My difficulty in coming to terms with the idea of a secret rapture finds itself in the very ideology of life that I am attempting to expose as purely individual and self-serving. In the light of the fact that the scriptures speak so little on such a significant topic, I am dumbfounded at my once unapologetic acceptance of this undoubtedly European doctrine. In trying to come to grips with the scriptural and historical evidence for understanding a secret rapture, I have found little support. The doctrine itself represents a world of science more than it does a world of biblical perspective. The scientists of the early 18th and into the 19th have suggested that all truth when scrutinized under tooth and scalpel is able, with pinpoint precision, to be exposed in unified propositional statements. The idea of Christian prophecy lends itself to this pursuit of scientific discovery, especially in the community of Protestantism in the early modern period. In seeking the biblical understanding of the eschaton, interpreters and exegetes and the like sought to divide the scriptures into its discernible parts, however when studied together with an understanding of the world in which mankind’s happiness is the aim, their discoveries finally conclude with a theology in which mankind is the idea of the telos of things. I cannot find any other argument in scripture that will support a rapture other than Thessalonians, and even that passage is obscure in its context and surely cannot be interpreted in the light of the linear events proposed by the big-tent prophecy conferences. Scripture is not a lab of inspired literature which is deconstructed by scientific means, rather scripture is a principle which is alive and living and has nuances and meanings which are beyond the interpretations of the scientist. I also argue that the church has not understood the rapture for 1,800 years of its 2,000 year existence. Arguments from silence are never strong arguments, however, the fact that the eschaton has been such a prominent theme throughout the entirety of the administration of the church, I find it difficult to think that men of stature and wisdom as the Fathers, the Medieval Churchman, the Reformers, and the like failed to see such a perfect understanding of a pre-tribulational rapture. The church did not seek this until the millenarianism of the early 19th century. The church, however it has interpreted the coming end of the world throughout its existence missed an important piece of information if they missed the teaching that men and women will disappear into thin air as the result of Jesus’ almost second return. My last argument against the idea of the rapture is that its has failed to find a comprehensive agreement among believers even today. Many accept rapture, but what is worse, far too few succeed in thinking about the reasons for believing in that rapture. There are pre-tribers, mid-tribers, post-tribers, so it is true that those among the group itself cannot even agree as to the time of the event. It is likely that such a difficult and multi-interpretational teaching may not even be called for in the first place. I have nothing against a rapture, as a matter of fact I want a rapture, but the reason that I want a rapture is the reason why I fail to see its validity. I want a rapture because it is my escape from this world of pain, it is my demonstration of my religions validity in the face of non-believers, it is my hope to find satisfaction and fulfillment for myself. This is ultimately self-serving and self-defeating. I do not say that these are the reasons that others believe, but as humans we all suffer from like maladies.