Defense of the Post-Trib / Pre-Wrath Position

[Omegaman 3.0]

I tend toward Post-Trib, but am open to variations of pre-wrath. I don't have enough objections to pre-wrath to speak out against it. For one thing, at least formerly, during most of my 'post-trib career', I considered post-trib to BE pre-wrath, since I held that God's wrath was poured out when Jesus returns visibly after the tribulation. While I still think that His wrath is poured out after the trib (or continues to be after the trib, I am not convinced that His wrath BEGINS after the trib.

In this diagram, I have many eschatological event shown, in the sequence that I believe the Bible indicates. Notice, that I leave the wrath of God out here. Where one places the wrath of God in this sequence, I guess, perhaps determines what one calls oneself positionally.

One could, for example, place an arrow, somewhere in the second half of the tribulation, and not run afoul of any Bible verse. However, since phrases about the wrath, also point to times after Jesus returns, I think that arrow would have to be limited to a beginning point of God's wrath, (see Rev 14 and 15). So, I think, that the wrath should be a band, a lapse of time, not a point in time.

Now, since we are talking about a pre-wrath rapture (I think), here is where I have my doubts on this position. Although I agree that the wrath may start during the great tribulation, the rapture does not occur before the end of the tribulation. So, if Christians are, as I believe, present during the tribulation, and even during the part of the tribulation that Jesus described a great (after the abomination of  desolation) then it seems that those Christians present, will be protected (perhaps sealed) against harm from God's wrath, while still present during the tribulation. However, this does not mean that they are immune from all harm - the are still subject to the persecution of anti-christ and his forces.

I made a confident statement there, that the rapture does not occur before the tribulation, and that is why I do not consider myself (yet at least) to be in the pre-wrath camp. Is my confidence justified? Perhaps not to you, but allow me to explain the source of that confidence, then judge for yourselves.

If the wrath begins during the tribulation, fine, then it does. However, the main event seems to occur at the Day of the Lord.

1 Thess 5

2For you yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night. 3While they are saying, “Peace and safety!” then destruction will come upon them suddenly like labor pains upon a woman with child, and they will not escape.

In the same context (same chapter) Paul goes on to say:

 9For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,

To me, this likely indicates that the destruction of V.3, can be fairly called the wrath of God.

I should probably insert an idea here for you all to consider, not really a point, but just something to think about in this topic, when discussing the wrath aspect.

There word "wrath" not a time word, and it is possible that it should not be thought of as if it is. Wrath is anger, and emotion, and an outpouring or expression of anger with consequences. I discuss this idea in a video I made once upon a time. Think of that as you are tempted to pencil in a time point or an expanse of time, just a thought.

Anyway, back to my train of thought:

There is also this:

It seems to me, that the church is caught up, to be with Christ, when He returns visibly:

Matt 24

 29“But immediately after the tribulation of those days THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, ANDTHE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30“And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the SON OF MAN COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF THE SKY with power and great glory. 31“And He will send forth His angels with A GREAT TRUMPET and THEY WILL GATHER TOGETHER His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.

(Please pardon the mix of regular and bold type above, I am not trying ti emphasize anything there, there are two different fonts in the passage that I cut and pasted there)

What was said there though?

• Immediately after the tribulation
• the sun, moon, stars phenom
• the Son of Man appears
• the elect are gathered

While our pre-tribs friends deny that this is the rapture, it is undeniable that Jesus is here, returning after the trib, and gathers someone!

and that immediately after the trib, there is a phenom involving the sun, moon and stars.

We know also from 1 Thess 5:

2For you yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night. 3While they are saying, “Peace and safety!” then destruction will come upon them suddenly like labor pains upon a woman with child, and they will not escape. 4But you, brethren, are not in darkness, that the day would overtake you like a thief; . . . and . . .

9For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, 

Paul, it seems to me is possible connecting God's wrath, with the Day of the Lord, but . . . 
he is also comparing God's wrath to it's alternative - salvation. Which salvation is in mind, I leave you do decide.

However, for those of us who beleive that the rapture occurs when Jesus returns visibly, it is hard for us to place the rapture before the end of the tribulation, since that is when scripture says He will return.

If that understanding is correct, then a prewrath rapture, would mean that the wrath that the rapture occurs prior to, is a wrath that follows the tribulation, this necessitating a post-trib rapture.

While it may be possible to understand a wrath of God during the tribulation, it is not possible that the rapture, is prior to that wrath, unless the rapture occurs before the sun and moon and stars thing which is explicitly after the tribulation, does that much make since.

So, if a pre-wrath rapture is not a post-trib rapture, then that understanding suffers the same problem that the pre-trib and mid-trib rapture positions have, that of being an argument form silence, not a scriptural argument.

The Bible does not describe a rapture apart from a return of Christ, nor does the Bible ever describe a return of Christ, is before the end of the tribulation, nor does it describe  secret ot invisible coming, those ideas come from vivid imaginations. I list 12 things often said about the end times that are not is scripture in another thread

So, as I see it, comparing the pre-trib and post-trib postitions, there are some similarities and some differences. Both are held by people who hold the bible in high esteem. I would make a comparison though, that in these camps, there is a philosophical difference in how one arrives at spiritual truth. The comparison, is to the chasm, between the Roman Catholic Church, and Protestant or Reformed traditions.

In the reformation, the principle of Solo Scriptura, the bible only, was emphasized, It was believed that only the Bible, was a reliable source of truth. This tends to be the position that post-tribbers use in eschatology.

In Roman Catholicism, it is the Bible, plus church tradition, plus decrees of the Pope. Church tradition, and the Pope, have added things not found in scripture, such as exaggerated veneration of Mary, prayers to the saints, the idea that saints are a special class of believers, not ordinary believers, a central, human authority, etc, etc.

Protestants reject these ideas as spiritually reliable, simply because they are not found in the Bible.

I am pretty simple minded, I am a sola scriptura kind of guy as well. So, me eschatology, comes from the Bible. Everything I hold in mt eschatology, has at least one verse that supports that belief. Since pre-trib rapturism, adds things like invisible, secret, surprise to everyone return of Christ, I reject it, not be cause it is untrue, but because it is unsupported by scripture.

For this same reason then, I have to reject some varieties of the pre-wrath position, since they also are withouth scriptural support that I can see. However, I do not find them as dangerous as I find teaching the church that it will escape the tribulation altogether, so I do not see pre-wrath-ism, as harmful, even though I do not accept it.

[Diaste]

OK. I guess you must have a different interpretation of Dan 7:25, Rev 11:3, and Rev 12:6 and 14 than me. To me these would point to the Church passing through the GT for 1260 days before the rapture. I'm interested to know how you interpret those passages. Not trying to challenge your view, just would like to understand it.

Too many quotes of quotes of quotes, time to simplify.

In an earlier post, you told how you were enlightened as it were by Marvin Rosenthal's book on Pre-wrath, after he came out of his belief in Pre-trib. Trouble was, he dragged into his new understanding the old Pre-trib false teaching of a 7-times period for the End Times, divided into two 1260-day halves. The 7 times/70th week teaching is totally based upon Daniel 9:24-27: no other Scripture mentions such a 7-year period for the End Times. Anyone who bases a critical doctrine on one witness alone has already violated the Scriptures.

Truth is, everything prophesied in Dan. 9:26-27 was completely and perfectly fulfilled by the coming of Jesus the Messiah, and then subsequent destruction of the Temple and demise of the Aaronic priesthood in the 7-year Jewish War of 66-73 AD. A detailed analysis of why this is so can be found here: http://www.ourchurch.com/member/d/dummies/index.php?p=1_10_Daniel-s-70-Weeks

So, this leaves us with those prophecies yet unfulfilled of 3-1/2 times = 1260 days = 42 months; as referenced in your post above, and with the addition of Dan. 12:7. Daniel knew and was told nothing about the Church: the Book of Daniel refers always to "thy/my people Israel:" 9:20, 24, etc. The OT is full of prophecies about "the remnant of Israel/Jacob" undergoing fiery trials and purification on earth during the End Times; not about being raptured into heaven. Now, consider these key prophecies:

Rev. 1:7 Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen.

Zech. 12:10 “And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn."

Matt. 26:64 Jesus said to him [Caiaphas], “It is as you said. Nevertheless I say to you, hereafter you [plural] will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

So, right after the great heavenly and earthly shakings of the 6th Seal, when the Lord comes for the elect of his Church, the unbelieving remnant of Israel will see him sitting at the right hand of God, and then coming on the clouds of heaven -- and they will come to believe in him, and mourn for their blindness. However, their faith will come too late to qualify them to ascend with the elect of the Church, so they will experience the period of the Wrath on earth -- but be preserved through it.

Therefore, the Church will not have to go through the 1260 day-period; with the significant exception of the non-elect, i.e. those many foolish virgins who will not be prepared for the Lord's Coming.

Hope this will help to clear up some things in your understanding.

 I only have one thing to say to all that. I don't see you as having understanding of the scriptures in this area.

 

[Diaste]

Odd, I always thought of the pre-wrath as a nuanced post-trib position, although I did have a book once that detailed it as a nuanced pre-trib position. Is the term pre-wrath copyrighted or is there an official Pre-Wrath Association which can define it? Hard to defend something if once doesn't even know the position's specifics.

According to the great theology site Wikipedia:

 

The Prewrath rapture is one of several premillennial views on the end-times events among evangelical Christians, and states that Christians will be raptured at the end of a time called the Beginning of Sorrows that occurs in the first half of the seventieth week of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks, and before the day of the Lord's wrath (God's wrath). The prewrath position emphasizes the biblical distinction between tribulation (which Christians have been promised) and the wrath of God (which Christians have been promised deliverance/salvation from).

According to the Prewrath perspective, the great tribulation begins 3.5 years after the Antichrist "makes a covenant with the many" (Daniel 9:27), in the middle of "Daniel's 70th week." The 70th week is a reference to Daniel 9:24, where each day of the week corresponds to a year (for a total of seven years). After the first 3.5 years, the Antichrist will make himself known with the abomination that causes desolation, and he will reign for 3.5 years (42 months or 1260 days). The latter half of the 3.5 years is characterized by the Antichrist deceiving the world and persecuting the church.

Hi,

Love this discussion and I just have to chime in. The pre-wrath thing is something I have studied out over the decades since I first became acquainted with the return of Jesus and the gathering of the elect. At first I read every book I could find on the subject, all were pre-trib. That position always left me unsettled, as if I was somehow in the right crowd, in the know as it were, but still incomplete and searching. So much of the pre-trib position comes from the bias of certain ideas that have been rationalized into existence. Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing pre-trib, though there is much there to bash, this is just an introduction by way of a little history. In any case I stumbled across a book by M. Rosenthal that helped me to search in a different way, and the eyes of my heart were opened! In all the study i did over the years the only 'rapture' that makes sense, from all the verses related to such an event, is the one we like to call pre-wrath. Some seem to think it's also a post trib event but I think the trib continues until the 70 weeks is complete, though the tribulation of the saints is over at the coming of Jesus, or pre Wrath of God, probably why this rapture is called post-trib by some.

The objection I have to the above Wiki quote has to do with this statement:  states that Christians will be raptured at the end of a time called the Beginning of Sorrows that occurs in the first half of the seventieth week of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks, and before the day of the Lord's wrath

Pre-wrath actually states that believers are gathered at the end of 'great tribulation' and before the wrath of God falls, and this on the same day, likely moments before the Wrath of God begins at the Day of the Lord. "Great tribulation" begins at the middle of the 70th week when the beginning of sorrows ends. Believers endure 'great tribulation' for a period of less than 3.5 years until the Lord returns to gather us up and fight against the rebellious armies of the world.

Looking forward to a fruitful discussion!

Hmm. I'm a little confused? OK, so if I get you right pre-wrath is similar to post-trib, just that you consider the wrath as part of the 3.5 years and that the rapture happens just before the wrath a little before the end of the 3.5 years of the last week of Daniel?

Yep.

OK. I guess we're possibly on the same page till we get to the--end of the trib beginning of the wrath--part. So what is it that leads you to interpret the wrath as part of the trib, which I assume means part of the 1260 days of GT that would be connected with the last half of the 70th week?

If i understand what you are saying, correct me if i'm wrong, you are wondering why I think the Wrath of God and 'great tribulation' seem to coincide. Well, I don't. I don't see that sort of thing anywhere in scripture. What scripture shows us is a week of years with two halves. The week begins with the beast confirming a covenant. The first half of the week runs till the A of D when the beast is finally revealed for who he is, and the second half commences. The 2nd half of the week is 42 months, or 1260 days. Layered into this, on top of, or woven into, we might say, the 2nd half of the week, are two events of some undetermined duration: 'great tribulation' and the Wrath of God. Scripture does not record that 'great tribulation' has a specified end point except for " those days were shortened or no flesh would be saved." Scripture shows us the beginning of 'great tribulation', but the duration is not specified. The Wrath of God doesn't have a specified beginning either. We assume that the end of the Wrath of God is at the end of the 2nd half of the week and that seems reasonable to me, but scripture does not provide a beginning that is clearly defined("no man knows the day or the hour, but we can know the year and the month, yes?). Logically we know that believers are not appointed to wrath. We also know that 'great tribulation' is the refining fire God promised would come. If the refining fire is for the people of God, to make them pure and holy, then 'great tribulation' ceases when He comes to redeem us and gather us to Him. After he has gathered us the Wrath of God falls on the rebels. We know this from passages in Rev where the Lord gathers the believers from the 4 winds and then the Day of the Lord begins, likely on the same day and the same hour, and the wrath of God is poured out on the rebels It would look like this:

                                                                                                                                 70th Week

                                                                                          l____       _First Half__     ______l___                Second half                         l

                                                                                          l         Beginning of Sorrows_  _   l             'great tribulation'      l Wrath of God l

So the second half of the week only is 1260 days. 'Great tribulation' is in the 2nd half of the week and is part of the 1260 days, and is likely the greater part of the 2nd half. 2.5, 3 years, perhaps. I don't know for sure but scripture seems to say the Wrath of God lasts for around 5 to 6 months.

OK. I guess you must have a different interpretation of Dan 7:25, Rev 11:3, and Rev 12:6 and 14 than me. To me these would point to the Church passing through the GT for 1260 days before the rapture. I'm interested to know how you interpret those passages. Not trying to challenge your view, just would like to understand it.

Just a quick look at the references you supplied tells me we have a similar understanding. And feel free to challenge me. I could be wrong and I need to know that. As far as 'my view' goes I try to keep my personal bias out of it if I can. I learned long ago that hoping for a certain conclusion never led me to the truth and did nothing to help me mature. But, I am a creature and a sinful one, so I know that I can be incorrect. That being said, scripture is always correct IF we can understand what the Lord is telling us. Not so easy as it sounds. I see what you are saying concerning the above scriptures, and it makes sense. With your permission I'll look at them all.

Dan 7 "25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time."

This verse clearly says the saints are under the power of the stout little horn for 3.5 years. If the second half of the week is also 1260 days, then the saints are in 'great tribulation' for the whole of the 2nd week. But scripture also says this: Matt 24

"15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

16-20 These five verses are the warning to flee and the hardships the Jews will endure during their flight.

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened." 

I wanted to look at the beginning and the end of 'great tribulation'. The beginning of 'great tribulation' is the A of D as Jesus is telling us here. Jesus is also telling us that it's going to be a time like no other. Most associate the dread of this fearful time with the cruel persecution of the saints of God, and I concur. But there are also many powerful, supernatural events occurring as well making this, 'a time like no other'. But that's another story. Verse 22 says the days are going to be shortened or no flesh would be saved. I understand this 'flesh' to be living saints. The last phrase of verse 22 tells us the days of 'great tribulation' are shortened for the sake of the elect(saints), so I understand this to mean some of the flesh(living saints) of the elect(all believers) must be saved alive(to fulfill another prophecy) so the days are shortened. But by how much are the days shortened? Not a lot. Maybe just a few months from what I read in the scriptures.

That’s a possible interpretation for sure. However, it seems a little unlikely to me that something of this significance would only be mentioned once and in a manner that seems quite ambiguous if it were indeed about a shortening of the GT. To me it reads as a shortening of the days of man’s reign on earth. Surely man would eventually wipe himself out if he were allowed to reign over the earth for too long a time. I think your logic can be applied to your statement as well. It's far to important to mention the end of the reign of man only once. Indeed man may indeed wipe himself off the planet and so if the end of man's reign is coming, mankind should hear about many times. Still, it's hard to ignore the statement immediately following, " for then shall be great tribulation...", "and except those days be shortened..." and, "for the elects sake those days shall be shortened."

The object of the shortened days is clearly the days of 'great tribulation'.

"3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth." 

I have heard several contend the two witnesses are the church and the bible, the church and their testimony, the Jews and the church or, the OT and NT. I wish some scripture would explicitly identify these two. However, scripture definitively identifies them as two individuals, likely men, and there are logical(deductive)arguments that can place these two in the first half of the week.

Rev 11:5-12 attributes several characteristics of individuals to the two witnesses: they have feet, a mouth, they speak, they prophesy, they have individual wills, they can be killed, they have bodies.

Clearly these are individuals and not the church. There are a couple other things as well. These two are resurrected under different circumstances than the elect. The elect are gathered from the four winds after undergoing persecution during 'great tribulation'. These two laid in the street for three days and then heard a voice saying, "Come up here." The elect will hear a trumpet and see the sign of the coming of the Son of Man. Also, the elect are undergoing persecution by everyone in the world. These two are doing the persecution!! They are burning people to death, causing drought, smiting people with plagues as often as they will. These two are agents of the Most High prophesying for the Lord and smiting the earth; they cannot be the church, the Jews, the OT and NT, etc.

I agree.

 The two witnesses certainly will not be able to fulfill 1260 days of prophecy in the second half of the week. If the witnesses were to fulfill their ministry in the second half of the week the reign of the beast would continue past the 42 months, or 1260 days. Let me explain: If the witnesses prophecy 1260 days and then are killed, and the world parties for 3.5 days and gives gifts to one another after the death of these two prophets, then the beasts time runs 3.5 days longer than it should. Since the two witnesses must prophecy for 1260 days it seem logical, though not imperative, their prophecy must fit within one of two time periods we know to be the same length of their prophecy. Namely, either the first or second halves of the week. Since we know they cannot fulfill the prophecy in the second half, then they must appear in the first half, before the beast is empowered and kills them. This seem logical to me. The two witnesses arrive on the scene at the beginning of the 70th week and prophesy against the covenant made with the Jews. The two torment the earth and kill their enemies for 1260 days. The beast ascends from the bottomless pit, is empowered by the dragon, kills the two prophets, the world parties, the beast places the A of D, and 'great tribulation' commences. Now it's true the 1260 days of their prophecy could be any 1260 day period. It could begin one year into the first half and run 2.5 years into the second half, or any other combination. But their days of prophecy cannot be fully contained within the 2nd half of the 70th week or the beast's reign runs past the allotted 42 months. The reason I'm convinced the time of the two prophets is fully contained within the first half is the same as I stated earlier. God will warn the Jews about their impending doom, relying on this little horn that promises peace and plans destruction. This prophesying will begin the moment the treaty for peace is confirmed and fulfill the 1260 days in the first half of the week.

I’ve never noticed that before. Thanks for pointing that out and for the information regarding the two witnesses falling into the first half of the 70^th week. These kind of details I’m particularly interested in. I want to know what the other possible scenarios are regarding this time period so that, in case the interpretation I hold to is wrong, I'll be aware of these other options, and hopefully I won’t be groping in the dark wondering why things are happening as they are. So now I know if when the covenant is confirmed by the AC and it happens that the two witnesses are plowing ahead full steam that the only thing that's wrong is that I had the wrong interpretation. That’s definitely a good thing to be aware of.

I don’t personally think that it will happen that way though. When you put that one verse that seems to be saying that the 1260 days is while they are alive against the backdrop of the surrounding passages it doesn’t seem like that’s what it’s saying. For instance you’ve got verse 2 talking about the holy city being trodden under foot by the gentiles 42 months. To me that’s an obvious reference to the second half of the 70^th week. Then in verse 15 you’ve got the sounding of the 7^th trumpet which, as far as I understand, is the end of the GT. Also the fact that it’s in a place in Revelation which I consider to be specifically about the GT (Chp 8-14) persuades me that the verse in question is only talking about the length of the 2 witnesses ministry on earth including the 3.5 days, not how long they would be alive. And the question I have here is: How can they minister if they are dead? It also seems to me having their ministry in the first half of the week is out of place since the Jews will be sacrificing in their temple during that period, which to me sounds like that first 3.5 years will be a somewhat peaceful time which is what one would expect after a peace deal has been signed. The idea here is that the Jews have made a covenant for peace with the one who will destroy them. The beginning of that destruction happens in the middle of the week. The two witnesses are going to be there to tell Israel and the world that the Jews have made a covenant with death. Even though it will be a time of peace it's just a ruse and that's what the witnesses are warning against, in the first half of the week.

Rev 12.

If I understand correctly you are equating the woman in Rev 12 with the church, elect. Since the scripture clearly says the woman flees to the wilderness on the wings of a great eagle, and is nourished there for 1260 days, the church, elect, must be in 'great tribulation' for 1260 days, therefore, a post trib rapture. I think scripture says exactly what you suggest. The woman in the wilderness, in the place prepared for her, is on earth for the entire 1260 days. But the group in question is the remnant of her seed.

"17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ" Now this group is different from the woman. But I guess we should let scripture identify the woman first.

"5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne." Clearly the man-child who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron that was caught up to God's throne, is Jesus Christ. The woman then must be Israel(at one point Jesus likened all the Jews to his 'mothers and brothers') as it certainly cannot be Jesus birth mother Mary. So the remnant of the seed of the woman can only be the elect as they, "keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ". So the woman is here for the whole of the 1260 days in a special place whereas the other group that, "keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ" are under siege by the dragon. This is the elect for," except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened". So while the woman is on earth for 1260 days, 'great tribulation' for the elect is cut short, the elect is gathered and the Wrath of God begins, and ends at the culmination of the 70th week.

In reality I understand pretty much the same as you do, except maybe the two witnesses. I just added some scripture to give us more to think about.

That's an interesting take on that passage in Rev 12. Personally I try to take the simplest explanation, especially when it comes to these types of passages. To me the woman is simply the church throughout the ages, Old and New Testament. But I will definitely keep that interpretation in mind. (More comments above in between your last post in case you missed them.)

I guess I would ask who the man child is and the remnant of the seed of the woman. If the woman is the church what child did she give birth to that will rule the nations with a rod of Iron. Rev 19 says Jesus will rule the nations with a rod of iron. Psalm 2 says something similar. Maybe Jesus is the man child the woman gives birth to? 

[toknowthetruth]

Odd, I always thought of the pre-wrath as a nuanced post-trib position, although I did have a book once that detailed it as a nuanced pre-trib position. Is the term pre-wrath copyrighted or is there an official Pre-Wrath Association which can define it? Hard to defend something if once doesn't even know the position's specifics.

According to the great theology site Wikipedia:

 

The Prewrath rapture is one of several premillennial views on the end-times events among evangelical Christians, and states that Christians will be raptured at the end of a time called the Beginning of Sorrows that occurs in the first half of the seventieth week of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks, and before the day of the Lord's wrath (God's wrath). The prewrath position emphasizes the biblical distinction between tribulation (which Christians have been promised) and the wrath of God (which Christians have been promised deliverance/salvation from).

According to the Prewrath perspective, the great tribulation begins 3.5 years after the Antichrist "makes a covenant with the many" (Daniel 9:27), in the middle of "Daniel's 70th week." The 70th week is a reference to Daniel 9:24, where each day of the week corresponds to a year (for a total of seven years). After the first 3.5 years, the Antichrist will make himself known with the abomination that causes desolation, and he will reign for 3.5 years (42 months or 1260 days). The latter half of the 3.5 years is characterized by the Antichrist deceiving the world and persecuting the church.

Hi,

Love this discussion and I just have to chime in. The pre-wrath thing is something I have studied out over the decades since I first became acquainted with the return of Jesus and the gathering of the elect. At first I read every book I could find on the subject, all were pre-trib. That position always left me unsettled, as if I was somehow in the right crowd, in the know as it were, but still incomplete and searching. So much of the pre-trib position comes from the bias of certain ideas that have been rationalized into existence. Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing pre-trib, though there is much there to bash, this is just an introduction by way of a little history. In any case I stumbled across a book by M. Rosenthal that helped me to search in a different way, and the eyes of my heart were opened! In all the study i did over the years the only 'rapture' that makes sense, from all the verses related to such an event, is the one we like to call pre-wrath. Some seem to think it's also a post trib event but I think the trib continues until the 70 weeks is complete, though the tribulation of the saints is over at the coming of Jesus, or pre Wrath of God, probably why this rapture is called post-trib by some.

The objection I have to the above Wiki quote has to do with this statement:  states that Christians will be raptured at the end of a time called the Beginning of Sorrows that occurs in the first half of the seventieth week of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks, and before the day of the Lord's wrath

Pre-wrath actually states that believers are gathered at the end of 'great tribulation' and before the wrath of God falls, and this on the same day, likely moments before the Wrath of God begins at the Day of the Lord. "Great tribulation" begins at the middle of the 70th week when the beginning of sorrows ends. Believers endure 'great tribulation' for a period of less than 3.5 years until the Lord returns to gather us up and fight against the rebellious armies of the world.

Looking forward to a fruitful discussion!

Hmm. I'm a little confused? OK, so if I get you right pre-wrath is similar to post-trib, just that you consider the wrath as part of the 3.5 years and that the rapture happens just before the wrath a little before the end of the 3.5 years of the last week of Daniel?

Yep.

OK. I guess we're possibly on the same page till we get to the--end of the trib beginning of the wrath--part. So what is it that leads you to interpret the wrath as part of the trib, which I assume means part of the 1260 days of GT that would be connected with the last half of the 70th week?

If i understand what you are saying, correct me if i'm wrong, you are wondering why I think the Wrath of God and 'great tribulation' seem to coincide. Well, I don't. I don't see that sort of thing anywhere in scripture. What scripture shows us is a week of years with two halves. The week begins with the beast confirming a covenant. The first half of the week runs till the A of D when the beast is finally revealed for who he is, and the second half commences. The 2nd half of the week is 42 months, or 1260 days. Layered into this, on top of, or woven into, we might say, the 2nd half of the week, are two events of some undetermined duration: 'great tribulation' and the Wrath of God. Scripture does not record that 'great tribulation' has a specified end point except for " those days were shortened or no flesh would be saved." Scripture shows us the beginning of 'great tribulation', but the duration is not specified. The Wrath of God doesn't have a specified beginning either. We assume that the end of the Wrath of God is at the end of the 2nd half of the week and that seems reasonable to me, but scripture does not provide a beginning that is clearly defined("no man knows the day or the hour, but we can know the year and the month, yes?). Logically we know that believers are not appointed to wrath. We also know that 'great tribulation' is the refining fire God promised would come. If the refining fire is for the people of God, to make them pure and holy, then 'great tribulation' ceases when He comes to redeem us and gather us to Him. After he has gathered us the Wrath of God falls on the rebels. We know this from passages in Rev where the Lord gathers the believers from the 4 winds and then the Day of the Lord begins, likely on the same day and the same hour, and the wrath of God is poured out on the rebels It would look like this:

                                                                                                                                 70th Week

                                                                                          l____       _First Half__     ______l___                Second half                         l

                                                                                          l         Beginning of Sorrows_  _   l             'great tribulation'      l Wrath of God l

So the second half of the week only is 1260 days. 'Great tribulation' is in the 2nd half of the week and is part of the 1260 days, and is likely the greater part of the 2nd half. 2.5, 3 years, perhaps. I don't know for sure but scripture seems to say the Wrath of God lasts for around 5 to 6 months.

OK. I guess you must have a different interpretation of Dan 7:25, Rev 11:3, and Rev 12:6 and 14 than me. To me these would point to the Church passing through the GT for 1260 days before the rapture. I'm interested to know how you interpret those passages. Not trying to challenge your view, just would like to understand it.

Just a quick look at the references you supplied tells me we have a similar understanding. And feel free to challenge me. I could be wrong and I need to know that. As far as 'my view' goes I try to keep my personal bias out of it if I can. I learned long ago that hoping for a certain conclusion never led me to the truth and did nothing to help me mature. But, I am a creature and a sinful one, so I know that I can be incorrect. That being said, scripture is always correct IF we can understand what the Lord is telling us. Not so easy as it sounds. I see what you are saying concerning the above scriptures, and it makes sense. With your permission I'll look at them all.

Dan 7 "25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time."

This verse clearly says the saints are under the power of the stout little horn for 3.5 years. If the second half of the week is also 1260 days, then the saints are in 'great tribulation' for the whole of the 2nd week. But scripture also says this: Matt 24

"15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

16-20 These five verses are the warning to flee and the hardships the Jews will endure during their flight.

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened." 

I wanted to look at the beginning and the end of 'great tribulation'. The beginning of 'great tribulation' is the A of D as Jesus is telling us here. Jesus is also telling us that it's going to be a time like no other. Most associate the dread of this fearful time with the cruel persecution of the saints of God, and I concur. But there are also many powerful, supernatural events occurring as well making this, 'a time like no other'. But that's another story. Verse 22 says the days are going to be shortened or no flesh would be saved. I understand this 'flesh' to be living saints. The last phrase of verse 22 tells us the days of 'great tribulation' are shortened for the sake of the elect(saints), so I understand this to mean some of the flesh(living saints) of the elect(all believers) must be saved alive(to fulfill another prophecy) so the days are shortened. But by how much are the days shortened? Not a lot. Maybe just a few months from what I read in the scriptures.

That’s a possible interpretation for sure. However, it seems a little unlikely to me that something of this significance would only be mentioned once and in a manner that seems quite ambiguous if it were indeed about a shortening of the GT. To me it reads as a shortening of the days of man’s reign on earth. Surely man would eventually wipe himself out if he were allowed to reign over the earth for too long a time. I think your logic can be applied to your statement as well. It's far to important to mention the end of the reign of man only once. Indeed man may indeed wipe himself off the planet and so if the end of man's reign is coming, mankind should hear about many times. Still, it's hard to ignore the statement immediately following, " for then shall be great tribulation...", "and except those days be shortened..." and, "for the elects sake those days shall be shortened."

The object of the shortened days is clearly the days of 'great tribulation'.

"3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth." 

I have heard several contend the two witnesses are the church and the bible, the church and their testimony, the Jews and the church or, the OT and NT. I wish some scripture would explicitly identify these two. However, scripture definitively identifies them as two individuals, likely men, and there are logical(deductive)arguments that can place these two in the first half of the week.

Rev 11:5-12 attributes several characteristics of individuals to the two witnesses: they have feet, a mouth, they speak, they prophesy, they have individual wills, they can be killed, they have bodies.

Clearly these are individuals and not the church. There are a couple other things as well. These two are resurrected under different circumstances than the elect. The elect are gathered from the four winds after undergoing persecution during 'great tribulation'. These two laid in the street for three days and then heard a voice saying, "Come up here." The elect will hear a trumpet and see the sign of the coming of the Son of Man. Also, the elect are undergoing persecution by everyone in the world. These two are doing the persecution!! They are burning people to death, causing drought, smiting people with plagues as often as they will. These two are agents of the Most High prophesying for the Lord and smiting the earth; they cannot be the church, the Jews, the OT and NT, etc.

I agree.

 The two witnesses certainly will not be able to fulfill 1260 days of prophecy in the second half of the week. If the witnesses were to fulfill their ministry in the second half of the week the reign of the beast would continue past the 42 months, or 1260 days. Let me explain: If the witnesses prophecy 1260 days and then are killed, and the world parties for 3.5 days and gives gifts to one another after the death of these two prophets, then the beasts time runs 3.5 days longer than it should. Since the two witnesses must prophecy for 1260 days it seem logical, though not imperative, their prophecy must fit within one of two time periods we know to be the same length of their prophecy. Namely, either the first or second halves of the week. Since we know they cannot fulfill the prophecy in the second half, then they must appear in the first half, before the beast is empowered and kills them. This seem logical to me. The two witnesses arrive on the scene at the beginning of the 70th week and prophesy against the covenant made with the Jews. The two torment the earth and kill their enemies for 1260 days. The beast ascends from the bottomless pit, is empowered by the dragon, kills the two prophets, the world parties, the beast places the A of D, and 'great tribulation' commences. Now it's true the 1260 days of their prophecy could be any 1260 day period. It could begin one year into the first half and run 2.5 years into the second half, or any other combination. But their days of prophecy cannot be fully contained within the 2nd half of the 70th week or the beast's reign runs past the allotted 42 months. The reason I'm convinced the time of the two prophets is fully contained within the first half is the same as I stated earlier. God will warn the Jews about their impending doom, relying on this little horn that promises peace and plans destruction. This prophesying will begin the moment the treaty for peace is confirmed and fulfill the 1260 days in the first half of the week.

I’ve never noticed that before. Thanks for pointing that out and for the information regarding the two witnesses falling into the first half of the 70^th week. These kind of details I’m particularly interested in. I want to know what the other possible scenarios are regarding this time period so that, in case the interpretation I hold to is wrong, I'll be aware of these other options, and hopefully I won’t be groping in the dark wondering why things are happening as they are. So now I know if when the covenant is confirmed by the AC and it happens that the two witnesses are plowing ahead full steam that the only thing that's wrong is that I had the wrong interpretation. That’s definitely a good thing to be aware of.

I don’t personally think that it will happen that way though. When you put that one verse that seems to be saying that the 1260 days is while they are alive against the backdrop of the surrounding passages it doesn’t seem like that’s what it’s saying. For instance you’ve got verse 2 talking about the holy city being trodden under foot by the gentiles 42 months. To me that’s an obvious reference to the second half of the 70^th week. Then in verse 15 you’ve got the sounding of the 7^th trumpet which, as far as I understand, is the end of the GT. Also the fact that it’s in a place in Revelation which I consider to be specifically about the GT (Chp 8-14) persuades me that the verse in question is only talking about the length of the 2 witnesses ministry on earth including the 3.5 days, not how long they would be alive. And the question I have here is: How can they minister if they are dead? It also seems to me having their ministry in the first half of the week is out of place since the Jews will be sacrificing in their temple during that period, which to me sounds like that first 3.5 years will be a somewhat peaceful time which is what one would expect after a peace deal has been signed. The idea here is that the Jews have made a covenant for peace with the one who will destroy them. The beginning of that destruction happens in the middle of the week. The two witnesses are going to be there to tell Israel and the world that the Jews have made a covenant with death. Even though it will be a time of peace it's just a ruse and that's what the witnesses are warning against, in the first half of the week.

Rev 12.

If I understand correctly you are equating the woman in Rev 12 with the church, elect. Since the scripture clearly says the woman flees to the wilderness on the wings of a great eagle, and is nourished there for 1260 days, the church, elect, must be in 'great tribulation' for 1260 days, therefore, a post trib rapture. I think scripture says exactly what you suggest. The woman in the wilderness, in the place prepared for her, is on earth for the entire 1260 days. But the group in question is the remnant of her seed.

"17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ" Now this group is different from the woman. But I guess we should let scripture identify the woman first.

"5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne." Clearly the man-child who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron that was caught up to God's throne, is Jesus Christ. The woman then must be Israel(at one point Jesus likened all the Jews to his 'mothers and brothers') as it certainly cannot be Jesus birth mother Mary. So the remnant of the seed of the woman can only be the elect as they, "keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ". So the woman is here for the whole of the 1260 days in a special place whereas the other group that, "keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ" are under siege by the dragon. This is the elect for," except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened". So while the woman is on earth for 1260 days, 'great tribulation' for the elect is cut short, the elect is gathered and the Wrath of God begins, and ends at the culmination of the 70th week.

In reality I understand pretty much the same as you do, except maybe the two witnesses. I just added some scripture to give us more to think about.

That's an interesting take on that passage in Rev 12. Personally I try to take the simplest explanation, especially when it comes to these types of passages. To me the woman is simply the church throughout the ages, Old and New Testament. But I will definitely keep that interpretation in mind. (More comments above in between your last post in case you missed them.)

I guess I would ask who the man child is and the remnant of the seed of the woman. If the woman is the church what child did she give birth to that will rule the nations with a rod of Iron. Rev 19 says Jesus will rule the nations with a rod of iron. Psalm 2 says something similar. Maybe Jesus is the man child the woman gives birth to? 

 

Well, it seems we've both have put forth our views and are still convinced of the same interpretation as before. I don't know at this point if it will serve us to continue this dialog. I will at least answer your questions though, and if you think there is more we can profit from in continuing this dialog I'll be more than happy to continue. 

I do have one question for you. It's not clear to me, but you seem to be saying that there is only one mention of the end of man's reign on earth. However, it seems to me that there are several passages about man's reign on earth coming to an end. Could you clarify what you meant there? Thanks.

OK. And the question I have here is: How can they minister if they are dead?

I don't think that's what I said. I simply said that it could be considered that their ministry could include the last 3.5 days until they get taken up to heaven. I don't see that as an unreasonable statement especially when you look at all the surrounding passages and what makes the most sense in connection with the whole chapter. 

I guess I would ask who the man child is and the remnant of the seed of the woman. 

I would simply answer that Jesus is the man child and that the remnant are the body of believers who are still alive at the time. Is there some reason why that couldn't be the case if the woman is the church?

[toknowthetruth]

I tend toward Post-Trib, but am open to variations of pre-wrath. I don't have enough objections to pre-wrath to speak out against it. For one thing, at least formerly, during most of my 'post-trib career', I considered post-trib to BE pre-wrath, since I held that God's wrath was poured out when Jesus returns visibly after the tribulation. While I still think that His wrath is poured out after the trib (or continues to be after the trib, I am not convinced that His wrath BEGINS after the trib.

In this diagram, I have many eschatological event shown, in the sequence that I believe the Bible indicates. Notice, that I leave the wrath of God out here. Where one places the wrath of God in this sequence, I guess, perhaps determines what one calls oneself positionally.

One could, for example, place an arrow, somewhere in the second half of the tribulation, and not run afoul of any Bible verse. However, since phrases about the wrath, also point to times after Jesus returns, I think that arrow would have to be limited to a beginning point of God's wrath, (see Rev 14 and 15). So, I think, that the wrath should be a band, a lapse of time, not a point in time.

Now, since we are talking about a pre-wrath rapture (I think), here is where I have my doubts on this position. Although I agree that the wrath may start during the great tribulation, the rapture does not occur before the end of the tribulation. So, if Christians are, as I believe, present during the tribulation, and even during the part of the tribulation that Jesus described a great (after the abomination of  desolation) then it seems that those Christians present, will be protected (perhaps sealed) against harm from God's wrath, while still present during the tribulation. However, this does not mean that they are immune from all harm - the are still subject to the persecution of anti-christ and his forces.

I made a confident statement there, that the rapture does not occur before the tribulation, and that is why I do not consider myself (yet at least) to be in the pre-wrath camp. Is my confidence justified? Perhaps not to you, but allow me to explain the source of that confidence, then judge for yourselves.

If the wrath begins during the tribulation, fine, then it does. However, the main event seems to occur at the Day of the Lord.

1 Thess 5

2For you yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night. 3While they are saying, “Peace and safety!” then destruction will come upon them suddenly like labor pains upon a woman with child, and they will not escape.

In the same context (same chapter) Paul goes on to say:

 9For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,

To me, this likely indicates that the destruction of V.3, can be fairly called the wrath of God.

I should probably insert an idea here for you all to consider, not really a point, but just something to think about in this topic, when discussing the wrath aspect.

There word "wrath" not a time word, and it is possible that it should not be thought of as if it is. Wrath is anger, and emotion, and an outpouring or expression of anger with consequences. I discuss this idea in a video I made once upon a time. Think of that as you are tempted to pencil in a time point or an expanse of time, just a thought.

Anyway, back to my train of thought:

There is also this:

It seems to me, that the church is caught up, to be with Christ, when He returns visibly:

Matt 24

 29“But immediately after the tribulation of those days THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, ANDTHE STARS WILL FALL from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30“And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the SON OF MAN COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF THE SKY with power and great glory. 31“And He will send forth His angels with A GREAT TRUMPET and THEY WILL GATHER TOGETHER His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.

(Please pardon the mix of regular and bold type above, I am not trying ti emphasize anything there, there are two different fonts in the passage that I cut and pasted there)

What was said there though?

• Immediately after the tribulation
• the sun, moon, stars phenom
• the Son of Man appears
• the elect are gathered

While our pre-tribs friends deny that this is the rapture, it is undeniable that Jesus is here, returning after the trib, and gathers someone!

and that immediately after the trib, there is a phenom involving the sun, moon and stars.

We know also from 1 Thess 5:

2For you yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night. 3While they are saying, “Peace and safety!” then destruction will come upon them suddenly like labor pains upon a woman with child, and they will not escape. 4But you, brethren, are not in darkness, that the day would overtake you like a thief; . . . and . . .

9For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, 

Paul, it seems to me is possible connecting God's wrath, with the Day of the Lord, but . . . 
he is also comparing God's wrath to it's alternative - salvation. Which salvation is in mind, I leave you do decide.

However, for those of us who beleive that the rapture occurs when Jesus returns visibly, it is hard for us to place the rapture before the end of the tribulation, since that is when scripture says He will return.

If that understanding is correct, then a prewrath rapture, would mean that the wrath that the rapture occurs prior to, is a wrath that follows the tribulation, this necessitating a post-trib rapture.

While it may be possible to understand a wrath of God during the tribulation, it is not possible that the rapture, is prior to that wrath, unless the rapture occurs before the sun and moon and stars thing which is explicitly after the tribulation, does that much make since.

So, if a pre-wrath rapture is not a post-trib rapture, then that understanding suffers the same problem that the pre-trib and mid-trib rapture positions have, that of being an argument form silence, not a scriptural argument.

The Bible does not describe a rapture apart from a return of Christ, nor does the Bible ever describe a return of Christ, is before the end of the tribulation, nor does it describe  secret ot invisible coming, those ideas come from vivid imaginations. I list 12 things often said about the end times that are not is scripture in another thread

So, as I see it, comparing the pre-trib and post-trib postitions, there are some similarities and some differences. Both are held by people who hold the bible in high esteem. I would make a comparison though, that in these camps, there is a philosophical difference in how one arrives at spiritual truth. The comparison, is to the chasm, between the Roman Catholic Church, and Protestant or Reformed traditions.

In the reformation, the principle of Solo Scriptura, the bible only, was emphasized, It was believed that only the Bible, was a reliable source of truth. This tends to be the position that post-tribbers use in eschatology.

In Roman Catholicism, it is the Bible, plus church tradition, plus decrees of the Pope. Church tradition, and the Pope, have added things not found in scripture, such as exaggerated veneration of Mary, prayers to the saints, the idea that saints are a special class of believers, not ordinary believers, a central, human authority, etc, etc.

Protestants reject these ideas as spiritually reliable, simply because they are not found in the Bible.

I am pretty simple minded, I am a sola scriptura kind of guy as well. So, me eschatology, comes from the Bible. Everything I hold in mt eschatology, has at least one verse that supports that belief. Since pre-trib rapturism, adds things like invisible, secret, surprise to everyone return of Christ, I reject it, not be cause it is untrue, but because it is unsupported by scripture.

For this same reason then, I have to reject some varieties of the pre-wrath position, since they also are withouth scriptural support that I can see. However, I do not find them as dangerous as I find teaching the church that it will escape the tribulation altogether, so I do not see pre-wrath-ism, as harmful, even though I do not accept it.

Hi Omega. Thanks for the nice graphics and the interesting discourse. Since I'm a post-tribber and not a pre-wrather I guess I don't have much to say other than I agree that arguments from silence for the most part are not very convincing.

Edited September 9, 2015 by toknowthetruth

[Omegaman 3.0]

Thank you toknowthetruth, for the rare reply where I do not feel like I have to defend something

[Omegaman 3.0]

 

"Hmm. I'm a little confused? OK, so if I get you right pre-wrath is similar to post-trib, just that you consider the wrath as part of the 3.5 years and that the rapture happens just before the wrath a little before the end of the 3.5 years of the last week of Daniel?"

I think you would have to get the definition from each one who claims to hold the position, I am not sure there is a consensus on what the real, pre-wrath position is.

For me, so far, the Bible has no evidence of the imminent return of Christ, a pre-trib rapture,, 2 second comings, a secret coming, or any of the 12 things I listed often said of the end times, so i cannot find it in my heart to hold those views or defend those views, even though I do try at times, to explain why some people think they see those positions as valid.

Of the positions that I am aware of, I see post-trib as being the most scripturally supported and least troubled position, so I hang my hat there. I see prewrath as mostly compatible with that position, and some variations nearly the same, and the differences are not of great significance, so I see pre-wrathers and almost allies in the 'fight' for eschatological sanity, or at least eschatological reasonableness.

I am in this thread, hoping to see the idea developed more fully and taking it's righful place, whatever that is. If there comes a time when it appears to me that it is a better fit with scripture that post-trib, then I will jump ship, again. I am not married to post-tribism, I am married to my Lord, and whenever He comes or calls, I hope I am watching and ready.

Edited September 10, 2015 by Omegaman 3.0

[WilliamL]

 

...for those of us who believe that the rapture occurs when Jesus returns visibly, it is hard for us to place the rapture before the end of the tribulation, since that is when scripture says He will return.

If that understanding is correct, then a prewrath rapture, would mean that the wrath that the rapture occurs prior to, is a wrath that follows the tribulation, this necessitating a post-trib rapture.

While it may be possible to understand a wrath of God during the tribulation, it is not possible that the rapture is prior to that wrath, unless the rapture occurs before the sun and moon and stars thing which is explicitly after the tribulation, does that much make since. ...

I am pretty simple minded, I am a sola scriptura kind of guy as well. So, me eschatology, comes from the Bible. Everything I hold in mt eschatology, has at least one verse that supports that belief. Since pre-trib rapturism, adds things like invisible, secret, surprise to everyone return of Christ, I reject it, not be cause it is untrue, but because it is unsupported by scripture.

Being "a sola scriptura kind of guy," you should confess that there is no scriptural evidence that says God will pour out his wrath before he removes the elect of his Church. Therefore, your statement "it may be possible to understand a wrath of God during the tribulation" is without any basis.

The scriptural evidence is clear:

Isaiah 2:10 Enter into the rock, and hide in the dust, from the terror of the LORD and the glory of His majesty. 11 The lofty looks of man shall be humbled, the haughtiness of men shall be bowed down, and the LORD alone shall be exalted in the day. 12 ...the Day of the LORD of hosts... 19 They shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, from the terror of the LORD and the glory of His majesty, when He arises to shake mightily the earth.

Rev. 16:12 ...when he opened the sixth seal...there was a great earthquake...  15 And the kings of the earth, the great men, the rich men, the commanders, the mighty men, every slave and every free man, hid themselves in the caves and in the rocks of the mountains, 16 and said to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the Face of Him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! 17 “For the great day of His wrath has come [Greek aorist tense, lit. has come and is to continue], and who is able to stand?”

When do they see the Face of God? When they Matt. 26:64  "...see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

To sum up: Post-trib = Pre-wrath. Everything after Rev. 6:16-17 is post-trib. [and in-wrath] Everything before Rev. 6:16-17 is pre-wrath. Everything before Rev. 6:1 is pre-trib. Everything from Rev. 6:1 to 6:16 is mid-trib.; or, in-trib if you prefer.

[WilliamL]

 

I only have one thing to say to all that. I don't see you as having understanding of the scriptures in this area.

 

Cheap shot. You declare yourself having more understanding than I, without any debate.

Here is the evidence that your 7-year tribulation period, based upon Dan. 9:26-27, is bogus.

9:26 And after the 62 weeks/sevens [of years], Messiah shall be cut off, but not for himself.    [This was fulfilled at the Crucifixion.]

And the people of the ruler who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary, and its end will come with a flood [of attackers]. And until the end of the war, desolations are decreed.    [The coming ruler was Vespasian, the commanding Roman general, then emperor, during the Jewish War of 66-73 A.D. “His people” destroyed and desolated Jerusalem and Temple in 70 A.D.; however, it was done in fulfillment of his policy and orders. Rebel Zealots and Idumeans also caused widespread desolation in the war, both in Jerusalem and throughout the Judean countryside.

Jesus prophesied about these events, and when and how they would take place:

Matt. 23:29, 35-38: “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees…upon you may [shall] come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth… All these things shall come upon this generation. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem… Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.” Jesus thus decreed a desolation upon the “house” of the apostatizing Jewish establishment, probably meaning both their lineage and their Temple.

Luke 19:43-44: “For the days shall come upon you [Jerusalem], that your enemies will build an embankment around you, and surround you and close you in on every side, and shall level you, and your children within you, to the ground, and they shall not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not know the time of your visitation.”]

9:27 And he will have caused to make strong/to prevail/to confirm [a] covenant for many one week [of years].    

[“…he will have caused”: 3 masc. sing. Hiphil Perfect. This was Vespasian’s policy, which he established from the beginning of the war: for those Jews who would continue to submit to Rome’s civil authority, Rome would continue to maintain the peace and permit the Jews to allow only YHWH-worship in the land. But any place in the land that harbored rebellion against Rome, including Jerusalem and Temple, would be desolated.

Flavius Josephus, The Jewish War, Preface 8: “[Vespasian] took…some of its [Galilee’s] cities by treaties, and on terms.”  III:ii:4: “…the inhabitants of Sepphoris…the largest city of Galilee…received Vespasian, the Roman general, very kindly, and readily promised that they would assist him…”  III:ix:8: “Now the seniors of the people [of Tiberius]…fell down before Vespasian, to supplicate his favor… Vespasian…accepted of their rights hands by way of security…[and] the citizens opened to him their gates…”]

And in the midst of the week he shall cause to cease sacrifice and offering. And upon a wing/corner/extremity, appalling/desolating abominations [plural], even until the consummation decreed is poured upon the desolate.

[In 70 A.D., the “midst of the week/7 years” – no mention here of the 3½ times/1260 days prophesied elsewhere in Daniel – the Romans captured the Antonia Fortress on the northwest “corner/wing” of the Temple Mount, which provided access to the Temple complex via a narrow passage. War VI:i. Jewish Temple “sacrifice and (meal) offering ended” soon after, on Tammuz 17 = July 15. Ibid., VI:ii:1. The “desolating abominations” that ensued consisted of the most savage combat between the Romans and Jews, including instances of Jewish fratricide; piles of corpses within the Temple complex; and the Jews setting fire to the Temple’s own cloisters on the corner opposite the Roman-occupied Antonia. Ibid. VI:ii-iii. Also, the Romans began bringing their idolatrous ensigns (Aquilae) into the Temple precincts, to which sacrifices were offered. VI:iv:1; vi:1. The utter desolation by fire of the Temple occurred during its capture on Ab 9/10 = August 4/5; followed by the desolation of upper Jerusalem (Zion) in early September. The last stronghold of the Jewish rebellion, Masada, fell in 73.]

 

Thus, Daniel 9:24-27 provides an accurate summary of events in Judea from the First Coming of the Messiah up to the destruction of the Temple. It doesn’t mention at all

– any abomination of desolation of the Holy Place;

– the time of the end/latter time/latter days, or any similar term;

– the Great Tribulation/time of trouble such as never was;

– the saints, or any flight of God’s people;

– Messiah’s coming in the clouds, Divine Judgment, and/or the establishment of God’s kingdom;

– the coming prince’s demise;

– or the raising of the dead.

These topics are discussed elsewhere in Daniel’s End Time prophecies. Why not here? Because this is not a prophecy for the end of Church Age, but rather for the Jewish Age.

There is no scripture that prophesies the rebuilding of the Temple prior to the Second Coming of the Messiah.

There is no scripture that says Jerusalem will be destroyed in the End Times.

There is no scripture that specifically speaks of a 7-year period in the End Times.

There is no scripture that speaks of a Temple (Greek, hieron) in Jerusalem in the End Times, before Messiah comes to build it. Passages people cite, such as 2 Thes. 2:4 and Rev. 11:1, speak of a naos (holy place or sanctuary), which is the sacred place around which a temple is built. English Bibles generally mistranslate the word as temple, leading to much confusion. For example, Jesus taught in the hieron/temple, never the naos/sanctuary. Judas, however, threw the 30 pieces of silver into the naos, not hieron, which is very noteworthy. Most English Bibles cause readers to totally miss the distinction in this and many other places where naos is mistranslated as temple. Another example: hieron is never used in the Book of Revelation text, only naos.

[Diaste]

 

I only have one thing to say to all that. I don't see you as having understanding of the scriptures in this area.

 

Cheap shot. You declare yourself having more understanding than I, without any debate.

Here is the evidence that your 7-year tribulation period, based upon Dan. 9:26-27, is bogus.

9:26 And after the 62 weeks/sevens [of years], Messiah shall be cut off, but not for himself.    [This was fulfilled at the Crucifixion.]

And the people of the ruler who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary, and its end will come with a flood [of attackers]. And until the end of the war, desolations are decreed.    [The coming ruler was Vespasian, the commanding Roman general, then emperor, during the Jewish War of 66-73 A.D. “His people” destroyed and desolated Jerusalem and Temple in 70 A.D.; however, it was done in fulfillment of his policy and orders. Rebel Zealots and Idumeans also caused widespread desolation in the war, both in Jerusalem and throughout the Judean countryside.

Jesus prophesied about these events, and when and how they would take place:

Matt. 23:29, 35-38: “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees…upon you may [shall] come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth… All these things shall come upon this generation. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem… Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.” Jesus thus decreed a desolation upon the “house” of the apostatizing Jewish establishment, probably meaning both their lineage and their Temple.

Luke 19:43-44: “For the days shall come upon you [Jerusalem], that your enemies will build an embankment around you, and surround you and close you in on every side, and shall level you, and your children within you, to the ground, and they shall not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not know the time of your visitation.”]

9:27 And he will have caused to make strong/to prevail/to confirm [a] covenant for many one week [of years].    

[“…he will have caused”: 3 masc. sing. Hiphil Perfect. This was Vespasian’s policy, which he established from the beginning of the war: for those Jews who would continue to submit to Rome’s civil authority, Rome would continue to maintain the peace and permit the Jews to allow only YHWH-worship in the land. But any place in the land that harbored rebellion against Rome, including Jerusalem and Temple, would be desolated.

Flavius Josephus, The Jewish War, Preface 8: “[Vespasian] took…some of its [Galilee’s] cities by treaties, and on terms.”  III:ii:4: “…the inhabitants of Sepphoris…the largest city of Galilee…received Vespasian, the Roman general, very kindly, and readily promised that they would assist him…”  III:ix:8: “Now the seniors of the people [of Tiberius]…fell down before Vespasian, to supplicate his favor… Vespasian…accepted of their rights hands by way of security…[and] the citizens opened to him their gates…”]

And in the midst of the week he shall cause to cease sacrifice and offering. And upon a wing/corner/extremity, appalling/desolating abominations [plural], even until the consummation decreed is poured upon the desolate.

[In 70 A.D., the “midst of the week/7 years” – no mention here of the 3½ times/1260 days prophesied elsewhere in Daniel – the Romans captured the Antonia Fortress on the northwest “corner/wing” of the Temple Mount, which provided access to the Temple complex via a narrow passage. War VI:i. Jewish Temple “sacrifice and (meal) offering ended” soon after, on Tammuz 17 = July 15. Ibid., VI:ii:1. The “desolating abominations” that ensued consisted of the most savage combat between the Romans and Jews, including instances of Jewish fratricide; piles of corpses within the Temple complex; and the Jews setting fire to the Temple’s own cloisters on the corner opposite the Roman-occupied Antonia. Ibid. VI:ii-iii. Also, the Romans began bringing their idolatrous ensigns (Aquilae) into the Temple precincts, to which sacrifices were offered. VI:iv:1; vi:1. The utter desolation by fire of the Temple occurred during its capture on Ab 9/10 = August 4/5; followed by the desolation of upper Jerusalem (Zion) in early September. The last stronghold of the Jewish rebellion, Masada, fell in 73.]

 

Thus, Daniel 9:24-27 provides an accurate summary of events in Judea from the First Coming of the Messiah up to the destruction of the Temple. It doesn’t mention at all

– any abomination of desolation of the Holy Place;

– the time of the end/latter time/latter days, or any similar term;

– the Great Tribulation/time of trouble such as never was;

– the saints, or any flight of God’s people;-

– Messiah’s coming in the clouds, Divine Judgment, and/or the establishment of God’s kingdom;

– the coming prince’s demise;

– or the raising of the dead.

These topics are discussed elsewhere in Daniel’s End Time prophecies. Why not here? Because this is not a prophecy for the end of Church Age, but rather for the Jewish Age.

There is no scripture that prophesies the rebuilding of the Temple prior to the Second Coming of the Messiah.

There is no scripture that says Jerusalem will be destroyed in the End Times.

There is no scripture that specifically speaks of a 7-year period in the End Times.

There is no scripture that speaks of a Temple (Greek, hieron) in Jerusalem in the End Times, before Messiah comes to build it. Passages people cite, such as 2 Thes. 2:4 and Rev. 11:1, speak of a naos (holy place or sanctuary), which is the sacred place around which a temple is built. English Bibles generally mistranslate the word as temple, leading to much confusion. For example, Jesus taught in the hieron/temple, never the naos/sanctuary. Judas, however, threw the 30 pieces of silver into the naos, not hieron, which is very noteworthy. Most English Bibles cause readers to totally miss the distinction in this and many other places where naos is mistranslated as temple. Another example: hieron is never used in the Book of Revelation text, only naos.

Not a cheap shot. I didn't declare myself endowed with any understanding at all. I just listen. Though I guess it stands to reason that if i think you have no understanding in this area, i must at least have some understanding, or how would I know you have none?

And...sure, if you stick to scriptures that prove your point, or are easy to rationalize into evidence that supports your position, then of course you prove your assertions to be beyond reproach and the purest of truths. Everyone does this. Claiming Jesus name doesn't provide immunity from this. I would provide evidence to the contrary but you're a true believing partial preterist, so no evidence to the contrary will suffice to change your mind.

Just remember I said this, "Another Jewish Temple will be rebuilt and the sacrifices will begin anew. At some point the rituals in the Temple will be put to an end and a man will demand the worlds worship." This will be future from today, 9-10-2015.