Olivier Melnick: Tucker Carlson and John Rich Tackle the Pre-Trib Rapture!

In this episode of Shalom in Messiah, Olivier Melnick sits down with Dr. Andy Woods (Sugar Land Bible Church) to respond to Tucker Carlson’s recent interview with country singer John Rich. Together, they address key claims about the Scofield Study Bible, John Nelson Darby, dispensationalism, the pre-tribulation Rapture, and Israel’s future in prophecy.

What does the Bible really say about the Rapture? Is it a “recent invention”? Does the word “Rapture” appear in Scripture? And why is Israel central to God’s plan? Olivier and Dr. Woods tackle common misconceptions, logical fallacies, and antisemitic conspiracy tropes to provide a clear, biblical perspective.

Topics covered:

• Tucker Carlson, John Rich, and the pushback against pre-trib teaching

• The Scofield Study Bible & dispensational hermeneutics

• Who was John Nelson Darby?

• “The Rapture isn’t in the Bible” — myth busted

• Did pre-trib start in 1830? Evidence from early church writings

• Why context matters: Matthew 24 & 2 Thessalonians 2

• The gospel message and our Blessed Hope

Resources mentioned:

• Sugar Land Bible Church: https://slbc.org

• Andy Woods Ministries: https://andywoodsministries.org

Interview: Olivier Melnick & Dr. Andy Woods

Topic: Tucker Carlson, John Rich, Dispensationalism, and the Pre-Tribulation Rapture

Olivier Melnick:
Hello everybody, this is Olivier Melnick with Shalom in Messiah. I’m very excited today to have another conversation with my good friend, Dr. Andy Woods from Sugar Land Bible Church. Today’s topic is a little different from what we usually cover, yet very connected—you’ll see what I mean.

First, let me welcome my good friend, Dr. Andy Woods. Andy, welcome to the show, and thanks for being with us.

Dr. Andy Woods:
Hey, Brother Olivier—good to be here. Thanks for having me.

Olivier:
Before I forget—because I’m good at forgetting—tell our audience how to connect with you. I know you have a lot of teaching on your YouTube channel. Share the info, and I’ll put links in the description as well.

Andy:
All our material is well archived at the Sugar Land Bible Church website: slbc.org. I also have andywoodsministries.org. You can find us on YouTube and Rumble, and you can download our free app from the app store. You’ll have more of me than you probably want!

Olivier:
(Laughs) People who start listening to your teaching usually can’t get enough. Sound Bible teaching is hard to find these days, so I recommend your channel often—it’s one of my go-tos.

And friends, since this is YouTube: if you haven’t subscribed, please do; give us a thumbs up and share. In the description you’ll also find ways to connect with Shalom in Messiah for free resources, and there’s a place to donate if the Lord puts it on your heart. Many of you already support us—thank you.

Setting the Stage: Why This Conversation

Olivier:
About a week ago, Andy sent me a short public clip—a soundbite of two very well-known people: Tucker Carlson (now on X, formerly Twitter) and country singer John Rich (Big & Rich). Let me be clear: neither of us is interested in character assassination. Our goal is to expose our viewers to biblical truth. When something needs correction, we step in and say, “This is what was said; here’s what Scripture actually teaches.”

We’re going to revisit what they said, and I’ll link Tucker’s interview in the description so you can watch it yourself. (We briefly lost Andy’s connection earlier—he’s back now. We’ll keep rolling.)

Before we dig into specifics, Andy, when you watched the Tucker/John Rich video, what was your first reaction?

Andy:
I generally like Tucker Carlson—he’s a limited-government guy like I am—but I noticed a pattern. First he hosted Munther Isaac, a Palestinian “Christian” with a long record of anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian, and antisemitic positions, dressed up as unity and reconciliation. Then, a month or two later, John Rich comes on to take down the pre-trib Rapture. Tucker often plays the inquisitive learner, but back-to-back like this suggests intent—he or his team are platforming voices that undermine a biblical, dispensational, pro-Israel view.

Olivier:
Same concern. I’m not saying “boycott Tucker,” but two instances like this raise a red flag. If it keeps happening, I’ll question whether he’s taking sides against biblical Israel and dispensational teaching.

Scofield, Study Bibles, and Dispensationalism

Olivier:
John Rich started by talking about the Scofield Bible. Some in our audience may not know what that is. Quick history?

Andy:
He’s correct that the Scofield Study Bible had copious notes and popularized a dispensational perspective for lay readers. He’s wrong that it was the first study Bible with notes—the Geneva Bible (16th century) had far more notes and predates Scofield by centuries. What made Scofield significant is that its notes consistently applied a literal, grammatical-historical approach across Scripture, which helped ordinary Christians see the Bible’s flow.

Olivier:
You used the word “dispensationalism.” Give us the one-minute version.

Andy:
A dispensationalist believes:

1. God’s ultimate purpose in history is to glorify Himself (doxological view).
2. The Bible should be interpreted literally from Genesis to Revelation (recognizing figures of speech when the text indicates them).
3. When you do that consistently, you see that God has distinct programs for Israel and for the Church. That distinction leads to the pre-tribulational Rapture (Christ comes for His Church before Daniel’s 70th week), while Israel’s national restoration unfolds in the Tribulation and Kingdom.

Olivier:
Exactly. Many Christians are “functional” dispensationalists without using the label: God’s glory, literal hermeneutics, and Israel/Church distinction.

Andy:
I didn’t set out to “become” a dispensationalist. I wanted to interpret the Bible consistently. Once you do, certain truths become obvious: Israel still has a future, there will be a literal millennial kingdom, and Christ returns for His Church (Rapture) and later with His saints (Second Advent). Scofield’s value was giving lay readers an organized way to see that.

Who Was John Nelson Darby?

Olivier:
John Rich also mentioned John Nelson Darby. Quick bio?

Andy:
Darby was a godly Plymouth Brethren leader, church planter (reportedly hundreds of fellowships), and a top-notch scholar. After a horseback accident sidelined him in the early 1800s, he dug deeply into Scripture. He noticed Israel has explicit time markers (e.g., 400 years in Egypt; 70 years of captivity; Daniel’s 70 weeks), whereas the Epistles—governing Church truth—do not. He concluded Israel and the Church are organically distinct peoples with distinct timetables. From that ecclesiology flows his eschatology: Christ will come for the Church (1 Thess. 4:13–18) before Israel’s 70th week (Daniel 9:27). Later, at the Second Advent (Zech. 14), His feet touch down on the Mount of Olives to rescue Israel and judge the nations.

Olivier:
And the Church is not “new Israel.” The word Israel in Scripture is a technical term for the physical descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Andy:
Right. Israel occurs ~2,500 times in the OT and 70+ times in the NT, and it never means “Gentiles” or “the Church.” God can run multiple threads at once—He’s a master playwright. Darby didn’t invent this; he saw it by taking the whole Bible literally.

“Secret Rapture,” “Rapture Isn’t in the Bible,” and Other Claims

Olivier:
John Rich referred to a “secret rapture” and said the word rapture isn’t in the Bible. How do you respond?

Andy:

1. “Secret” is not how Scripture describes it: “with a shout, with the voice of an archangel” (1 Thess. 4:16) doesn’t sound secret.
2. The term “rapture” functions like “Trinity”—a theological shorthand for a biblical reality. Paul uses harpazō (“caught up”) in 1 Thess. 4:17. Jerome translated harpazō into Latin as rapturo in the Vulgate. From that Latin root we get the English word rapture. The concept is biblical even if English translations don’t use the word “rapture.”

“It Started in 1830” — Did It?

Olivier:
John Rich also said the pre-trib view started in the 1830s with Darby.

Andy:
That was the common claim 30 years ago. But since the Pre-Trib Study Group began (Thomas Ice, Tim LaHaye), researchers have discovered dozens of pre-Darby references to a pre-tribulational catching up—some centuries earlier (see William Watson’s Dispensationalism Before Darby). The Pseudo-Ephraem sermon (4th–6th century) is particularly compelling; if you covered the author’s name and just read it, it sounds like modern pre-trib exposition. More texts are still being translated.

Even if (for the sake of argument) it arose “late,” that wouldn’t refute it. Luther’s solas were “late” in church history, but they were biblical. Our authority is Scripture, not when a doctrine is articulated.

Fallacies Driving the Critique

Olivier:
You mentioned some logical fallacies in the interview. Which ones?

Andy:

• Recency fallacy: “If it’s new, it’s false.”
• Ad populum: “Most Christians in church history didn’t believe this; therefore it’s false.” Majority doesn’t equal truth—Jesus said the broad road is crowded.
• Genetic fallacy: Attack an idea by attacking its source (e.g., Darby, Scofield) instead of addressing the biblical arguments.

The Rothschild Detour

Olivier:
At one point John Rich tossed in: “Did you know Darby was connected to the Rothschilds?” That’s a loaded statement. What does that have to do with the biblical case for the Rapture?

Andy:
When I sent that clip to Dr. Thomas Ice—one of the foremost Darby scholars—he said he’d never even heard that claim. In any case, dragging in Rothschild language plays on the antisemitic conspiracy trope fueled by the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion (1905). It’s a smear tactic—genetic fallacy again. Even if Darby had some contact, that proves nothing about the biblical validity of the pre-trib view.

Olivier:
Exactly. I’ve researched Rothschild tropes extensively—they’re routinely used to imply “Jewish control/greed.” Even if a contact existed (and evidence is thin), it’s irrelevant to whether the pre-trib Rapture is biblical.

Misstating Basic Facts

Olivier:
Early in the video, Rich said “Antichrist isn’t in the Bible.” But it is: 1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 1:7. He also spoke of “Hebrew” in Revelation where the New Testament is in Greek. These are basic errors.

Andy:
Right. And this is why people should stay in their lane. I don’t try to sing country music; it’s not my field. Watching influencers drift into theology with no training is like watching a car crash—misquotes, no context, wrong categories.

Context Matters: Matthew 24 and 2 Thessalonians 2

Olivier:
Rich read long portions of 2 Thessalonians 2 and Matthew 24 without context.

Andy:
2 Thessalonians 2: The Thessalonians received a forged letter claiming the Day of the Lord had already begun (v. 2), contradicting what Paul taught—that they would be raptured before that period. Paul lays out markers proving they were not in the Tribulation. Their alarm only makes sense if Paul had taught a pre-trib Rapture.

Matthew 24 (Olivet Discourse): Jesus addresses Israel, not the Church. Note the Jewish markers: “those in Judea flee to the mountains” (v. 16); “pray that your flight not be on the Sabbath” (v. 20). In Passion Week, Jesus gave two major discourses:

• Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24–25): Farewell to Israel, explaining the road to national restoration through the Tribulation.
• Upper Room Discourse (John 13–17): Hello to the Church, introducing Church-age truths (Spirit’s ministry, abiding, etc.). Mixing these produces confusion.

Olivier:
He also applied 2 Chronicles 7:14 (“my people… heal their land”) to the Church, when the context is Israel under the Mosaic covenant in the land. The Church didn’t exist yet.

“Pre-Trib Means We Escape Hard Times” — No, It Doesn’t

Andy:
One more correction: Rich said we teach we’ll be “out of here when things get rough.” No. Christians have faced tribulation for 2,000 years (John 16:33). We don’t teach escape from persecution; we teach deliverance from the wrath of God in Daniel’s 70th week (the seal, trumpet, and bowl judgments—Rev. 6–16). The Church is not appointed to wrath (1 Thess. 1:10; 5:9).

Tucker, Foreign Policy, and Israel

Andy:
I suspect Tucker’s deeper issue is Israel in the land and modern U.S. pro-Israel policy. Historically, many U.S. leaders have supported Israel (Washington’s letter to the Touro Synagogue; Truman’s recognition of Israel; Nixon aiding Israel in 1973). Scofield’s notes helped average Christians understand biblical promises to Israel, and some don’t like the political implications. But the issue is biblical, not political.

Please, State Your View

Olivier:
Another point: the entire video attacked pre-trib, but never clearly stated what their eschatology is—post-trib, mid-trib, pre-wrath?

Andy:
There are no strong exegetical arguments for those alternatives, which is why critics often stick to tearing down pre-trib rather than clearly defending a different position from Scripture.

The Gospel & Our Blessed Hope

Olivier:
We’ve talked a lot about the Bible, Jesus, and the Rapture. If someone is watching and says, “This is interesting, but I don’t even know if Jesus would care about me—what do I do?” What would you say?

Andy:
God has made a promise: Jesus is coming again to take His Church before the outpouring of divine wrath on earth. You can be related to Jesus and planted in that promise by fulfilling one condition: believe—trust—in His finished work for the forgiveness of your sins. On the cross He cried, “It is finished” (Greek: tetelestai—paid in full). He did the work we can’t do. Stop trusting yourself; trust Jesus. The moment you do, His promises—including the Blessed Hope (Titus 2:13)—become yours.

Conference Misquotes & Final Clarifications

Andy:
Two quick clarifications:

1. 2 Thessalonians 2 was read without v. 2—the key that the Thessalonians were shaken by a forgery claiming the Day of the Lord had begun. Paul writes to reassure them they had not missed the Rapture.
2. Matthew 24 is Israel’s roadmap, not the Church’s. You don’t “find the Church” in the Olivet Discourse any more than you find Israel’s feasts in the Upper Room Discourse.

And yes, I keep a mug on my desk that says, “I can do all things through a verse taken out of context.” It’s a daily reminder: context matters.

Event Details & Resources

Olivier:
We could go another hour, but we’re already over time. Andy, where can people find your books and teaching?

Andy:
Books: Amazon (search “Dr. Andy Woods”).
Teaching: andywoodsministries.org; YouTube, Rumble, Facebook; podcast apps (“Andy Woods Ministries”). Our weekly show Pastor’s Point of View is there too.

Olivier:
There’s also a conference coming up at Sugar Land Bible Church in late February (Friday–Sunday). Share the highlights?

Andy:
Yes—From Faith to Final Days (worldview + end-times). Speakers include Dr. Randall Price, Dr. Bill Federer, Olivier Melnick (addressing the Protocols, Rothschild tropes, and the Khazar myth), and me.

• Feb 21 (Fri): Shabbat dinner (led by Olivier) at Sugar Creek Country Club.
• Feb 22 (Sat): All-day conference (registration limited ~350; banquet ~200).
• Feb 23 (Sun): Speakers in Sunday School and main service.
  Watch slbc.org for registration opening.

Olivier:
Perfect. And February in Sugar Land isn’t nearly as humid as July! Andy, thank you so much for your time. I look forward to our next conversation. God bless you.

Andy:
God bless you, brother.

Olivier:
And to all of you—Shalom. Until next time, be blessed.