Part XIII.3

THE RAPTURE: A QUESTION OF TIMING

Yet another posttribulational defense was published in 1985 by William R. Kimball, entitled The Rapture: A Question of Timing. It grants that the Rapture is the “blessed hope” of all true believers, and is “firmly established as a centerpiece in biblical eschatology” (11). In the “Final Appeal” of the book, the author states that he does not wish to cast “a negative reflection upon the integrity, sincerity, or spiritual competency of those believers who may disagree with the prophetic positions I have taken.” Furthermore, he declares, “we must always exercise an attitude of tolerance toward those brethren who may disagree with our prophetic positions” (180-81). This is, of course, the fair and proper attitude in prophetic debate. Differences aside, we are all one in Christ Jesus, and in love we are to honor and respect one another.

However, our author fails tragically to follow his own declared standard, making us wonder if it is more pious talk than true conviction. He calls his fellow Premillennialists with a different view of the Rapture “the pied pipers of pretribulationism.” They use “complicated twisting and exegetical gymnastics” and are guilty of “wrenching of scriptures from their context.” They hold “novel” and “radical” theories, “prophetic innovations” and “vagaries of ... ever-changing speculations.” Their views are “blatant,” “evasive,” and “desperate” “maneuvers.” They hold a “wistful hope” of a “secret rapture escape,” “unheard of prior to 1830,” a “secret, silent and mysterious” “split rapture,” a “double coming,” a “doctrinal quagmire,” a “novelty” of “confusion” and “contradiction.” The “pretribulationist defense could be likened to the proverbial ostrich who buries his head in the sand.” Their “convenient scheme” when dealing with certain passages spells “irretrievable shipwreck to their position.” They teach a “mysterious evacuation,” a “heavenly elopement of seven years,” “a fragmentation of the second coming into two very distinct comings,” actually “a third coming.” Other men quoted call a Pretrib Rapture “a perversion of Second Coming truth, a delusion of the last days” (121), a “myth” among the sorriest in the whole history of freak exegesis” (59).

Such comments and namecalling, scattered throughout the book, such verbal abuse, make it difficult to listen to what the author actually has to say. Let us endeavor, however, to bring a brief evaluation of his primary arguments.

Kimball is guilty of broadscale attacks against non-representative positions. It is true that early in the Rapture debate, some used the term “secret Rapture” as a synonym for the pretribulational return of Christ, stressing that the Rapture will occur without warning signs and will find many unprepared. It did not mean “without a sound” or “the world will be unaware,” but simply that it would occur suddenly and for many be totally unexpected. However, as used by Tregelles, I. M. Murray and others, it became a term of posttribulational contempt. Like them, Kimball ridicules the term continually, making it “secret, silent and mysterious,” and thinks that by disproving “secrecy” he has destroyed the pretribulational Rapture. The truth is that Pretribs are fully aware of the shout and the trump of God which accompany the Rapture, and agree that the world will recognize that Christians are gone. However, the term “secret” has been so misunderstood and maligned that most modern pretribulationists find no need to continue its use. There is no victory for posttribulationism in attacking the thought of a “secret Rapture.” Kimball may prove that it will be “a noisy, open and spectacular event” (59), but he is attacking a position which is no longer relevant.

Kimball opposes the idea that Revelation 4:1 actually makes John’s experience “a symbol of the church being raptured” (77). Once again, this is a minority and non-representative view. While the writer respects those who may accept it, he prefers the position that the Rapture falls chronologically between chapters three and four. While the experience of John at 4:1, as well as the resurrection of the two witnesses and the presence of the 144,000 in glory are significant events in themselves, they most probably do not typify the resurrection and Rapture of the Church.

Similarly, E. Schyler English once suggested that the “departure” of 2 Thessalonians 2:3 might be a reference to the catching up of the Church rather than an end-time apostasy or departure from the faith. His proposal was merely a trial balloon, and Pretribs were the first to shoot it down. It certainly never became representative of pretribulationism, but Kimball labels it “a desperate attempt to defend the any moment rapture theory,” and plagiarizing Reese he calls it an “example of freak exegesis.”

Posttribs who take minority views and endeavor to make them representative of pretribulational theology because they appear easy to attack are simply tilting at theological windmills, when they should be establishing sound exegesis and end-time chronology.

Concerning the history of the doctrine, Kimball strongly identifies himself with the view of Dave MacPherson, with all of its attendant problems. While correctly recognizing that the Church will not suffer the outpoured wrath of God, he holds that “Christians will weather the opposition and tribulations imposed by men until the second coming of Christ” (76). At this point, he should read Revelation 13:7, then review the warnings and instruction of Jim McKeever.

He holds that the promise of comfort found in 1 Thessalonians 4:18 is more relevant to the suffering and martyrdom of the first century than it is to their prospect of escaping coming Tribulation. He identifies the “last trump” of the Rapture with the “seventh trumpet” of the Book of Revelation, saying that “the timing of the rapture is restricted to the seventh, or last trumpet” (107). These are common views which have been frequently and convincingly answered. If the Rapture is concurrent with the seventh trumpet, because of the intervening seven vials of wrath it must be considerably before the descent of the Son of God from heaven.

Many believe there is a valid distinction between “coming for the saints” and “coming with the saints,” drawing from the prophecy found in Jude 1:14 and many other Scriptures. Kimball is satisfied that this means that Christ will “come again with His holy angels” (127), although it is doubtful if angels may be identified as “saints.” Sinless creatures need no sanctification.

Commenting on John 14:1-3, he declares that this does not mean that the Church will return with Christ to heaven, but simply “accompany Him in His final victorious descent to earth” (131). The Church is caught up, briefly “evacuated from the surface of the earth in conjunction with the awesome holocaust which will be suddenly unleashed upon an unregenerate humanity” (132). Thus he agrees that the Church must be raptured to escape the outpouring of divine wrath. But Pretribs find outpoured wrath beginning early in the Tribulation, with Revelation 6:16-17 and not with 19:11 at the glorious coming of the King.

Kimball closes his book correctly by saying: “Our essential unity and fellowship in Christ should never be severed or undermined because of our differences on prophetic points” (181). In the opinion of the reviewer, he has failed in this high purpose, and has written a book which adds nothing to harmony and little if anything to the posttribulational argument. Rather, the command to “love His appearing” has been completely lost in the midst of the bitterness of yet another posttribulational polemic. THE RAPTURE QUESTION: REVISED AND
ENLARGED EDITION For the final and most significant defense of the pretribulational position, we have chosen to review the volume by John F. Walvoord, The Rapture Question: Revised and Enlarged Edition. While the other books herein reviewed have been considered in chronological succession since 1956, including the original edition of The Rapture Question, this 1979 re-publication is worthy of special mention. It brings issues and arguments up to date as it answers the more recent challenges to the hope of the imminent return of Christ.

One hundred pages longer than the earlier edition, the book adds a full topical Index, and expanded Bibliography, and attractive boldface subheadings. For Scripture quotations, it has switched from the AV to the NIV, which in some cases yields a more simple and vigorous translation. However, to some Bible students raised with the familiar expression of the King James Version, there are some instances where the NIV terminology will probably come across with a peculiar sound, such as “the parable of the wheat and the weeds,” and in John 14:1-31, “there are many rooms in my Father’s house.”

Far more important however is the fact that Dr. Walvoord has added to his earlier edition six new chapters of Biblical exposition. He discusses the Rapture in the Gospels, in 1 Thessalonians 4:1-18; 1 Thessalonians 5:1-28, in Second Thessalonians, in First Corinthians and in the Book of Revelation. Significant also is the fact that his exegesis includes a direct response to the vigorous arguments of Robert H. Gundry, whose 1973 book The Church and the Tribulation was undoubtedly the strongest challenge to pretribulationism since The Approaching Advent of Christ by Alexander Reese, dated 1932.

It makes interesting and challenging reading to discover how a mature and skilled theologian like Walvoord answers the clever, spirited, and frequently involved arguments of a scholar like Gundry, both of them maintaining the highest level of Christian courtesy as fellow Premillennialists and brethren in the service of Christ. The fact that two such scholars should disagree at all, serves to illustrate the difficulty and complexity of the debate under consideration.

While the arguments and issues are far too extensive for adequate treatment within this brief evaluation, the main highlights may be pointed out as follows: THE RAPTURE IN THE GOSPELS

Both Reese and Gundry take the position that explicit references to a Posttrib Rapture are found in the Gospels, especially in Matthew 13:1-58; Matthew 24:1-51; Matthew 25:1-46 and in John 14:1-31. Gundry argues from Matthew 13:30, the wheat and the tares, that the mere professors are gathered for judgment in the same crisis as the transfiguration of the righteous, causing great embarrassment to those who separate the two by several years. This does not logically follow, for the expression “first the tares” disrupts the Posttrib claim that Christ raptures the Church before He deals in judgment with the wicked. Also in the parable of the good and bad fish which immediately follows (vs. 48), the “good fish” are selected first, which is in opposite order from the burning of the tares before the wheat is gathered. On these points, Gundry gives no solid evidence for a Posttrib Rapture. In fact, observes Walvoord, in context Matthew is discussing the judgment of Christ’s Revelation, and the Rapture is not in view at all. In Matthew 24:1-51; Matthew 25:1-46, the subject matter concerns the “end of the age,” which is not the Church Age as such, but rather the interadvent age previously discussed in chapter 13. The period between the two advents of Christ includes both the Church Age and the coming Tribulation. In the Olivet Discourse, Christ is answering specific questions of the apostles relative to the future of Israel, a fact which Gundry chooses to ignore. While most Premils agree that there will be a gathering of all the “elect,” both of Israel and of the Gentiles, at the end of the Tribulation, the “elect” in question refers to Tribulation believers and not Church saints. For the two main features of the Rapture are entirely absent from the passage, namely the translation of the living and the resurrection of the dead in Christ. Our author concludes: “Proof that Matthew’s account of this event includes either a translation or a resurrection, however, is lacking” (187).

Furthermore, the Posttrib attempt to find the Rapture in Matthew 24:40-41 hew-41 hew-41 is inaccurate, for the context of verse 39 declares that those who are “taken” are the ones who are drowned, and “it would be strange to have a clear illustration like this be completely reversed in the application of verses Matthew-41” (188). Many will be taken away in judgment and some will be left to enter the millennial Kingdom. The Rapture as such is not under discussion, no matter how similar the language may sound.

Posttribulationism also fails to find the Rapture in Matthew 25:31-46, for the sheep and the goats are intermingled and require separation by a special judgment immediately following the Second Coming of Christ. This would be entirely unnecessary if a Posttrib Rapture had just taken place, for the Rapture “would be the first event and would automatically separate all the saved from the unsaved before Christ’s feet ever touched the Mount of Olives and before His kingdom was instituted” (192).

John 14:1-3 is taken by many to be the first clear mention of the Rapture in the New Testament from a chronological point of view. His coming for His own is here quite in contrast with the glorious event of Matthew 24:1-51, which is compared with the lightning shining from east to west. “Instead of Christ picturing a coming from heaven to the earth, He describes a coming for His saints to take them to the Father’s house” (194). Posttribs labor to eliminate such a Rapture because, as we have seen, it is in direct contradiction to their prophetic system. For example, instead of rapturing the Church to the Father’s house, Barton Payne refers John 14:3 to the death of a Christian, while Robert Gundry explains that Christ is going to prepare for them “spiritual bodies within His own Person.” And Douty declares that Christ first returns to earth to judge Antichrist and introduce His glorious reign before He returns to heaven to administer it. Such strained interpretations indicate “how posttribulationists, even those given to literal interpretation, will spiritualize when the plain text contradicts their point of view” (195). And in so doing they clearly contradict one another. THE RAPTURE IN 1 Thessalonians 4:1-18 The commentary on 1 Thessalonians 4:1-18; 1 Thessalonians 5:1-28 by both Gundry and Walvoord is quite extensive and should be read carefully by all who seek an understanding of the respective viewpoints. In brief, Dr. Walvoord’s discussion includes the following thoughts. I Thessalonians contributes more to the doctrine of the Rapture than any other book of the New Testament, mentioning the Rapture in every chapter. If the Great Tribulation is going to precede the Rapture, this book would be the natural place in which to state it. Instead, the return of Christ for His Church is set before the Christians of Thessalonica as an imminent event for which they should look with hope and expectation. Concerning their Christian dead, they will first be resurrected, and this expectation should bring them comfort in the midst of sorrow.

Now in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, the coming of the Lord at the Rapture will be “with a loud command,” and will be joined by the “voice of the archangel, Michael,” a shout of triumph and victory from one who has led the holy angels against Satan and his angels throughout the centuries. The “trumpet call of God” is frequently used in the Old Testament and in the New to signal important events, but the sounding of a trumpet does not identify two events as the same event. The Rapture is herein presented as imminent, with no preceding order of events which must be enacted. “It should also be obvious that if the Thessalonians would have to pass through the Great Tribulation before the Rapture, this would be a matter of greater concern to them than the possible problem of a delayed resurrection of their loved ones in Christ” (203). In addition, Posttribs have yet to explain why, according to their view, the saints would have to leave the earth at all, since Christ intends them to reign with Him, and since they could so easily become the ones who will populate the millennial Kingdom. To a Posttrib, the Rapture is merely a brief incident of doubtful significance in the sequence of events known as the Second Coming.

Most important, this critical Scripture gives no warning of the Great Tribulation, and to those who think it is implied, “instead of exhorting Christians to comfort, posttribulationists should be preparing Christians for martyrdom” (209).

Walvoord concludes that 1 Thessalonians 4:1-18 is one of the strongest passages for the pretribulational interpretation of Scripture, and offers the least comfort to those who hold the posttribulational position. THE RAPTURE IN 1 Thessalonians 5:1-28

1 Thessalonians 5:1-28 is a chapter which has generated some heated disagreements, including as it does the difficult problem of the “day of the Lord.” Gundry aggress that this expression does not mean a 24 hour day, “but a longer period of time ... which includes the millennium and the final judgment.” Note that he strongly resists any contention that the day of the Lord also includes the Tribulation. Accordingly, Walvoord reminds us that Gundry attempts to re-arrange the Book of Revelation so that the major judgments fall at its close, with “all the catastrophic judgments of the seals, trumpets, and bowls as if they were in some way simultaneous” (223). His motive “is to get the church raptured before major events of the day of the Lord take place.” Behind all this is the assumption that if the Tribulation is not a time of divine wrath, then Christians will escape the severity of the period.

Walvoord responds that Gundry is wrong on both counts. Not only do the saints suffer severely but also the Scriptures reveal that the Tribulation is primarily a time of God’s wrath. Even if it were only a time of Satanic wrath, Christians could not avoid great suffering and probable death. “The prospect of a church’s going triumphantly through the Great Tribulation relatively untouched is not supported in the prophecies of the Book of Revelation, as indicated by the martyrs in chapters 6 and 7” (230).

Actually, chapters 4 and 5 of I Thessalonians are setting forth the broad program of end-time events, with the day of the Lord beginning right after the Rapture. The Church does not enter this period, indicated by (1) the fact that the Rapture is discussed first; (2) by the change of pronouns from “we,” “us,” and “you” (vs. 1, 2, 4-6, 8-11) to “they” and “others” (vs. 3, 6, 7); (3) by the fact that people will be saying “peace and safety” which implies that the Tribulation has not yet begun; and (4) by the clear statement that Christians are not appointed to suffer wrath but are to obtain deliverance. In this passage, the pretribulationist has the obvious advantage, for if the Church is raptured before this time of trouble, then all that is said in the passage becomes very clear. “The period of wrath will not overtake the church as a thief because the church will not be there” (221). The Great Tribulation is expressly a time of divine judgment on a world that has rejected Christ. Gundry’s posttribulationism forces him into “an extreme and untenable position by trying to bring the church through the Great Tribulation without experiencing great tribulation” (228). THE RAPTURE IN I CORINTHIANS

Gundry’s position concerning the Restrainer in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-17 has previously been reviewed, so the writer will move on to 1 Corinthians 15:51-58. This Scripture is important because it is one of the two main passages on the Rapture in the entire New Testament. Included in the great Pauline resurrection chapter, the Rapture is presented as the major exception to the normal rule of death followed by resurrection. Those who are “alive and remain” at the close of the Church age shall escape death by physical translation into the presence of Christ. This Scripture is normally given brief treatment by posttribulational writers because, as Walvoord explains, “The passage ... contributes practically nothing to the posttribulational concept of the Rapture” (247). For the Rapture is a “mystery,” not revealed in the Old Testament, and this immediately sets it apart from the Second Coming of Christ, which is revealed. For that matter, “the translation of the church is not mentioned anywhere in the New Testament in a passage that clearly speaks of the coming of Christ after the Great Tribulation” (248). The main aspect of Gundry’s discussion revolves around the phrase “the last trumpet.” Posttribs normally associate this “last trumpet” with the seventh judgment trumpet of the angle in Revelation 11:15. Gundry makes the same identification but with a qualifying “perhaps,” suggesting also that it might be last “as one sounded at the end of the age, after the sounding of the seven apocalyptic trumpets” (Gundry, 148). This appears to be an admission that the seventh trumpet in Revelation 11:1-19 actually sounds considerably before the end of the Tribulation, a fact that Posttribs normally do not recognize. But rather than make such an acknowledgement he asks, “how could Paul have had an eye on the seven trumpets when John had not yet written Revelation?” His final and more restrained explanation is that the trumpet will be the “last in its sphere, i.e., in the Church age, rather than last in a series.” This sounds very much like the Pretrib position, except that to Gundry it is a foregone conclusion that the Church age will include the Great Tribulation. He therefore places the trumpet at the very end of that period, which is actually assuming what he is trying to prove. Nor does he solve the significant problem that there are seven bowls of the wrath of God in Revelation 16:1-21 following the seventh trumpet but before the Second Coming of Christ.

Walvoord holds that the trumpets of 1 Corinthians 15:1-58, Revelation 11:1-19 and Matthew 24:31 are entirely different trumpets, for the one in Matthew deals with the saints of all ages who are assembled at the time of the Second Coming, the ones in Revelation relate to judgment and are blown by angels, while the one in Corinthians relates to the Church and is called the “trump of God.” Those who make “last trumpet” a technical term do so based on a prior assumption rather than upon solid Biblical evidence.

Furthermore, the resurrection of 1 Corinthians 15:52 is absolutely unique, for it is the only case where a resurrection is connected with the translation of the living. Also, in verse 58 there is an exhortation attached to the doctrine of the Rapture, relating it to our present service for Christ, but in no wise warning us that this great event can occur only after the Great Tribulation has run its course. THE RAPTURE IN THE BOOK OF REVELATION The last of these distinct chapters relates to the Rapture in the critical Book of Revelation. Declares Walvoord: “The prospect of a church’s going triumphantly through the Great Tribulation relatively untouched” is not supported by the prophecies of this great book (230). This is most significant, for in the Revelation specific details are revealed concerning the Tribulation and the coming of Christ nowhere else given in the entire Bible! “If ... the Rapture is part of the events of the Second Coming, the strange absence of any mention of it certainly is a devastating blow to posttribulationists” (254).

There are, however, several specific passages involved in the Rapture-Tribulation debate. Among the most important is Revelation 3:10-11 : “Since you have kept my commandment to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth. I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown.” As previously considered, the Greek tereo ek and its translation is important to the understanding of the passage. Gundry devotes ten pages to his discussion of Revelation 3:10 and insist that the Greek preposition means “out from within.” Walvoord, backed by practically all of the English translations, holds that it has the simple meaning “from.” More important, “the purpose of the promise is deliverance from ‘the hour of trial,’ a period of time, not simply preservation through the trials in that period” (257). The purpose is to keep them from the time of persecution, not to keep through the persecution. This makes “kept from the hour” a valid pretribulational promise.

Revelation 5:8-10 involves the 24 elders in heaven in the presence of Christ, seen by many Pretribs as representative of the Church raptured before the outpouring of divine judgments, and seen by Posttribs as simply angels singing a song of rejoicing over the redeemed. Since the main difference of opinion is based on alternate readings of the Greek text, the matter “remains debatable,” although the use of the revised text alone “does not prove that the twenty-four elders are angels” (259). The fact that they are clothed in white raiment suggests rather that they are redeemed men, and their being described as having golden crowns implies that they have been judged and rewarded, as would be the case if there had been a pretribulational Rapture and a Judgment Seat of Christ following in heaven.

Walvoord reminds us of the main problem related to the Book of Revelation: “There is no clear mention of the rapture of the church from Revelation 4:1-11 through Revelation 18:1-24,” and this gives us a strong implication that it has already taken place (260). Gundry counters this absence by the fact that the book does not mention the Church as being in heaven either. But such an objection hangs on the identification of the elders and forgets that the Church as the Bride of Christ is seen in heaven prior to Christ’s Second Coming (Revelation 19:7-9).

Walvoord reminds Gundry that “there is no mention of a local church anywhere in Revelation 4:1-11; Revelation 5:1-14; Revelation 6:1-17; Revelation 7:1-17; Revelation 8:1-13; Revelation 9:1-21; Revelation 10:1-11; Revelation 11:1-19; Revelation 12:1-17; Revelation 13:1-18; Revelation 14:1-20; Revelation 15:1-8; Revelation 16:1-21; Revelation 17:1-18; Revelation 18:1-24,” leaving Posttribs to face not only the fact that the universal Church is not mentioned, but also that there is no local church seen on earth (261).

Revelation 7:1-8; Revelation 14:1-5 introduce the calling and spiritual authority of the 144,000. Most Posttribs spiritualize this group and speak of them as representative of the Church on earth during the Tribulation. Gundry departs from this normal Posttrib position by offering an entirely new approach. He suggests that they are orthodox, unconverted Jews, destined to be protected by God during the judgments and then saved at the time of the Rapture. Walvoord counters this idea with the fact that those who go through the Tribulation without Christ must take the mark of the Beast and thus seal their destiny. Also, Gundry’s view would allow unsaved men to be called “the servants of God,” and later be given a “second chance” to trust in Christ. Furthermore, men clearly designated as saved Israelites cannot be members of the New Testament Church, where we are no longer seen as Jew or Gentile but one new man in Christ Jesus.

Another of the unique views offered by Gundry is that “God’s wrath will not stretch through the whole tribulation,” but follow Armageddon instead of preceding it. Walvoord calls this “a strange and unnatural exegesis.” But when to support his view, Gundry identifies “the first harvest” of the Rapture with the blood-bath of Armageddon, in Revelation 14:14-20, Walvoord charges: “Only an expositor desperate to support an insupportable view would appeal to a passage like this” (265).

Finally, Revelation 19:1-21; Revelation 20:1-15 constitute a major problem for posttribulationists, for they contain no Scriptural proof for a Posttrib Rapture in the very passages which ought to include it. “In the most comprehensive and detailed account to be found anywhere in the Bible of the second coming of Christ, there is no resurrection or translation mentioned as an event occurring in the Second Coming itself.” Significantly, “The posttribulational Rapture, which should have been a prominent feature of the Book of Revelation if it were indeed a part of the great climax of the second coming of Christ, is totally missing in the narrative” (268).

Revelation 19:1-21; Revelation 20:1-15 constitute a major problem for posttribulationists, for there is no proof for a Posttrib Rapture in the very passages that ought to include it. Walvoord concludes that “there is not a single verse in the entire Book of Revelation that teaches a posttribulational Rapture” (268). The Posttrib Rapture is a theory without Scriptural support!
THE PRE-WRATH RAPTURE OF THE CHURCH

Recently there has emerged a strong frontal attack against the pretribulational return of Christ, written by one who claims to have held that view and preached it with conviction for some 35 years. It is entitled The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church by Marvin J. Rosenthal, former executive director of Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry. His 317 page book is generally well written and is attractively published, with 25 charts to clarify the various millennial and tribulational views, plus his own unique and somewhat complex position on the timing of the Rapture.

Rosenthal is clearly a Bible-believing, conservative and premillennial servant of Jesus Christ. He calls himself a “biblicist” who, although “not a scholar,” has invested his life in the preaching of the “whole counsel of God.” However, under the prodding of a friend he began to re-examine his view of the Rapture, particularly in it relationship to the coming Tribulation. The view he now espouses is no longer pretribulationism, nor is it midtribulationism or posttribulationism, but one which he calls “pre-wrath rapturism.” Although radically different from standard viewpoints, Rosenthal predicts that within five years it will be a “recognized position,” and within fifteen years “a major position of the believing church” (293). This reviewer recently questions the validity of that ambition or the necessity of adding a fifth position to an already overcrowded Rapture debate. The primary thrust of the book is that the Church of Jesus Christ will be removed from the earth by Rapture prior to the outpouring of the “wrath of God,” and that the correct timing of the Rapture places it just be fore the fourth quarter of the “seventieth week of Daniel.” Speaking of God’s “final wrath on an unbelieving world,” he declares that “God’s children will be delivered from that day. That is the ‘blessed hope’” (35). Such a change of emphasis is unfortunate, for it moves the “blessed hope” of the believer away from the expectation and joy of being in the presence of Christ to the more human desire of escaping outpoured wrath in the coming judgment. Nor does this “pre-wrath” emphasis contribute anything particularly new. Rosenthal freely admits that all Pre- and Mid-tribs expect to be caught up by Rapture before the outpoured wrath of God in the coming Tribulation. He points out that even Gundry’s variety of posttribulationism could qualify as “pre-wrath,” although Gundry does not use that designation (59). He simply declares “the theological necessity that God’s wrath not touch a saved person.”

Further research would have revealed a wider agreement among posttribulationists. George Ladd declares: “Everyone must agree that it is inconceivable that the Church will suffer the wrath of God.” J. Barton Payne comments: “Posttribulationists united in affirming that, ‘The church will endure the wrath of men … but will not suffer the wrath of God.’” Arthur Katterjohn writes: “Christians, it must be remembered, will be removed before God’s final anger falls.” William Kimball says: “The scriptures clearly teach us that the church will never suffer from the wrath of God…. This point is agreed upon by all.” And even so strong a posttribulationist as Alexander Reese assures us: “The essential fact for us to know is that Jesus by His death, has delivered us from the wrath to come, and that immediately prior to the full revelation of divine wrath, He will gather the saints to Himself.” So the mere declaration that the Rapture will be “pre-wrath” is hardly a spectacular discovery. It is solidly affirmed by almost all of Pre-, Mid- and Posttribulational persuasion because of the clear declarations of Scripture at this point.
A NEW POSITION FOR THE RAPTURE

It is evident that the timing of the Rapture, and not its relationship to divine wrath, is uppermost in the mind of Rosenthal in the writing of this volume. Coming periodically close to advocating a date-setting scheme, he defends with enthusiasm the view that the Rapture will be three-quarters of the way through the seventieth week of Daniel, with divine wrath to be found only in the final quarter. His evidence for such a conclusion is rather lengthy and complicated, based squarely on his personal division of the “seventieth week of Daniel” into three clearly recognizable periods, the “beginning of sorrows,” the “great Tribulation,” and the frequently predicted “day of the Lord.” The Rapture is then placed immediately between the Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord, which according to his definitions is after the Tribulation but still “pre-wrath.” These viewpoints, Rosenthal proceeds to support by some 200 pages of strong and somewhat overbearing argumentation, with a sharp attack against any response which reminds him of his previous Pretrib position. His terminology and unique division of the “seventieth week” are central to his argument. He endeavors, with several notable exceptions on his own part, to refrain from using the expression “Tribulation period,” saying that it contains a predisposition toward pretribulationism when it is used of the entire seventieth week of Daniel. Rather, he prefers to call the coming seven years of judgment and wrath simply the “seventieth week of Daniel.” These seven years he then subdivides as follows: (1) the first three and one-half years are “the Beginning of Sorrows.” (2) The first half of the second three and one-half years (which would be one and three-fourths or twenty-one months), he calls the “Great Tribulation.” (3) The final twenty-one months, the fourth quarter of the seven years, he then designates as the “Day of the Lord,” in which is found the “wrath of God.” Just prior to the Day of the Lord, at the sounding of the “seventh trumpet,” the Rapture occurs. Hence, the Rapture of the Church takes place between the third and fourth quarters of the “seventy weeks of Daniel,” just before the outpouring of the wrath of God. Therefore,, to Rosenthal, the Rapture takes place at a sharply defined moment of prophecy, and it is posttribulational but pre-wrath. The thirteen chapters of argumentation in support of these claims are frequently tedious and repetitious, with a dogmatism which earns it a unique place in the literature of the Rapture debate. Rosenthal sets forth Walvoord, Pentecost and Ryrie as his former “heroes” in matters of eschatology (25), whose logic in his judgment is now faulty and whose exegesis can no longer be trusted. Rosenthal’s own opinions, however, are “indisputable” and “beyond refutation” (105, 109). His facts “cannot be set aside,” and for his primary conclusions “there simply is no question” (110). The doctrine of imminence, which he calls “a major pillar of pretribulation rapturism,” is “untenable,” and that is a “clear, unassailable truth that cannot be dismissed” (150). Differing with Pretribs, he declares that they are locked in an “unsolvable dilemma” (112). Such dogmatism is, to say the least, both unwholesome and irritating, for a great many of his statements clearly warrant further investigation.

Now in spite of all of this, it must be noted in all fairness that there are some excellent sections in the book, especially chapters two, and four through seven. Interestingly, this section is almost wholly irrelevant to the timing of the Rapture. Here much information is given on the history of Israel, together with her customs, feasts and leadership. He discusses the credentials of the King and the certainty of Christ’s Second Coming. Other subjects range from the virgin birth of Christ to modern humanism - themes taken no doubt from the author’s Bible lectures. Perhaps the desired impression is that since the author appears to be gracious, godly, and biblical, he would assuredly be a safe and seasoned student of Bible prophecy, bringing trustworthy conclusions concerning the blessed hope of the Church. The latter, however, is not the case.

While it is an unhappy task to bring critical evaluation of a book where on many points there is substantial agreement, as graciously as possible it must be done. Although it should be recognized that when an argument is as lengthy and complex as this, it would take a new volume of equal length to examine every detail. The following are some of the salient points which should be carefully evaluated by all serious readers of this volume. THE TRIBULATION PERIOD As previously noted, Rosenthal declares that the designation “the Tribulation period” should be omitted from any honest consideration of the time of the Rapture. It cannot be used as synonym for the entire “seventy weeks of Daniel,” for to do so, he says, predisposes one to pretribulationism, and the expression “Tribulation period” has no biblical justification (103). He believes that Pretribs have coined a technical phrase and superimposed it upon the Scriptures (105). If such is the case, it is fair to ask “Where is Rosenthal’s biblical justification for the new expression, “pre-wrath rapturism”? It is not found in Scripture and comes upon the scene as recently as 1990.

Admittedly, the King James Bible does not use the precise expression “Tribulation period,” any more than it uses the term “rapture,” “second coming,” or “premillennial.” But on at least six occasions it does speak of a coming “tribulation,” and Rosenthal freely admits that it is a period to be measured in years. Like the other terms, “Tribulation period” is simply a widely used term of convenience, less cumbersome and less in need of explanation than the expression “seventieth week of Daniel,” which also does not appear in the Bible. Indeed, on a number of occasions Rosenthal himself uses the term “Tribulation period” (107, 117, 143) and his own publisher uses it in the promotional material on the back cover of the book! However, his attempt to cancel the expression “Tribulation period” helps to pave the way for his novel three-fold subdivision of the same actual period of seven years. THE BEGINNING OF SORROWS

Rosenthal calls the first three and one half years of Daniel’s “seventieth week” by the name “the beginning of sorrows,” borrowed from Matthew 24:8, for he finds a rough parallel between the Matthew passage and the first four seal judgments of Revelation 6:1-17. But similarity is not identity, and the likeness is superficial. There is a world of difference between the “many deceivers” of Matthew and the Devil’s Antichrist of Revelation; between the “wars and rumors of wars” and battles so powerful they take peace from the whole earth; between the earthquakes of Matthew and the cosmic disturbances of Revelation 6:12-13. Nor does Matthew 24:4-8 even vaguely hint of martyred saints in heaven, nor of an outpouring of God’s wrath so severe that a fourth part of earth’s population will be slain. A view that deserves serious consideration is that the “beginning of sorrows” describes the prevailing conditions on earth at the close of the Church age, before the Rapture and the Tribulation. For those who wonder if these descriptions are relevant to our day, for famine, one may note Ethiopia. For pestilence, AIDS is evident. For earthquakes, one need only recall San Francisco and many other unfortunate cities. For nations rising up against nation, two World Wars testify to that reality. Calling the early half of the Tribulation “the beginning of sorrows” in Rosenthal’s book is merely a device to minimize this period and shift what he calls the “Great Tribulation” to the third quarter of Daniel’s seventieth week.

IT is a serious error to claim that “the first three and one-half years are not part of the Tribulation period” because God’s wrath does not start until “considerably further” into the seventieth week (106-7). Rosenthal declares: “The seals are not God’s wrath; they are God’s promise of eternal protection during man’s wrath” (145). Moreover, “the first five seals relate to man’s activity under the controlling influence of Satan. God’s wrath has not yet begun” (247). But this is not entirely true, for the seals also reflect the judgment of the sovereign God. All seven seals are broken by Christ, and the riders of the first four seals and their accompanying judgments are initiated by four “living creatures” who descend from the very presence of God (Revelation 4:6-8). They are responding to divine holiness when they command these riders, not to “come and see,” but simply to “Come!” The judgments of these four seals include the sword, famine, pestilence and wild beasts, frequently used in Scripture as the expressions of divine wrath. Indeed, they are all included and named when God calls His “four sore judgments upon Jerusalem, the sword and the famine, and the noisome beast, and the pestilence” (Ezekiel 14:21). This is likewise true of Leviticus 26:22; Leviticus 26:25; Deuteronomy 28:21-25; Jeremiah 15:2-3; Jeremiah 16:4, Ezekiel 5:12; Ezekiel 5:17, and a host of other passages. It is a denial of Scripture to declare the first four seals are entirely the activity of men and do not include judgment from the Almighty. And a Rapture placed after the first six seals would certainly not be a “pre-wrath Rapture.” THE GREAT TRIBULATION

Rosenthal also has peculiar and erroneous views relating to the “Great Tribulation.” Similar to the first four seals, he declares it “the persecution of God’s elect by wicked men,” namely man’s wrath against man, but never God’s wrath against man (105). He limits the Great Tribulation by declaring that it will be the third quarter of the seven year period, and that somehow even these days will be “shortened.” He fails to relate the Great Tribulation to the detailed descriptions of the book of Revelation. One can only conclude hat if the first four seals are the “beginning of sorrows,” and the Day of the Lord begins with the opening of the seventh seal (117), then the Great Tribulation which comes between must be limited to the brief compass of the fifth and sixth seal. This is exactly Rosenthal’s position, illustrated by a charge on page 161. With such a view he stands alone. It finds no adequate place for detailed teaching of Christ in Matthew 24:9-26, and makes the Great Tribulation, like the first four seals, simply the activity of the Antichrist rather than judgment from God. Then to Rosenthal, the rest of the seven years, the final quarter, starts with Revelation 8:1, and becomes the “day of the Lord” or the final day of the Lord’s wrath.

Rosenthal is in serious trouble when he limits the Great Tribulation to the third quarter of the seven year period. For Christ linked the Great Tribulation with the action of Antichrist defiling the Jewish Temple by setting up his image to receive worship, in fulfillment of the “abomination which makes desolate” in Daniel 9:27. This event in the middle of the “week” is the sign for the Jews to fleet from the wrath of Satan, from whom they must be protected three and one-half years “from the face of the serpent” (Revelation 12:14). Thus the “time of trouble” for Israel (Daniel 12:1) and the desolation of the “great tribulation” predicted by Christ (Matthew 24:21) must extend at least for a full three and one-half years and not for a period of twenty-one months.

Indeed, the finishing of Israel’s “rebellion” and the end of Antichrist’s “desolation” are linked with the entirety of the seventy weeks and not with a small portion of it (Daniel 9:24; Daniel 9:27). Even Gabriel testified that Antichrist’s “war” with Israel should last until the “end” of the period under consideration, evidently with a “flood” of divine judgment. Antichrist will make war with Israel and all the saints, until he is judged and they possess the Kingdom (Daniel 7:22). He will defile the earth and lead the nations in the final rebellion and war of Armageddon right up to the power and glory of the Second Coming of Christ. In a word, Tribulation conditions cannot be limited to one fourth of that frightful seven year period. THE FUTURE OF THE CHURCH From the perspective of Rosenthal’s book, how does all this relate to the future of the Church? In brief, he insists that the Church must pass through the first 42 months of the Tribulation period under the pretext that it is only the “beginning of sorrows."” The Church must then pass through an additional twenty-one months of Great Tribulation because divine wrath has not yet been poured out. Later, Rosenthal evidently has the Church back on earth during the outpouring of the seven vials of wrath, for “Christ will literally return to assume His kingdom at the seventh trumpet” (146), right at the end of the “seventieth week.” The notion that the seven vials will follow the Second Coming is clearly stated on page 146 and charted on pages 247 and 276. Of the seven-year Tribulation the Church will miss only the small portion of twenty-one months Rosenthal entitles the Day of the Lord. So whereas believers will not experience wrath, they will be on earth during the severe judgment of the seals, according to Rosenthal. They will come under the dominion of the Beast and suffer and die at the hands of the Antichrist (Revelation 13:7), and even be present when the final seven vials of “God’s wrath” are poured out. Not much by way of comfort or blessing in an eschatology such as this!

All this can be avoided by recognizing that the “Tribulation,” “the great Tribulation,” and “Daniel’s seventieth week” are all substantially one and the same thing, and share identical features. These terms are simple descriptions of a coming period, not technical names or definitions around which to build a prophetic theory. While granting that the last half of the Tribulation period is more severe than the first, it is all designated “great tribulation” (literally in the Greek, “tribulation, the great one,” Revelation 7:14), simply because in the midst of earth’s trials there is no other period like it (Jeremiah 1:7; Daniel 12:1). “Tribulation” and “great tribulation” are spoken of together and clearly equated in Matthew 24:21; Matthew 24:29. These descriptions have to do with the content, not with the duration of that period, and certainly do not designate the timing of the Rapture. THE DAY OF THE LORD

Pretribulationists normally place the beginning of the Day of the Lord right after the Rapture in conjunction with the start of the Tribulation. Rosenthal rather violently opposes such a placement and makes it “perhaps the single greatest error in the debate concerning the timing of the Rapture” (117). To him the Day of the Lord must commence after the Great Tribulation is over. It fills in the final 21 months (half of three and one-half years) of the seven year “Tribulation period,” beginning with the opening of the seventh seal (117). But this misses the fact that there can be only one completely unprecedented day of sorrow in Israel’s future, and Joel 2:1-2 calls it the “day of the Lord,” while Daniel 12:1 calls it Israel’s “time of trouble,” and in Matthew 24:21 Christs identifies it as the “great tribulation.” The three are one, not separate periods which follow in sequence.

Rosenthal rightly reviews the frequent use of “day of the Lord” in the Old Testament, but denies that it extends to the “new heavens and a new earth” according to 2 Peter 3:10-13. He commences it at Revelation 8:1 on the basis of cosmic disturbances under the sixth seal (Joel 2:30-31; Revelation 6:11-12). He argues that the day of the Lord’s wrath must begin immediately after the Church is raptured, indeed “on the same day,” and cites the commencement of the flood on the same day Noah entered into the ark, and fire and brimstone fell out of heaven the same day Lot went out of Sodom. However, this is weak evidence to help establish a great New Testament doctrine. A number of Scriptures unite to demonstrate that the Day of the Lord does include the first six seals. While Rosenthal speaks of these seals as the wrath of man, the beasts of the earth and the heavenly bodies of Revelation 6:8; Revelation 12:1-17 are not under the dominion of man, but of God. The darkness of Amos 5:18-20 matches the darkness of the sixth seal. The judgment upon the proud and lofty in Isaiah 2:12; Isaiah 2:17 finds clear fulfillment in Revelation 6:15, and the announcement of wrath in Isaiah 13:6-13 and Zephaniah 1:14-18 finds its counterpoint in Revelation 6:17. Isaiah 2:19 and Revelation 6:15 state that the wicked shall hide in the holes of the rocks and caves of the earth, a fact far too specific to be lightly ignored. Zephaniah 2:3 calls this period the day of the Lord’s fierce anger, surely fulfilled in substance at Revelation 6:8 with the destruction of one fourth of the world’s population. It is wrong to declare that the Day of the Lord begins with Revelation 8:1 when its predictions find such clear fulfillment in the seal judgments of Revelation six.

How could the Day of the Lord come unexpectedly, “as a thief in the night” if the severe judgments of Revelation six must come first? Why should men be found crying “peace and safety” (1 Thessalonians 5:2-3) under such horrendous circumstances? Yet it is essential to Rosenthal’s prophetic system that the Day of the Lord begins with the opening of the seventh seal (155), which to him signals the end of the Great Tribulation and the moment of the Rapture. It is far better to understand that the Rapture precedes the entire Tribulation period, with the Day of the Lord commencing soon thereafter. This is the order and emphasis of 1 Thessalonians 4:1-18; 1 Thessalonians 5:1-28, which happen to be among the prime Scriptures on both prophetic themes.

It has been demonstrated in chapter four of Kept from the Hour that the Old Testament predictions of the “day of the Lord” and their fulfillment in the book of Revelation fit together like hand in glove, including the judgments under the first six seals. Placing the Day of the Lord after the Great Tribulation is erroneous and artificial, and denying that it extends to the “new heavens and earth” appears to be in violation of 2 Peter 3:10-13. For even in the Messianic Kingdom, Christ must rule the nations with a rod of iron and subdue all unrighteousness, and ultimately He must cleanse both the heavens and the earth. Certainly the Day of the Lord, the theme of such extensive prophecy, is of greater significance and extent than twenty-one months or six hundred and thirty days!

Rosenthal’s treatment of the three component parts of Daniel’s “seventieth week” is entirely unsatisfactory. His view essentially ignores the first three and one-half years and artificially distinguishes between the Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord, compressing each into a mere one fourth of the Tribulation period. This is a fractured foundation upon which to build any trustworthy conclusions relative to the blessed hope of Christ’s return.

SIX EVENTS SET THE TIMING OF THE RAPTURE

It has been demonstrated that Rosenthal dogmatically divides the last half of Daniel’s seventieth week into two parts, the Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord. Between the two he places the Rapture, but that is not all he places at this particular moment of time. So important to Rosenthal is this prophetic juncture of Tribulation activity that he dedicates to it six entire chapters, each with a great prophetic event, all converging at the time of the Rapture and demonstrating that the Day of the Lord relates exclusively to the last quarter of the seven year period. These are (1) Cosmic Disturbances; (2) the Coming of Elijah; (3) the Day of God’s Wrath; (4) the Sealing of the 144,000; (5) the Last Trump; and (6) the Apostasy and the Man of Sin. He holds that the convergence of these six events before the seventh seal form an “impregnable” argument supporting a “pre-wrath” Rapture three fourths of the way through the “seventieth week.” Such claims demand careful scrutiny. For the vast majority of students of prophecy are still convinced that the Rapture will be unannounced, unheralded by such signs, dateless but imminent. What then of the six signs which Rosenthal thinks will be “the prelude of the Rapture of the church and the Day of the Lord wrath” (153)?

COSMIC DISTURBANCES

(1)    There shall be cosmic disturbances, according to Joel 2:31, “The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord come.” Rosenthal identifies this with the sixth day and uses it to date the Rapture and the beginning of the Day of the Lord. But that can hardly be dogmatized, for the predicted Tribulation will not be limited to one display of cosmic power (cf. Revelation 8:10-12; 11:19: 16:8, 21), making Rosenthal’s argument uncertain at best. In Matthew 24:27, Christ places yet another great cosmic disturbance after the seventieth week when He shall appear with clouds and great glory and Israel shall mourn as they finally identify Christ as the long awaited Messiah.

Indeed, if there must be a cosmic disturbance before the Day of the Lord can commence, let it be during a brief transitional period after the Rapture but before the announcement of Antichrist. In Scripture, such transitional periods are not hard to find. There was a period of fifty days between Calvary and Pentecost, between “law” and “grace.” Rosenthal himself makes much of a transition of seventy-five extra days between the “seventieth week” and the setting up of Christ’s Kingdom (273). The whole Church age was thrust between prophecies of the two advents of Christ, as foretold in the Old Testament. Undoubtedly there will be time for the Great White Throne judgment between the Millennial Kingdom and the Eternal Kingdom. Similarly, there is no urgency which demands a tight chronology of events following the Rapture, and so the argument of our author concerning heavenly activity finds a ready answer. Indeed, the immediate context of the prophecy he uses from Joel 2:30-32 seems to relate the heavenly wonders more to the coming of the Messianic Kingdom than to a pre-wrath cosmic disturbance (cf. Matthew 24:29).

ELIJAH MUST COME

(2)    Next, Rosenthal teaches that Elijah must come, and that if it occurs before a pretribulational Rapture “the doctrine of imminence is once again destroyed” (158). He is not sure if the two witnesses are Moses and Elijah or Enoch and Elijah, or whether it is Elijah in the flesh or merely one in the spirit and likeness of Elijah. He supports the view that Elijah will reappear and have a ministry during the last three and one-half years of the Tribulation. Since the witnesses die in the sixth trumpet after a full three and one-half years of witness, this makes it mandatory to place the seven vials of the wrath of God (according to his chronology after the Second Coming of Christ, a radical view which Rosenthal propounds and illustrates on his charts.

He makes much of Malachi 4:5-6, which seems to relate to the Second Coming of Christ when He comes to “smite the earth with a curse,” rather than to an earlier manifestation of the Day of the Lord adjacent to the Rapture. It must be noted also that in Matthew 11:14 Christ declared that in a potential sense, Elijah had already come in the person of John the Baptist. But if Malachi is indeed predicting the coming of one of the future two witnesses, the most probable understanding is that the prophecy places their coming relatively early in the prophetic “week” before the Day of the Lord is fully come. There is nothing here to date the Rapture, even if one assumes it should be dated. THE WRATH OF GOD

(3)Next, Rosenthal uses the wrath of God to prove that the pretribulationist has a problem, “larger than big - it is mountainous and unscalable” (164). He makes the expression, “the great day of his wrath is come” (Revelation 6:17) to mean, not a past experience, but a prediction of “an event about to occur” (166-67). This, he declares, is a glaring problem for pretribulation rapturism, for “God’s wrath cannot be understood to include the first six seals” (171). “Wrath is impending. It is about to happen; it has not yet occurred” (167). But the real problem lies at the door of Rosenthal. For he constantly asserts that the outpoured wrath of God does not commence until Revelation 8:1, the seventh seal, which immediately introduces the unprecedented judgments of the seven trumpets. However, his prophetic system is embarrassed, if not refuted, by the obvious fact that one of the strongest references to the wrath of God is recorded in Revelation 6:16-17 in conjunction with the sixth seal. But rather than revising his system, Rosenthal devotes eight pages of argumentation (163-70) endeavoring to prove two main points: (1) that this declaration of outpoured wrath is a prophecy spoken by the prophet John, and not an agonizing cry on the part of the wicked who hide from the face of God in the rocks and the mountains; and (2) that the use of the Greek aorist in the expression “the great day of his wrath is come” demonstrates that it “refers, not to a past event, but to an event about to occur, and that in concert with the opening of the seventh seal” (167).

Even the most casual reading of Revelation 6:12-17 reveals that the cry of verses 16-17 is a scream of terror from the wicked, rebellious human leaders who have endured war and famine, death and destruction, a shattering earthquake and a frightful disruption of heavenly bodies under the earlier seal judgments. Obviously, they are responding to past judgments and not judgments yet to come, for wicked men have no ability to speak a prophecy! It is true that the aorist tense normally has no time significance. But the verb elthen is in the aorest tense and indicative mood, and when this occurs it refers to a past action and not to a future. Hence, the proper translation is “the great day of his wrath is come,” or as the vast majority of translators put it, “the great day of his wrath has come.” It is a major error to force the translation to declare, “the great day of his wrath will come.” One can only conclude that this strong reference to the wrath of God is the direct response of the wicked to their shattering experience under the first six seals, and not a veiled prophecy of coming trumpet judgments. Not only is Rosenthal in error in this matter, he proceeds to make matters worse by making the seals a symbol of ownership and protection, as though that is what God is doing in Revelation 6:1-17. While ownership and protection are certainly true for the Church through the sealing ministry of the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 4:30), it is not even vaguely related to the Lion of the tribe of Judah loosing the seven seals of the book of Tribulation judgment. THE SEALED 144,000

(4)    The fourth pillar supporting Rosenthal’s impregnable argument concerning the time of the Rapture relates to the sealed 144,000 and the “multitude which no man could number,” both round in Revelation chapter seven. He holds that the 144,000 Jews are “sealed for protection” from God’s wrath, but not sealed for witness and evangelism. A more normal view is that Israel is beginning to turn back to the Lord, and that these are sealed for service and evangelism to fulfill their destiny as God’s witnesses and “a light to the Gentiles” (Isaiah 42:6; 43:10, 12: 49:6).

Rosenthal is not sure if they are regenerated, saying that is “a matter of speculation.” He flatly rejects the traditional view, as expressed by John Walvoord, that they represent “the godly remnant of Israel on earth in the great tribulation” (183). He at least implies their redemption when he says, “The 144,000 must be sealed for protection to go through the Day of the Lord…. God will not leave Himself without a people on earth” (185).

Rosenthal immediately focuses attention on the “great multitude that no man could number” and makes this important identification: “This great multitude represents the true church which goes into the seventieth week of Daniel. They are raptured at the end of the Great Tribulation but before the Day of the Lord beings” (185). Here, finally, he reveals the Rapture of the Church, three-fourths of the way through the seventieth week, just before the Day of the Lord, and identifies it with the “innumerable multitude”! But the seventieth week is a precise period of seven years, each half of which Isaiah 42:1-25 months or 1,260 days. So mark your calendar! We cannot know the hour, but we can predict the day! From Antichrist’s covenant with Israel it will be 1,260 plus 630 days, a total of 1,890 days. From the commencement of the seventieth week, the date of the Rapture is precisely set! And if Rosenthal is correct that the 144,000 are “God’s people,” yet distinct from the “innumerable multitude,” and they go through the Day of the Lord which is the “wrath of God,” then added to all this confusion is a Partial Rapture.

However, the innumerable multitude is not like the Church, which goes to heaven as a group at the Rapture. Rather, they are martyrs who one at a time lay down their lives throughout the seven year period. The Greek present tense in Revelation 7:14 stresses that they “continually come” out of great Tribulation, and obviously do not go to heaven as a single group. It is likewise strange, if they do indeed represent the Church, that John could not recognize them, for John was an Apostle of Christ, a member of the early Church, and part of its essential foundation. Also the Church is composed of all believers since Pentecost, and cannot be limited solely to Tribulation martyrs.

Let it be said as gently as possible: This identification of the Church with the great multitude of the Tribulation is wrong and in fact it is radical eschatology. It teaches that the Rapture is after the Great Tribulation, which is posttribulationism. It implies a divided Church, some of whom are raptured while 144,000 of God’s people go through the time of God’s wrath. And though Rosenthal does not count up the exact number of days, his dating of the Rapture is so precise that he has fallen into the trap of advocating a date-setting system.