Premillennialism and the Tribulation — Part VIII: Midtribulationism

Midtribulationism is a comparatively new interpretation of Scripture relating to the translation of the church. Its principal expositor is Norman B. Harrison. Accepting some of the basic premises of pretribulationism, such as the future character of the seventieth week of Daniel (Dan 9:27), midtribulationism places the translation of the church at the middle of this week instead of at its beginning as do the pretribulationists. In contrast to the posttribulationists, it holds that the translation takes place before the time of wrath and great tribulation instead of after it.

Midtribulationism is, therefore, a mediate view between posttribulationism and pretribulationism. As such it has commended itself to some who for one reason or another are dissatisfied with both pretribulationism and posttribulationism. it has also provided a place for certain prophecies to be fulfilled before the translation of the church instead of afterward, and at the same time is able to claim the promises of comfort and blessing which seem to be denied by the posttribulationists who take the church through the entire period.

Midtribulationists usually do not use the term of themselves, and prefer to classify themselves as pretribulationists—pretribulational in the sense that Christ is coming before the “great tribulation” which characterizes the last half of Daniel’s seventieth week. Harrison refers to his view as teaching “His pre-Tribulation coming” (Norman B. Harrison, The End, p. 118). The term midtribulation is justified by the common designation of the entire seventieth week of Daniel as a period of tribulation even though pretribulationists can agree that only its latter half is properly “the great tribulation.”

The midtribulational interpretation bristles with important theological, exegetical, and practical problems, and it differs radically from normal pretribulationism. Among the crucial issues are such questions as the following: (1) Does the seventh trumpet of Revelation mark the beginning of the great tribulation? (2) Is the rapture of the church in Revelation 11? (3) Is the seventh trumpet the “last trumpet” for the church? (4) Do the programs for Israel and the church overlap? (5) Is the hope of the imminent return of Christ unscriptural? In general, the midtribulational view requires a different interpretation of most of the important Scriptures relating to the coming of Christ for the church.

One of the crucial issues in the midtribulational theory is the question of whether the seventh trumpet of Revelation 11 begins the great tribulation. In fact, it is not too much to say that the whole teaching of midtribulationists depends upon this identification. The midtribulational view cites many other Scriptures, however. Harrison appeals to the following passages: Exodus 25—40 : Leviticus 23; Psalm 2; Daniel 2, 7 , 9 ; Matthew 13; 24—25 ; 1 Thessalonians 4:13—5:10 ; 2 Thessalonians 2 (ibid., p. 35). It is clear from reading his discussion, however, that these are supporting passages, or problems which have to be solved in the midtribulational view, rather than the crux of the issue.

The midtribulational view requires the interpretation that the first half of the Book of Revelation is not the great tribulation. In general, the theme song of its adherents is that the church will go through the “beginning of sorrows” (Matt 24:8, A.V.), or “beginning of travail” (A.S.V.), but not through the “great tribulation” (Matt 24:21) as Harrison indicates in his “Harmonized Outline” of Matthew 24—25 and Revelation 1—20 (ibid., p. 54). It is their position that the events of the seven seals as well as the judgments of the first six trumpets are related to the first three and one-half years of Daniel’s seventieth week and therefore are not a description of the “great tribulation.”

Harrison states: “‘Wrath’ is a word reserved for the Great Tribulation—see ‘wrath of God’ in 14:10, 19 ; 15:7 ; 16:1 , etc.” (ibid., p. 91). He implies that there is no wrath of God mentioned during the period of the seven seals and the first six trumpets. In his comment on Revelation 11:18, he states: “The Day of Wrath has only now come (11:18 ). This means that nothing that precedes in the Seals and Trumpets can rightfully be regarded as wrath” (ibid., p. 119). He further defines the tribulation as equivalent to divine wrath: “Let us get clearly in mind the nature of the Tribulation, that it is divine ‘wrath’ (11:18 ; 14:8, 10, 19 ; 15:1, 7 ; 16:1, 19 ) and divine ‘judgment’ (14:7 ; 15:4 ; 16:7 ; 17:1 ; 18:10 ; 19:2 )” (ibid., p. 120). In both instances where Harrison gives extended lists of references to “wrath” in Revelation (ibid., pp. 91,120) he, with evident purpose, omits Revelation 6:16-17 and Revelation 7:14. The former passage refers to wrath in connection with the sixth seal, and the latter is the only reference to the “great tribulation” by that title in the entire book. Both of these passages fall in the section of Revelation which deals with the period preceding the trumpets.

The explanation given of the reference to “wrath” in Revelation 6:16-17 is certainly inadequate for such a crucial issue. Harrison interprets the sixth seal “as reaching to the day of Wrath” (ibid., p. 91), as if it were a future instead of aorist as it is in the text. No Greek tense would be more inappropriate to express this idea of Harrison’ s than the aorist, which usually is punctiliar as to kind of action, and present or past as to time. If “the great day of their Wrath is come” (Rev 6:17), it certainly cannot be postponed as to its beginning until after the seventh seal is opened and seven trumpets of various judgments are poured out upon the earth.

Not only does Harrison exclude wrath, but the first three and one-half years are declared a relatively pleasant time. Harrison writes: “The first half of the week, or period of seven years, was a ‘sweet’ anticipation to John, as it is to them; under treaty protection, they [Israel] will be ‘sitting pretty,’ as we say. But the second half—’bitter’ indeed…” (ibid., p. 111). Pretribulationists could accept the teaching that the first three and one-half years of Daniel’s seventieth week is a time of protection for Israel, but they do not find this period described in Revelation 6—11 .

Even a casual reading of the seals and first six trumpets will make clear that the great tribulation begins with the early seals, not with the seventh trumpet. Certainly famine (Rev 6:5-6), death for one-fourth of the world’s population (Rev 6:8), earthquakes, stars falling from heaven, the moon becoming as blood, and every mountain and island being moved out of their places (Rev 6:12-14) portray indeed “the great day of their wrath”—the “wrath of the Lamb” (Rev 6:16-17). This is no period of “‘sweet’ anticipation to John” (loc. cit.), but the unprecedented time of trouble. Add to this the first six trumpets with their bloodshed, destruction on the earth and the sea, and poisoning of the rivers with the result that “many men died” (Rev 8:11), climaxed by the great woes of Revelation 9—10 , and one has a picture of great tribulation such as the world has never experienced. According to Scripture, at that time “their torment” will be “as the torment of a scorpion, when it striketh a man” (Rev 9:5).Some will seek death in vain in order to escape (Rev 9:10). In the sixth seal, one-third of the remaining earth’s population will be killed. If language means anything, this is the predicted time of unprecedented trouble.

Midtribulationists are obliged not only to explain away the explicit reference to wrath in connection with the sixth seal (Rev 6:16-17), but they must also slide over the only specific reference to the “great tribulation” in the entire Book of Revelation (7:14 ). This is made into a prophetic vision of the time to follow the tribulation. In the light of these references to wrath and great tribulation in a context as frightfully graphic as the events of the seals and first six trumpets, it should be obvious that the very foundation of the midtribulational theory is built upon sand. Few theories are more openly contradicted by the very Scriptures from which support is expected.

The efforts to evade these graphic Scriptures force midtribulationists to spiritualize and thereby nullify the force of these judgments. Harrison attempts to find fulfillment of the trumpet judgments in the events of World War II. He states in reference to the second trumpet, “The ‘great mountain burning with fire’ seems a clear reference to Germany, suddenly ‘cast into the sea’ of nations…” (ibid., p. 218). In the same paragraph he then suddenly makes “the sea” a literal sea in which literal ships are sunk: “The further reference to ‘sea’ and ‘ships’ (8:9 ) must betaken literally…” (loc. cit). It should be obvious that this interpretation also calls for a chronology in which the seventh trumpet will sound within a few years thereafter, involving a date-setting for the rapture which subsequent history has proven an error.

The evident fallacy of the whole midtribulational interpretation of Revelation 1—11 is that this view forces a spiritualization of the entire passage to find contemporary rather than future fulfillment. In doing so, a strained exegesis of the passages is achieved which is subjective and arbitrary. Even a simple reading of this section will give an impression of vivid divine judgment upon a sinful world which transcends anything which history has recorded. If the passage is intended to be taken with any serious literalness, its fulfillment is yet future.

The great tribulation actually begins in Revelation 6, not in Revelation 11. The seventh trumpet marks a point near its end, not its beginning. Posttribulationists make the seventh trumpet the end of the tribulation (cf. Reese, The Approaching Advent of Christ, p. 73). This is accomplished by ignoring the fact that the seven vials of judgment follow the seventh trump. It is curious, however, that both of these opponents of pretribulationism adopt such opposite views of the seventh trump, and, in effect, cancel out each other.

At no point does the midtribulation view manifest its dogmatism more than in the interpretation of Revelation 11. One midtribulationist contends for the view that the great tribulation is the first part of Daniel’s seventieth week, that the rapture occurs in the middle of the week after this tribulation, and that the last half of the week is the beginning of the Day of the Lord. The rapture according to this view takes place at the sixth seal of Revelation 6:12-17 (cf. H. W. H., The Church and the Great Tribulation, 46 pp). This point of view is actually a variation of posttribulationism and is peculiar to the author. The more normal position for midtribulationism is to place the rapture at Revelation 11.

J.Oliver Buswell has expressed the midtribulational position in the following statement: “I do not believe that the Church will go through any part of that period which the Scripture specifically designates as the wrath of God, but I do believe that the abomination of desolation will be a specific signal for a hasty flight followed by a very brief but a very terrible persecution, and that followed very quickly by the rapture of the Church preceding the outpouring of the vials of the wrath of God” (extract from letter published in Our Hope, LVI, June, 1950, 720).

We are indebted to Norman B. Harrison for the most explicit exposition of this teaching. His interpretation of Revelation 11 claims that “all the elements involved in the Coming are here” (op. cit., p. 117). He submits the following tabulation:

This tabulation (ibid., p. 117) is supplemented by the discussion which brings out the midtribulational interpretation. The two witnesses are symbolic of Moses and Elijah, “represent the Law and the Prophets” and more specifically according to their description in Revelation 11 as “two olive trees and two candlesticks” (Rev 11:4) they represent the witness of the saints of the Old and New Covenant (ibid., pp. 114-15). Harrison is not too clear as to his precise definition, and seems to waver between the idea that the two witnesses represent all the saints, especially Jew and Gentile, and the idea that they represent Moses and Elijah, viz., “The Two Classes ‘Dead’—’Alive’“ (ibid., p. 117). By this, apparently, he means that the two witnesses are the living church and the resurrected saints at the time of the rapture. He states, “Now, if the two witnesses are symbolic of a ‘larger company of witnesses,’ then their resurrection and ascension must be symbolic of the resurrection and rapture of that larger company” (ibid., pp. 116-17).

This interpretation is supplemented by further identification of “the cloud” as symbolic of the rapture: “‘The Cloud’ (11:12 ) is a definite reference to the Lord’s presence-parousia” (ibid., p. 117). Because the future tense is omitted in the description of Christ in Revelation 11:17, Harrison concludes, “It seeks to tell us: He has come” (ibid., p. 118). The reference to the “reign” of Christ is declared by Harrison to be future, not present, as the third woe, viz., the vials, must be first poured out (loc. cit). The statement, “thy wrath came” (Rev 11:18, A.S.V.) is interpreted, on the basis of the Authorized translation, “thy wrath is come,” as “has only now come (11:18 ). This means that nothing that precedes in the Seals and Trumpets can rightfully be regarded as wrath” (loc. cit). Harrison overlooks that the verb “came” is in the aorist which emphasizes the fact but not the time of the action. It could just as well refer to the whole course of the wrath of God in the seals and preceding trumpets.

His interpretation of the opening of the temple (Rev 11:19) is that it “is a further reference to the Rapture. ‘Know ye not that ye are the temple of God?’“ (ibid., p. 119). Just how the church can be “opened in heaven” he does not explain. The concluding identification is that the “seventh Trumpet sounds for the pouring of the Bowls of wrath. While it brings glory to the Church, it brings Woe (the third) to the world” (loc. cit). The church goes through two woes which are not to be identified with the great tribulation, but not through the third woe which is so identified.

The fallacy of this entire exegesis of the passage is that there is no positive evidence that any of the identifications are correct. Similarities do not prove identity. The character of the two witnesses seems to indicate that they are actual individuals, not representatives of all the saints living and dead. The saints as a whole do not perform the miracles nor the witness designated of them (Rev 11:5-6). Nor are all the saints, especially the resurrected saints, killed by the beast. If all the saints are killed, then none would be living to be raptured. If the witnesses are only symbols, how can symbols be literally killed and lie in literal streets? Do the saints as a whole have men look on their “dead bodies” for “three days and a half,” refusing them burial in a tomb (Rev 11:9)? The other identifications are just as strained and unsustained by the text. sounded by angels. The trumpet at the rapture is the “trump of God.” The trumpets of Revelation are all connected with divine judgment upon sin and unbelief. The trump of 1 Thessalonians 4 and of 1 Corinthians 15 is a call to the elect, an act of grace, a command to the dead to rise.

The most damaging fact in the whole argument, however, is that the seventh trumpet of Revelation 11 is, after all, not the last trumpet of Scripture. According to Matthew 24:31, the elect will be gathered at the coming of Christ to establish His earthly kingdom “with a great sound of a trumpet.” While posttribulationists hold that this is identical with the seventh trumpet, midtribulationists cannot do so. In fact, it is not too much to say that this one reference alone spells the doom of midtribulationism.

The use of “last” in reference to the trumpet of 1 Corinthians 15 is easily explained without resorting to the extremities of midtribulationism. H. A. Ironside interprets it as a familiar military expression: “When a Roman camp was about to be broken up, whether in the middle of the night or in the day, a trumpet was sounded. The first blast meant, ‘Strike tents and prepare to depart.’ The second meant, ‘Fall into line,’ and when what was called ‘the last trump’ sounded it meant, ‘March away.’“ (Addresses on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, p. 529). The last trump of God for the church, following the gospel call and call to preparation, will be the call to go to be with the Lord. Whether or not this explanation be accepted, it illustrates that there is no necessity of relating a trump for the church with trumpets of judgment upon the unsaved. Each trumpet must be related to its own order. Any child in school knows that the last bell for one hour may be followed by a first bell for the next hour. “Last” must be understood then to relate to the time order indicated by the context.

Midtribulationists are therefore unjustified in making the identification of the seventh trumpet with the last trumpet of 1 Corinthians. The seventh trumpet is not the last trump of Scripture anyway, and the events which they claim are related to it actually occur before the seventh trumpet is sounded according to the chronology of Revelation 11. On no point does the identification commend itself.

Another objection to the midtribulational interpretation is that it confuses Israel and the church and requires an overlap of their two programs. Harrison’s argument that the existence of the temple to A.D. 70 proves that Israel’s program and that of the church overlaps is entirely untenable (cf. Harrison, op. cit., pp. 50-53). According to Scripture the dispensation of the law ended at the cross (2 Cor 3:11; Gal 3:25; Col 2:14). Most students of the seventy weeks of Daniel who believe the seventieth week is future also believe that the sixty-ninth week was fulfilled prior to the crucifixion of Christ. Israel’s program is therefore at a standstill and the continued existence of the temple had no relevance. Israel as a people and nation have continued throughout the present age, but their predicted program has made no specffic progress since Pentecost. The necessity for such an overlapping program is not inherent in Scriptural revelation, but only a necessary adjunct of midtribulational interpretation.

One of the important reasons why pretribulationists believe the refutation of midtribulationism is necessary is that it directly attacks the imminency of the Lord’s return for the church much in the same fashion as is true in posttribulationism. Midtribulationism has this added feature, however, which is most objectionable: it sets up a definite chronology requiring date-setting. The events of the first three and one-half years of Daniel’s prophecy are specific. They begin with a covenant between a Gentile ruler and Israel in which Israel is promised protection and Palestine becomes their national home. Such a covenant could not be a secret by its very nature as it would be heralded throughout Jewry and be of great interest to the entire world. Such a covenant would, on the one hand, make the coming of Christ impossible for three and one-half years, according to the midtribulationist, and, on the other hand, make an imminent coming impossible at any time prior to the covenant. If the restrainer of 2 Thessalonians is the Holy Spirit, it also sets up an impossible chronology—the Holy Spirit taken out of the world before the church is.

The date-setting character of midtribulationism is manifest in Harrison’s exposition. He identifies World War I specifically “as that which our Lord Jesus envisioned, distinguishing it from other wars through the years…” (ibid., p. 20). His calculations are detailed: “The evidence that the War Trumpets of Revelation 8 found their realization, initially at least, in World War II is striking and conclusive. Here are a few marks of identification (will the reader please familiarize himself with chapter 8 ): 1—Its Origin (vs. 1 )—the Trumpets proceed from the Seals. World War II definitely grew out of World War I—practically but a second stage. 2—Its Timing (vs. 1 )—’about the space of half an hour.’ Some time notes are merely general; this is specific. The key to divine reckoning is Peter’s ‘one day is with the Lord as a thousand years.’ A half-hour is 1/48th of a day; divided into 1, 000 years it yields 20 years, 10 months. This is the ‘space’ of ‘silence’ between the wars. Reckoned from the armistice of Nov. 11, 1918, it brings us to Sept. 11, 1939. But it says ‘about’; World War II began Sept. 1, 1939; Hitler ‘jumped the gun’ by 10 days” (Harrison, His Coming, pp. 42-43). This far-fetched interpretation is its own refutation.

Harrison further identifies the second trumpet with Germany (The End, p. 218). It should be obvious, under his chronology, if this occurs during the first three and one-half years of Daniel’s last week, that the rapture is now long overdue. This refutation from history does not seem to deter midtribulationists, like another date-setters, from making alterations in their system and making another guess at identifying current events with the seals and trumpets of Revelation.

To most students of prophecy, the midtribulation view falls for want of proof in its three strategic interpretations: its teaching that the great tribulation does not begin until the seventh trumpet, the identification of the seventh trumpet with the middle of the seventieth week of Daniel, and its further blunder of demanding identification of the seventh trumpet with the last trump of 1 Corinthians 15:52. Its arguments against imminency on other grounds (cf. Harrison, The End, pp. 231-33) are a repetition of familiar posttribulational arguments often refuted. While the question of the time of the return of the Lord for His church is not in itself a structural principle of theology as a whole, it certainly has a vital bearing on the interpretation of many Scriptures and is integral to the teaching of the imminency of the rapture. The great majority of expositors will continue to divide between the posttribulational and pretribulational positions, with the midtribulational and partial rapture viewpoints held only by a small minority.

I agree, the inter-testament period did not have the greater light they had in the NT... of course. My point was, where did such technical terminology as “the last day,” and “this world, and the world to come,” come from if it didn’t come from the inter-testament period? Such terminology the NT uses in a foundational way, adding detail to it, but not changing the basics of it.

Your view, seems to posit drastic renovations to that basic outline, as if they had it wrong, I think not.

On the timing of the rapture being the mystery revealed by Paul, I don’t agree with you. The particular take you have on 1 Cor. 15 seems pretty standard with both yourself and the pretribs. Nothing, however, is said in 1 Cor. 15:50-55, about the timing of the rapture being the mystery, it is bodily translation that is the mystery revealed.

This passage is not a revealing of a pretrib or prewrath rapture...as the mystery. Rather the translation of the body at the post-trib 2nd coming.

The timing of it is in verse 54, where Paul quotes Isa. 25:8, the setting of that passage in Isaiah is at the ushering in of the millennial - premill expositors agree on that. Following the cosmic catastrophism of the previous chapter, it more likely describes the singular event of the post-tribs rather than that of the prewraths, or the pretribs.

A good example of basic OT prophetic truth, in this case the resurrection/rapture of Isa. 25:8, NOT being reinvented in the NT, but being built upon, more detail supplied (the translation of our bodies). True, not only of Isa. 25:8, but of such inter-advent terminology as “the last day,” and “this world, and the world to come.”

Thanks for the linked article. I read it, looked up the Biblical references, and read them also. The only argument in it I find convincing is showing how God’s fury was carried out in Old Testament prophecy through events similar to some of the earlier seal judgments. Unfortunately, this is not adequate to demonstrate that these events ARE part of the Day of the Lord, just that that Day COULD include those events.

While I felt the author was evenhanded in dealing with the topic, I was disappointed with the approach of allowing for every various camp of interpretation of passages like Matthew 24. The problem is that it is possible to respond to one point of debate using one view point and then use an entirely contradictory viewpoint to defend a different argument. For example, he allows for disagreement as to whether this passage refers to the rapture or the second coming.

I do not subscribe to the author’s view that Isaiah 13 places the specific signs of the sun and moon within the Day of the Lord. Clearly, in multiple passages, there are signs in the heavens both before and during the Day of the Lord. However, the nature of these signs are distinguished from one another. The author does have an excellent point though that similarity does not mean identification, and it is possible for God to even cause the same exact signs to happen more than once. This does allow a little opening for narrow range of alternative viewpoints on the contents of the Olivet discourse.

None of these things are, however, ideas I did not personally explore before coming to embrace the pre-wrath view. There simply is no other view that is more well-supported by scripture. If there is, I have not personally heard the tenets explained or the particular problems of the established views (such as pre-trib) adequately defended. I have heard some pretty good ones, and Marv Rosenthal was previously one of the most persuasive.

The least persuasive aspect of the article was the attempt to make two definitions for the Day of the Lord. The problem with these two definitions is that the only reason for them is to find a loophole to make the pre-trib view workable. That is simply not a basis for interpreting the Bible. And it fits in the same general category as the other overly-flexible approaches to passages such as Matthew 24 in which it means whatever the arguer needs it to mean for the given point of argument.

The handling of 2 Peter 3 is a perfect example. This is a clear reading into the passage, not from other scriptures to arrive at the correct meaning, but from the pre-trib viewpoint in order to make sure whatever the passage says, it is not allowed to contradict this sacred cow. You would really need a third definition of the Day of the Lord in order to make this chapter work.

The article does not even address how, in both letters to the Thessalonians, an equivalence is established between the return of Christ and the arrival of the Day of the Lord. Nor does it answer the timing of this event in relation to believers entering into rest and those on earth being judged with fire from holy angels WHEN Christ returns as described in 1 Thessalonians 1.

And in the second chapter of the epistle we see that Paul addresses their concern that the Day of the Lord had already arrived. Paul indicates that two events had to happen first.

On every one of these passages I have found that pre-trib views are all over the place as to the particular meaning and details. There no singular, cohesive, systematic pre-trib view which can be arrived at exegetically. If there is I really, truly do want to hear it, because I would actually prefer to be raptured out of this world sooner rather than later. But alas, it appears that watchful readiness must be tempered with endurance and patient waiting for Christ’s return.

In spite of not being persuaded by the arguments of the article, I do appreciate your sharing of it as I did learn some things and become more familiar with certain passages of the Bible. I certainly do not intend to be overly harsh or dogmatic toward you or the author. I see you both as brothers headed for the same goal. We all share the same blessed hope in Christ’s return. And I am sure we will come to a deeper understanding of these things as the time comes closer.

The least persuasive aspect of the article was the attempt to make two definitions for the Day of the Lord.

This is where our words must be forms very precisely ... there are not two definitions of the Day of the Lord ... but two aspects to a unified single definition.

The book by Showers does a good job of explaining this ... in summary, the Day of the Lord is ANY day that The Almighty intervenes into the affairs of men in a supernatural way. He explains that there have already been several Days of the Lord in the OT that have already been fulfilled. Some are single days ... some are periods of time.

Anyway ... glad you liked the article ... that is what we are all here for; combat false doctrine (RCC) and sharpen each other through brotherly theological sparing. Most of us that are pre-trib would see Showers book as the definitive treatment of the topic ... so it is worth having for your own research. I certainly have Van Kampens original and most of Rosenthal's works; I find them both very helpful for documentation of the position.

I guess my stand would be a slight modification of an old saying ... "pray for pre-trib" ... prepare for "pre-wrath" ... lol.

You presented many arguments to which I did not deal with, and all good ones, prewrath has many good arguments; not that I couldn’t have, it’s just the nature of wild and wooly forums like this, that the most one can accomplish is to “put in a few good licks” for your position and leave the rest to God.

They were pretty good licks too, whether it dawned on you or not. Such as:

Christ appearing “the second time,” Heb. 9:28, really means the second time - there is no third time.

And Heb. 10:12,13, prewrath arguments to the contrary, really does mean what it says, Christ really does stay in heaven until his enemies are gathered together to be put under foot.

And the “Lord” part of the day of the Lord really means him in PERSON, which is described in Rev. 19:11, “heaven opens” and he comes IN PERSON.

And the “end” really does mean the “end.” in a most poignant way! The very end of this age, not seven years or even one year before the END.

And just as the end really means the end, likewise “the last day,” it really does mean THE LAST DAY.

I take my leave from this thread now, with this thought. Unlike pretribs, it is always a pleasure conversing with prewraths. Reason being we are really not that far apart. Though we stick to our guns, how all this is actually going to work out in real time, God, in his special way, is going to take care of.

Pretribs aren’t going anywhere, no “first flight, no fight.” They have the antichrist in their future, like it or not. I think you and I would agree there.

I believe once we get into the tribulation, a great many pretribs are going to be forced to abandon their comfy view. And what is that going to leave? Prewraths and Post-tribs. Our differences are really going to come into sharp focus by then, it will be the issue of the hour...but not until then.

Until then, we have the tribulation ahead of us, no small thing! Until then, in real time it will work out we as allies against our common enemy, the antichrist, his mark, etc. I count prewraths good allies in that fight. God bless you.

That is a good article about Jewish wedding traditions. Thank you for sharing it.

I do agree that the seven day period matches nicely to the seventieth week, but it is not something explicitly stated in scripture. In other words, there is nothing that specifically indicates a marriage of the church to Christ takes place 7 years, 7 months, or 7 literal 24-hour days before the marriage supper.

I think it is interesting that those who use the Jewish wedding argument to support a rapture of the church seven years prior to Christ’s return to set up His kingdom, also argue that the church cannot remain during these seven years because the church is not Israel and is not under Israel’s covenant.

Like a parable, it is possible to misread or read too much into the picture of marriage. For example, the church has been through horrific persecution over the centuries. What does that picture in relation to a wedding? I use this example because many argue that Christ will not allow His bride to go through the Great Tribulation.

There are more explicit explanations in scripture about the timing of the rapture in 1 Corinthians 15, Matthew 24 (and other Olivet passages), 1 Thessalonians 4 and 5, 2 Thessalonians 1 and 2, and 2 Peter 3.

All of these point to the rapture occurring at the onset of the Day of the Lord at which point there is sudden, cataclysmic, and fiery destruction. But this is not how Daniel’s seventieth week begins. It begins with a relatively and deceptively peaceful time.

1 Thessalonians 5:3
For when they say, “Peace and safety!” then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape.

2 Thessalonians 1:7-8
[God will] give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.

“Once that peace treaty is signed the number of days to the middle of the week are specifically given. To apply Jesus comment ‘no one will know the day or the hour’ makes no sense at that point.”

Contextually, when Christ said no one knows the day, He also said He comes as a thief and was referring to His coming at the end of the Great Tribulation (the one like no other) in the Olivet Discourse.

Matthew 24:29-30, 36-44
Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only. But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left. Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming. But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.

You seem to be forcing these statements to apply elsewhere because we do know how long Daniel’s seventieth week lasts. If the Great Tribulation ends at the same time as Daniel’s seventieth week, then we have two markers that tell us when His coming to establish His kingdom occurs - the signing of the anti-Christ treaty and the abomination of desolation.

But, if the end of the Great Tribulation happens prior to the end of Daniel’s seventieth week, at an unspecified time, then His statement makes sense, and His coming “after the days of that tribulation” can be sudden and unexpected, “like a thief”.

Every other approach require back flips to make a particular paradigm fit into the Olivet discourse.

>>I do agree that the seven day period matches nicely to the seventieth week, but it is not something explicitly stated in scripture.<<

Perhaps not but if you are honestly searching for understanding of prophesy as I believe you are if you keep that in mind things will start to make sense for you.

>>also argue that the church cannot remain during these seven years because the church is not Israel and is not under Israel’s covenant.<<

Well, that is part of it but there are much more compelling evidences that the "church" will not be earth bound during that seven years. One would be that believers are promised to not be subject to God's wrath. Yes we will have tribulation while here but not that from God. The tribulations we experience are from Satan and those he controls. The events of Revelation 6 through the end are directed by God. Not once in all of scripture are true, faithful believers subject to God's wrath. Even when Israel sinned God allowed them to be persecuted by Satan and his minions but did not affect that wrath like He will during the events of Revelation.

>>For example, the church has been through horrific persecution over the centuries.<<

Yes it has but none of that as a direct result of God's direction. He allowed it and even told us it would happen. Satan is after all the current ruler of this world and he has been doing all he can to eliminate the believers. Keep in mind that Satan can not control the weather and events like are going to happen during that seven year period. That is directly orchestrated and controlled by God.

>>I use this example because many argue that Christ will not allow His bride to go through the Great Tribulation.<<

He won't allow that. These words "Kept from the wrath to come", " which delivereth us from the wrath to come", and "I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come on the whole world to test the inhabitants of the earth" show that true believers will not be around during that time.

>>All of these point to the rapture occurring at the onset of the Day of the Lord at which point there is sudden, cataclysmic, and fiery destruction.<<

Once again you are squeezing events into a one day event. The "onset of the day of the Lord" is not a description of a one day event. Understand again that the "day of the Lord" is a period of time. That seven year period does begin with an illusion of peace signed by the anti Christ but begins to soon deteriorate as Revelation 6 on shows. We will "enter into His rest" at the end of the tribulation period and the beginning of the millennium.

I was not trying to leave anything out, I just included those verses for brevity (something I am rarely accused of). We certainly should take the entire discourse into account.

“In verse 32 Jesus began to explain what to look for as signs of when those things described earlier would begin to happen. Look at verse 33.”

Matthew 24:33
Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door.

What is “it” here?

We need to go back to the beginning for context:

Matthew 24:3
Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”

There are essentially three questions being answered. What are the answers?

When will these things be?
It is not for us to know when. (See verse 36.)
We should not fall into the trap of foolish date-setting schemes.

What will be the sign of Christ’s coming?
There are actually 6 signs that precede Christ’s coming:

1) Deception, False Christs, False Peace - Matthew 24:5
2) War and rumors of war - Matthew 24:6,7
3) Famine - Matthew 24:7
4) Disease, troubles and natural disasters - Matthew 24:7
5) “Tribulation”, persecution and martyrdom of the saints - Matthew 24:9
6) Signs in the heavens, specifically the darkening of the sun and moon (immediately AFTER the Great Tribulation) - Matthew 24:29

What will be the sign of the end of the age?
Christ coming is the 7th sign that marks the arrival of the END.

Matthew 24:3, 6, 8, 13, 14
Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the END [emphasis added] of the age?”
And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the END [emphasis added] is not yet.
All these are the beginning of sorrows.
But he who endures to the END [emphasis added] shall be saved.
And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the END [emphasis added] will come.

So the answer to the question of what is “it” in verse 33, is it is the END of the age.

The disciples wanted to know when. Christ said it was not for them to know. They wanted to know the signs of the END and of His coming. He answered them with six specific signs preceding His return and confirmed their expectation that His return does mark the END of the age.

The period called the END is another way of describing the Day of the Lord. It is the end of the world (not the end of the earth) or end of the age. It is the last portion of time before the new age and new world of the millennial kingdom begins. During this time God judges unbelieving Israel and all of the nations of the world.

An attempt to make “it” refer to the whole prior list of signs does not work and does not make sense:

Matthew 24:33 [if “it” refers to the signs]
So you also, when you see all these things, know that [THESE SIGNS] are near—at the doors!

See. It does not work. It does not fit. It is singular.

Could “it” be referring to the time period of these signs? No. Same problem.

Matthew 24:33 [if “it” refers to the time period of the signs]
So you also, when you see all these things, know that [THIS TIME PERIOD OF SIGNS] is near—at the doors!

Still does not work. Signs mean something. They point to something. Now try substituting the END for it:

Matthew 24:33 [if “it” refers to the END]
So you also, when you see all these things, know that [THE END] is near—at the doors!

Yes. That works. Because that is what He is referring to. That is the answer to the questions His disciples asked.

But here is the most important point: This time period is NOT the END of the age. It is what precedes the END.

This is additionally supported by the fact that He describes His coming AFTER the Great Tribulation to be like a thief and at an unexpected time:

Matthew 24:29-30
Immediately AFTER [emphasis added] the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. THEN [emphasis added] the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Matthew 24:42-44
Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming. But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.

Paul places the END on this same timeline as well:

1 Corinthians 15:23-25
But each one [is resurrected] in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming. Then comes the END [emphasis added], when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet.

“The events of Revelation 6 through the end are directed by God.”

When Job went through trials from Satan, they were also directed by God. That is, Satan had to get permission. It was not Satan, but God, Who brought up Job’s righteousness to Satan.

Likewise, when David numbered Israel against God’s command, he was given three options of what judgment would happen because of this sin. He actually chose the one directly from God because he thought God might have mercy and show restraint.

The fact that the opening of the seals indicate God’s sovereignty over these events does not prove that they are acts of His wrath any more than when the same judgments of famine, war, deception by anti-Christs, disease and natural disasters have happened throughout history. If not one sparrow falls to the ground apart from God’s sovereign will, then I think it is only reasonable to assume all of these calamities down through history are also under the control of His sovereign hand, even if we do not have a vision revealed of how these things unfolded in Heaven.

“He won’t allow that. These words ‘Kept from the wrath to come’, ‘which delivereth us from the wrath to come’, and ‘I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come on the whole world to test the inhabitants of the earth’ show that true believers will not be around during that time.”

I agree about the wrath. We will not be here during His wrath being poured out. This is different, however, from being “kept” from the hour of trial.

1 Thessalonians 1:10
and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.

delivers = rhyomenon

Revelation 3:10
Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.

John 17:15
I do not pray that You should take them out of the world, but that You should keep them from the evil one.

keep = tereses (You will keep) / tereso (I will keep)

Believers are kept from evil / the evil one / trials without being removed from the world. Believers are saved from (out of) God’s wrath. In this world we WILL have tribulation but are preserved by Christ’s overcoming power. But we do not experience God’s wrath now or in the future.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.