look at the subject of a pre-tribulation rapture versus a mid-tribulation rapture versus a post-tribulation rapture... I just know what I believe and why I believe it. And I don't feel as though there's a lot of need to debate future events because what will happen will happen and some of us will be wrong, some of us will be right; however, it is not a hill I necessarily feel strongly that I need to die on in terms of my own view of eschatology.

[George · Rating 4 out of 5]

…Rhodes’ latest book is primarily a defense of Pre-Tribulationism, a teaching I believe, while allowing for sincere Christians who disagree. Rhodes approaches the doctrine from every angle, dealing with pros and cons. He also goes into Church history, a great aid to those of us without an extensive library. I have high regard for his methods of interpretation, as well as his respect for detractors, a rarity in this age of internet sniping.

I have the audio book, and I whole-heartedly recommend it to any new Christian, or even seasoned believers who would like a refresher on this beautiful teaching of faith and hope.

There are some Christian doctrines that are clearly, and explicitly taught in the Bible (Jesus is the Son of God who came to earth and died for our sins), and some that are taught by inference, like Pre-Tribulationism. This might be illustrated by 5 + _ = 9. We can reasonably infer the missing number is “4”.

In this book, Rhodes delves into the difference between “exegesis” (drawing meaning from a text) and “eisegesis” (inserting a biased meaning into the text). He also points out the fallacy of false comparisons (I forget the technical term), illustrated by a comparison of the phrase “morning star”, used to describe both Satan and Jesus in the NIV. (Isaiah 14:12, 2nd Peter 1:19) He further shows the importance of context, and letting Scripture interpret Scripture.

And in chapter 15, he diplomatically describes the darkness that fell on the Church during the late Roman Empire and lasted until the Reformation. He does this without mentioning Popery, or the Roman Catholic Church.

He also speaks of “arguing from silence”, which Revelation does when it fails to mention a mid-tribulation rapture.

These ideas become important when dealing with my only point of contention. I’ve reviewed several of Rhodes’ books, as well as excellent books by John MacArthur and others. They all have one negative thing in common…they introduce the Co-equal, Co-eternal Triune Godhead dogma into material where it isn’t relevant. In this case, in chapter 8, Rhodes compares the lack of explicit verses on the seven-year Tribulation with the lack of explicit verses on the Trinity.

This is a lop-sided comparison. For one thing, Jews do not believe in the Trinity, and they never have. Yet Jesus said the Jews “…worship what we know.” (John 4:22 NIV) Therefore, one would expect Jesus and His apostles to explain the Trinity over and over in the Gospels, Acts, and epistles. After all, the first Christians were Jews. The teaching would be new, and confusing. (it’s confusing NOW) Not a single sermon in Acts even hints at a co-equal, co-eternal Triune Godhead. This “argues from silence” against the Trinity. On the other hand, Rhodes himself explains the rapture in any form was unknown to OT Jews.

Then, to illustrate his point Scripturally, Rhodes reasons on five points:

1. God is one. (no disagreement)
2. The Father is God. Obviously. But Rhodes inexplicably cites 1st Corinthians 8:4, neglecting to mention the immediate context (vs 6), “…yet for us, there is but one God, THE FATHER…”
3. The Son is God. He cites Titus 2:13, which according to the Catholic New American Bible, reads, “…of the great God and of our Savior, Christ Jesus.” This says the opposite of what Rhodes intends. Similar renderings are found in the New Testament by J.B. Phillips, and James Moffat’s translation. Verses that can be translated more than one way are weak support for a doctrine and citing them can only be described as eisegesis. The same goes for Hebrews 1:8, which is a quote from Psalm 45, that originally applied to the King of Israel. Rhodes knows this full well. He also cites Revelation 1:17, which doesn’t even contain the word “God” in any translation. This also is eisegesis, as well as a false comparison.
4. The Holy Spirit is God. Rhodes cites Genesis 1:2, and other vss that contain the phrase “Spirit of God.” “Spirit” in Hebrew and Greek can also be rendered “breath” and “wind”. It’s up to the translator to decide which word to use, depending on his view of the context. For example, the Common English Bible renders Genesis 1:2 as, “God’s wind…”. Compare that with Genesis 8:1 (NIV). This, again, is pure eisegesis.
5. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons. He cites Matthew 3:16, 17, Jesus’ baptism. Problem. The Father and Son are obviously Persons. But none of the vss Rhodes cites prove Holy Spirit is a Person. These say the Holy Spirit descended as a dove. The Father and Son both speak in the immediate context, the dove doesn’t. This “argues from silence” against Holy Spirit being a Person. (In fact, not a single Bible account depicts anyone having a conversation with the Holy Spirit) 2nd Corinthians 13:14 is also cited. This inadvertently works against the Trinity, because only one Person is called “God”, Jesus and Holy Spirit are mentioned separately. Inanimate objects are personified throughout the Bible, from trees to altars.

Consider this…in every epistle written by Paul and Peter, the greetings mention God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Not a single one mentions the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit is a Person, it’s strange He’s left out of all the greetings. If the Trinity were true, the greetings would read, “Grace and peace to you from God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.” Holy Spirit is also left out of John 1:1-18. These facts continue to “argue in silence” against a co-eternal, co-equal Triune Godhead.

Yahweh is the Father, Jesus is the Son, and Holy Spirit is the “finger of God” (Luke 11:20 compare Matthew 12:28)

Rhodes admits the Trinity wasn’t settled Christian doctrine until the 4th century Council of Nicea. This is around the same time the Church went into darkness until the Reformation. He quotes John Calvin in chapter 15 on this same point, regarding justification by faith. The difference is, justification by faith is taught explicitly in the entire books of Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians 2:8, 9. The Trinity isn’t taught explicitly ANYWHERE in the Bible, or in early Church writings such as 1st Clement, the Didache, the epistles of Polycarp, the epistles of Ignatius, or the Shepherd of Hermas.

I apologize for my lengthy review, but Rhodes brought it up, and it seemed appropriate that it should be addressed with the very same “rules of evidence” he himself correctly uses in Biblical exposition.

Otherwise, this (and all his books) are highly recommended. Rhodes is a true gift to the Christian Church in an age when the ungodly philosophy of Woke is affecting even those of the elect of Christ.

[Marlan L · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great Truth Telling

Ron Rhodes has done it again...put a Biblical spotlight on an imminent issue. Many curches, organizations, movements and denominations are getting rid of the word IMMINENT from their Statements of Faith in order to obtain a wider following thus waterring down the Biblical fact that Jesus is coming soon for His church. This book challenges everyone to reconsider their thinking and how to humbly present their cases in a Christlike manner. Thank you Ron Rhodes. Look up our redemption draweth nigh.

[Jenifer Baehr]

Very thorough and easy to understand!