The Rapture still hasn't happened at the end of Revelation Chapter 7

This argument is applicable to refuting Pre-Trib and maybe some forms of Mid-Trib and Post-Trib.  But I'm mainly making it with the "Pre-Wrath" model of Chris White in mind, the view that should be called the Sixth Seal Rapture view, in fact I think it's possibly the true final nail in the coffin of that view.

I've already deconstructed most layers of their argument, how silly it is to use the least unique characteristics of Matthew 24's Parusia account to decide where it happens in Revelation and choose a place with no truly uniquely Parusia characteristics.  And how there is no Wrath during the Trumpets.  But there is one issue I keep forgetting to really get into, and I only just recently realized the full implication of what Revelation chapter 7 says.

So Chris White's position is that the Multitude in Heaven in Revelation 7:9-17 is the post Rapture Resurrected Church .

Now I and Chris White agree that this Multitude is clearly the same people under the Altar when the Fifth Seal is opened back in chapter 6.  And we both agree that back then they had not been Raptured/Resurrected yet since they are explicitly described as just souls there.

I guess White feels like their state being different at all must be proof they are resurrected now, because there is really no other reason to think that.

You can't argue the Robes represent their bodies since they already possessed them in the Fifth Seal. I'm not sure what exactly the Robes are.but to argue they are their Resurrected Bodies would require arguing our Resurrected bodies have no continuity with our current bodies which would be functionally the same as making the Resurrection merely spiritual.

The key detail I only recently noticed however is that the last verse of the chapter is clearly describing the Rapture as yet Future, when the Lamb "shall lead them unto living fountains of waters" is The Rapture.  And you can't say I'm misusing the word "shall" by treating it as inherently future tense because the part about God wiping away all tears is definitely yet future, that happens in Chapter 21.

So that kills the Rapture view of Chris White, Revelation 7 explicitly tells us the Rapture is still yet future.  The scope of the Chapter is showing us Church Age saints on Earth and the souls of martyrs in heaven.

In Chapter 14 it's the 144 Thousand who are described in ways that are unambiguously telling us they are Resurrected now, by being "Redeemed from the Earth" and the "Firstfruits".  And in the first part of Revelation 7 they are still on Earth, as they are in the Fifth Trumpet later.  And in Paul being Sealed is a Church specific promise, tied to our promise that the Holy Spirit will not leave us which the Old Testament Saints didn't have.

So I feel like I can now firmly declare "Pre-Wrath" to be dead.

Christmas in Spring theories

My time on this blog spent defending the position that Jesus was born in December or January has usually been focused on the Fall Feast days as the popular alternative (all three Seventh Month Holy Days have been proposed).

However there are some arguing for Spring being when Jesus was born.  Arguing that His birth should be either the same day He was Crucified (14th Day of the First Month) or the same day He Rose (The Sunday that falls during Unleavened Break).  Then a third option could be to just have Him born on the First day of the First Month, the New Year.

There are Rabbinic Traditions that say the major Patriarchs and Prophets were all born the same day they died.  Another Rabbinic tradition possibly relevant is a tradition that says during the wandering it took nine months to build the Tabernacle, and Exodus 40 says the first day of the first month is the day the Tabernacle was completed.  There is also Julius Africanus saying the Incarnation was on March 25th with dispute on if that means Birth or Conception.

One Biblical argument that can be brought up is the instruction that the Passover Lamb should be a year old (same with the Lamb Sacrificed on firstfruits in Leviticus 23:12), that can be interpreted as meaning as close as possible to exactly a year, meaning the Passover Lamb's Birthday should in theory be Passover of the prior year.  This has also been used as evidence for Jesus ministry being exactly a year, which is a view I basically support but don't like to make that particular argument for it.

What reasons are there to favor one Spring theory over the others?  If Jesus was born on the 14th then that makes his Circumcision the Seventh day of Unleavened Bread, the only major day of the Spring Feasts that doesn't have an obvious corespondent in the Passion Narrative, though I like to theorize that is when the Doubting Thomas story happened, and maybe the Resurrection of Old Testament Saints refereed to in Matthew 27:51-53.

A major reason for favoring Resurrection Day would be that makes the Ascension the anniversary of when Jesus was presented in The Temple as the 40th day, the one lynchpin day of the Passion-Pentecost narrative that doesn't have an obvious antecedent in Leviticus 23 and Exodus 12.  There is also how Resurrection is often refereed to as like a Birth, from Isaiah 26's "the Earth shall give Birth to her Dead" to the arguments for being "Born Again" actually being about the Resurrection, further Capstoned by my connecting the Resurrection and Rapture of the Church to the Birth and Resurrection of the Man-Child in Revelation 12.  In that model His Circumcision is on the Eight day of the Omer.

The Resurrection version is the most attractive.  But also the easiest to discredit.

The thing about people making the Pilgrimage Festival requirements an argument agaisnt some Nativity models is that they often forget that only Joseph would actually have been required to be in Jerusalem, because only he was an adult male.  So events where only Mary and the Baby Jesus are directly refereed to as being present somewhere other then Jerusalem could happen on a pilgrimage feast day.  but Luke 2:16 clearly places Joseph in Bethlehem on the day Jesus was born.

Firstfurits is a day that is almsot certain to fall on one of the seven days of Unleavened Bread, the 15th through 21st of Abib.

Passover itself, the 14th, is mentioned in Deuteronomy 16, but it is still strictly speaking not one of the days every adult male is required to be in Jerusalem.  People who live far from Jerusalem generally chose to travel to the area by this point.  But Bethlehem is close enough that Joseph being there on the 14th was probably going to work out fine.

Actually a fourth spring option popped into my head when thinking of this.  The 10th day of the first month being the day the Lamb is selected.  We typically view the Triumphal entry as being that day even though it isn't directly stated to be, so it's like that was Jesus' final Birthday party.  That would make His Circumcision the 17th day of the month, the day on which I prefer to place the Resurrection because it fits being the 3rd day of Unleavened Bread and it's relevance to Esther.  Then his presentation in The Temple could equate to Lag BaOmer potentially.

So I'm open to this model, more so then I am the Fall Feasts, since there is arguably Spring imagery in mind in Simeon's Prophecy.  But I'm currently still leaning towards a Kislev or Tevet model.

What about the rest of the Nativity chronology?

John the Baptist was born six months prior so in this model probably on or near a Fall Feast day.  Which would then place the time frame of the events that open Luke's Narrative around Hanukkah.  Again, one of the things that annoys me about those who are so vehemently anti-Christmas is that about that time of year is when part of the Nativity narrative happened almsot no mater what.  But it's interesting how this model allows you to literally begin the Christmas narrative at Christmas.

The Conception of Jesus is then placed in the month of Tammuz, in June or July.  On the one hand I find it a little weird for Jesus Conception to be a less significant time of year Biblically then John's.  But I like to emphasize Jesus as the Sun of Righteousness so being Conceived near the Summer Solstice fits that.  Maybe it also fits that Mary and Elizabeth were given reason to rejoice when Pagan Women were weeping for Tammuz and Adonis.

Because I've looked at the Young's Literal Translation of Matthew 2:1 I no longer think the Magi had to arrive in Jerusalem the exact same day Jesus was born.  But I still reject saying it had to be two years later.  Maybe you could make when they presented their gifts to Jesus the role Pentecost plays in the nativity narrative?

Update December 25th 2023: I'm adding to this post even though I've retired this Blog because I felt I needed to add something.

My new theory about the Passion Week, would place Resurrection Day the day after the Seven Day Pilgrimage is over on the 22nd of Aviv.  Meanwhile John 20:26 potentially places the Doubting Thomas incident on the anniversary of The Circumcision one week later which can make Thematic sense because of of that story's focus on the Wounds of Jesus.  

And so if we place the visit of the Magi not two years later but still after the Presentation in The Temple on Ascension Day, perhaps Pentecost makes sense?

I now view The Last Trump as Yom Kippur

I still view the Last Trump of Matthew 24, 1 Corinthians 15 and 1 Thessalonians 4 as being the Seventh Trumpet of Revelation 10 and 11.  But I've changed from viewing that Trumpet as sounded on Yom Teruah to viewing it as sounding on Yom Kippur.  I had flirted with this theory before, but am now convinced by nuances I didn't notice before.

But I need to lay some groundwork first.

Chris White likes to draw a strong distinction between the Shofar and the Silver Trumpets of Numbers 10 and 31:6, saying it is only the Silver Trumpets that the Prophets associated with the Day of The LORD.

First of all I think drawing such a strong distinction between them is invalid.  Hosea 5:8 used both in the same verse in a way that could justify seeing them as synonyms.  The assumption that the Shofar was a Ram's Horn is not really Biblically proven.  Joshua 6 does once use Qeren (Horn) to describe those Shofars, but that word is also used of the Horns of the Brazen Altar so we know it can refer to objects made of metal.  Every time the KJV of Joshua 6 says "Ram's" however it's actually using the word Yobel, the word for Jubilee, none of the Hebrew words for Ram, Goat or Lamb are in that chapter.

But if they are distinct then it's only the Shofar that is explicitly tied to the Day of The LORD.  Most explicitly in Zephaniah 1:14-18 which I'll discus more later.  But also Joel 2:1, 15-16, where my personal theory is verse 1 is the Sixth Trumpet when the Day of the LORD is nigh but not quite here yet, and then 15-16 is the Seventh Trumpet and a pretty solid description of the Rapture.  Psalm 81 which I've discussed before also uses Shofar.

Isaiah 27:13 is also interesting.   Now when Pre-Tribbers (or more specifically an old Prophecy In The News episode) try to make that verse about the Rapture they argue the word for "perish" can be translated "disappear" or "vanish" to help their Secret Rapture doctrine, I'm not gonna support that.  What I think is that those ready to perish are believers who because of their Faith in the Resurrection are prepared to die for their Faith in the Messiah.  Remember pretty much all non Pre-Tribbers agree the Rapture happens during a time of persecution.

There are other uses of Shofar in the Prophets and Psalms that could be about the the Eschatological Trumpets of Revelation 8-11, but these are the ones I'm most strongly interested in.

It is also the Shofar that is used when YHWH's voice is described as being like a Trumpet in Exodus 19:13-16, 20:18 and Isaiah 58:1.  So that shows that Revelation 1:10& 4:1 have the Shofar in mind, and Hebrews 12:19 is probably the same.  And since the Greek is using the same word in those verses as every reference to the Rapture Trump and the Seven Trumpets it's likely they too are Shofar.

Also in the Hebrew Bible only the Shofar is associated with the number 7 thanks to Joshua 6.  In the Torah it's always singular when it is used, but the Silver Trumpets are inherently a pair, a duo.

Chris White and one Kariate website I used to visit argued that there is no Biblical proof for Yom Teruah of Leviticus 23:24 and Numbers 29:1 being about Trumpets.  In the past on this blog I'd argued against their position, but now I've come to agree with it.

The word Teruah is associated with the Silver Trumpets in Numbers 10 and the Shofar in places like Joshua 6.  But there are also plenty of places where it doesn't seem to involve Trumpets at all.  And to make things even more confusing thanks to Leviticus 25:9 the First day of the Seventh Month isn't even the only Holy Day the word Teruah is directly linked to.

In Leviticus 25:9 Teruah is used of the sounding of the Shofar on the Yom Kippur that comes six months prior to the Jubilee year.  The KJV confusingly translated the word "Jubilee" here, but every other time "Jubilee" appears in the KJV including the very next verse it is Yobel.

I had even very recently tried to use Zephaniah 1:16 as smoking gun proof that the Day of the LORD is Yom Teruah.  But the word "Day" is not used directly of Teruah in that verse but rather of the Shofar, it is the day of the Shofar's Teruah.  And in the Torah that day is the Yom Kippur of the 49th Year.

I still think the Resurrection and Ascension of the Two Witnesses possibly happens on Yom Teruah.  I'm thinking of connecting the 10 days that would begin there and end with The Rapture to the 10 days of tribulation refereed to in the message to Smyrna, and typologically to the ten days of Genesis 24:55.  But that's a conjecture and maybe all of this happens on the 10th or at least the evening of the 9th.

In my last post discussing Yom Kippur I showed that the "fast" of Yom Kippur ends at Sunset of the Tenth day.  I shall speculate that that is also when The Trumpet sounds.

Naturally making the Day of the LORD the pre Jubilee Yom Kippur backs up seeing the Jubilee as a type of the Millennium.

I was suprised how rarely the word Shofar is actually used in the Torah.  Three out of five uses are saying the voice of YHWH is like a Shofar.  Only this Yom Kippur prior to the Jubilee verse uses it of an instrument the Israelites sound.

I'm not in this post going to make any date setting guesses based on theories about the proper Jubilee cycle.  But since even arguing the Rapture happens on Yom Kippur is treated as date setting by Pre-Wrathers, I shall direct you all to my post refuting the anti date setting argument.

I'm starting to think the Biblical Day does begin at Sunrise

I still stand by my post arguing agaisnt the Lunar Calendar.  But at the time I made that I still agreed with days beginning at Sunset.

Then I discovered some websites like these.

http://www.isawthelightministries.com/daystarts.html

https://www.bibletimemarkers.com/a-day-begins-at-sunrise

I am not at this time endorsing anything else on those sites.  But the first one I notice does support a Rapture view similar to mine in being at the 7th Trumpet and before the Bowls.  That site however is still assuming a Lunar Calendar for determining the Months, which I am now highly skeptical of.  I also probably do not agree with their Passion Week chronology.

Both argue that during the Creation Week, the Day is when God does the work, and at the end of each day it describes the times of Sunset and Sunrise (evening and morning) following.  The first act of Creation is the creation of Light, which thematically supports the day beginning at Sunrise.  Then in Genesis 1:5, 15-16 and 18 the Day is listed before the Night.  Like many other times later on when referring to "forty days and forty nights" or "three days and three nights", in fact almost any time you see "nights" plural, and there are 27 verses that refer to "day and night".  Also the Sun is always listed before the moon in verses like Genesis 37:9, Deuteronomy 4:19. 17:3 and 33:14.  And in Numbers 28 the daily sacrifices are listed as morning first then evening.

In Leviticus 23 a few things make more sense when you remove the Sunset to Sunset based assumptions.  And this is the most important chapter to understanding the Torah Calendar.

What's said about the 14th of Nisan and Passover when compared to Exodus 12 and other Passover passages is a lot less confusing if the days begin and end at sunrise, since then the evening is the middle of the day.  

But the Yom Kippur instructions are what's really revealing.  The Day of Atonement is the Tenth day of the Seventh Month, that was determined already back in chapter 16.  But in verse 32 the Ninth Day is mentioned for some reason.  What the verse seems to be saying is this 24 hour period that functions like a Sabbath begins at the Sunset of the 9th and ends the next Sunset.  The emphasis on that here clearly implying that's not when actual calendar days begin and end.

I have argued in the past agaisnt viewing Yom Kippur as a Fast day.  But this understanding of verse 32 can negate my main argument, since it can allow the Fast to be from Sunset of the 9th to the Sunset of the 10th so that in the Evening of the 10th you eat the meat of Sacrificed Animals, similar to how the 14th as Passover works in this model.

Likewise is Exodus 12:18, everywhere else the Seven Days of Unleavened Bread are 15-21 of the first month, but in this passage it includes the Evening of the 14th.  

This also explains how confused the Rabbinic Jewish observance of Passover is.  While Deuteronomy 16 and Ezekiel 45 provide Hebrew Bible precedent for expanding the use of the word Passover to cover the entire seven day Feast of Unleavened Bread, the change to a Sunset based observance causing the Evening of the 14th to become the Evening of the 15th explained why Rabbinic observance basically forgets that the 14th is Passover.  Rabbinic tradition does call the 14th the Fast of the Firstborn.  Originally that was clearly tied to the 14th being the day the Egyptian First Born were killed and Israel's spared, but that is supposed to be happening during the Seder so the Sunset based reckoning now has that happening on the 15th so why the 14th is called the Fast of the Firstborn is something the Rabbis struggle to explain.

Speaking of Rabbinic tradition, Fasts are still traditionally supposed to begin at Sunrise, so that sounds like a carry over from the original reckoning.

1 Samuel 30:17 also arguably makes more sense on a Sunrise to Sunrise calendar.

It also mirrors the Torah year better.  Biblically the year begins in Spring, and Dawn is essentially the Spring of the day, hence Sunrise sometimes being refereed to as "dayspring".

Malachi says Jesus is the Sun of Righteousness, and the Fourth Gospel says He is the Light, and Peter calls Him the Lightbearer, there is also the Womb of the Morning reference in Psalm 110.  Revelation says Jesus is the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last, the Alpha and the Omega.  So the day beginning and ending with Sunrise fits that typological pattern.

Which then leads to overlooked details of the Passion narrative.  Matthew 27:57 and Mark 15:42 depict the evening following the Crucifixion as still the day before The Sabbath.  And John 20:19 depicts the Evening following when Jesus had Risen and been seen Risen as still the First Day of The Week.

The Rapture and the In-Gathering of Israel

Chris White is correct that Matthew 24:29-31 is about the Rapture.  However he is equally WRONG when he says that passage is not about the In-gathering of Israel.

You see his version of "Pre-Wrath" allows you to be not Pre-Trib but still basically fully Dispensationalist.  They still place Gaps in Daniel 11 and 9 for example  And most importantly they have to violently reject any implication that The Church is Israel.

I reject full Dispensationalism because I understand Romans 11 and Galatians 3.  The Church is a part of Israel and Gentile believers are being grafted into Israel "agaisnt nature".

Now you can say I'm still partially Dispensationalist because unlike Post-Tribbers and most non Pre-Millennials I don't think that means biological Israel doesn't matter.  In fact even most Pre-Tribbers think post Pentecost Jews who die without ever believing in Jesus will not benefit from the Eternal fulfillment of God's promises to the Patriarchs and David.  I however understand that after the Fullness of the Gentile is grafted in ALL Israel shall be Saved.

The problem with Chris White's acting like saying Matthew 24:31 is the Gathering of Israel is just as stupid as denying it's the Rapture of 1 Thessalonians 4, is that when Jesus says "from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other", He is basically quoting Deuteronomy 30:4.  And many scholars throughout history have recognized that, rejecting that began with Darby.

Now the thing about Deuteronomy 29 and 30 is it's about events that will happen multiple times, and not always looking exactly the same, it's about the cycle of Israel's disobedience then punishment then redemption.  Nehemiah 1:9 quotes this same verse as fulfilled in his day, and I do think it's in a sense fulfilled by what happened in 1948.  And I think there may be a final fulfillment that doesn't happen till after the Millennium but before New Jerusalem descends.  But Jesus clearly also wants us to understand The Rapture as a fulfillment of this as well.

In Revelation 12-19 during the second half of the Week terrestrial Israel isn't scattered, she is The Woman in a place prepared for her in the wilderness.

White strongly argues that Daniel 12's Resurrection passage is about the Rapture.  Well guess what that entire massive Prophecy of Daniel was entirely about God's Covenant with Israel.

Chris White like Post-Tribbers points out how much of Matthew is clearly Church specific, especially 24 and 25 being a discourse given only to the 12.  And yet Matthew is also the most Jewish Gospel, Pre-Tribbers didn't make that up.  It more then any other focuses on Jesus as the rightful King of Israel and how He fulfilled Old Testament Prophecy.  The other Synoptics expand on how Jesus is the Savior of all not just Israel (a seed already planted in Matthew) and then John is the most Theological.

This is why Matthew's came first, because Paul said The Gospel was for the Jews first and then the Gentiles.  The least Jewish of the Synoptics is the one that doesn't directly refer to the In-Gathering in it's Olivite Discourse.  This is also why only Matthew's Parusia passage mentions the Trumpet, because the significance of that is inherently Jewish coming from the Shofar, the Jubilee and Numbers 10.

Also this a good place to remind people of my belief that Joel 2:15-16 is also a Rapture Passage.

The Timing of The Rapture is not The Point of the Olivte discourse Parables

In Matthew 24's Olivite Discourse Verse 31 is the end of the straight forwards description of future events  Then verse 32 onto the end of chapter 25 is a series of figures of speech and parables, some have parallels in the others Gospels but most do not.

Pre-Tribbers and Post-Tribers and Pre-Wrathers all talk about MOST of these parables as if the timing of the Rapture is their point, and both sides of the "Imminence" debate will try to argue these parables support their position.

I don't believe the timing of the Rapture is the point.  I do believe they are about the Parusia in a sense, but whether the people involved were or should be expecting prior events or not isn't the point.

I should remind everyone that building doctrine on Parables is always sketchy.

Here is the thing, I'm Anti Pre-Trib, early in this blog's history I made a trilogy of posts debunking Imminence (both Pre-Trib and Pre-Wrath versions of it).  But if the timing of the Rapture was the point of these parables I'd have to agree they support Pre-Trib more.  I know Chris White keeps saying "what's the point of watching if there is nothing to watch for" but Pre-Tribbers view it as you're not watching for the return if you're instead watching for prior events.

In these parables the narratives in question have no prior events, the Bridegroom or Thief or whoever just shows up.  If the point is about timing then the point is the bad servants and foolish virgins seemed to think they had more time then they actually did.

And these are warnings given specifically to believers, most appear only in Matthew who's version was a speech given ONLY to the 12.  So the common Post-Trib and Pre-Wrath explanation that it's the World who it comes on like a Thief doesn't hold up in this context, maybe when 1 Thessalonians 5 uses that idiom but not here.

The problem with applying the Pre-Trib interpretations of the Parrables to the actual Doctrine of the Rapture is that they imply you won't be Raptured if you weren't properly watching for it.  And that's not how the Rapture will actually work. when it's directly described all believers regardless of what they are doing get Raptured.

I said most up above, but you see the Sheeps and Goats parable that ends chapter 25 is treated differently, no one thinks that one's point is the timing of The Rapture, it's usually viewed as either a Post-Armageddon judgment Revelation doesn't mention or as the White Throne Judgment.  But the opening of the parable is just as explicitly about the coming of the Son of Man as all the others, so separating it so it's about something different isn't justified.  Revelation 11 refers to a Judgment of the Saints after the Seventh Trumpet.

The moral point of the Sheeps and Goats Judgment is that we should act as if Jesus is already here regardless.  And I think the other parables are the same.

I think the best modern expositor on the Parables is Peter Hiett, even though I don't agree with his basic views on Revelation and Genesis.

The Beast out of the Red Sea?

My Hades and The Sea post was mainly about how the Sea is referenced in Revelation 20.  But I did suggest the possibility of the Beast rising out of the Sea being an idiom of a resurrection of someone buried at sea but then said I couldn't think of any historical Antichrist candidates who were.

Because I've been again rethinking my theories about the geography of Sinai and Kadesh I was reading Exodus 15, and noticed something right in the first verse.

"I will sing unto Yahuah, for he hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea."

We've long debated whether or not the Biblical text implies Pharaoh himself wound up also being drowned in the Red Sea, but consider the above, and how this terminology makes me think of the Four Horsemen, I'm starting to wonder if I just uncovered a vital clue to the Mystery of The Beast.

Later in verse 19.

"For the horse of Pharaoh went in with his chariots and with his horsemen into the sea, and Yahuah brought again the waters of the sea upon them; but the children of Israel went on dry land in the midst of the sea."

Combing this with my earlier arguments for an Egyptian Antichrist, and I think I really might have just stumbled upon the key.

The Removal of restraint happens in Revelation 9.

II Thessalonians 2:7-8 tells us something is currently restraining the Son of Apoleia and that's why the Abomination of Desolation hasn't happened yet and in turn the Parusia and Rapture can't happen till after that.  The use of the word "he" in translations is misleading, it's not necessarily any person doing the restraining, but you could in my view say the "restrainer" is the Fifth Trumpet Angel if you wanted to.

Revelation 11:7 and 17:8 both tell us that at least one of the Beasts ascends out of the Bottomless Pit aka the Abyss aka the Great Deep.  At the beginning of Revelation Chapter 9 the Abyss is locked but after the Fifth Trumpet is sounded it is opened and entities in that Abyss begin to leave.  Revelation 20 further tells us that in the future this is where Satan will be restrained for a Thousand years.

This argument is not dependent on identifying either Beast with any specific personage in Revelation 9, the facts I just laid out should be enough to make it obvious.  None the less I feel a strong argument can be made for Apollyon being the Son of Apoleia.

It annoys me that this simple answer to the Restrainer mystery is so rarely what Prophecy teachers argue for.  The Early Church Writers tended to think the Restrainer was Rome for some reason, today most Pre-Tribbers say it's the Holy Spirit to try and make this obviously Pre-Trib destroying passage compatible.  And the "Pre-Wrath" view of Chris White tends to say it's Michael doing what he does in Revelation 12 and Daniel 12 even though that makes no grammatical sense at all, not to mention how it makes no Chronological sense in the context of Pre-Wrath, that makes more sense as a Midway Point argument.

In his most recent Podcast while addressing Pre-Tribbers Chris White says that Matthew 24:38's description of people "eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage" makes no sense in a context where any of the Trumpets have already happened but specifically singled out the Fifth.  He makes a similar argument about the "peace and safety" from I Thessalonians 5:3.

The problem with that argument is Revelation 11:10.  I view that verse of Matthew 24 as that same three and a half day period, same with the "peace and safety" verse.  Doesn't matter how much bad apocalyptic stuff had already happened, people think it's over now.  And I still think the End Times deception will be partly based on people thinking the first half of the 7 year period is the second half.

If you think "as the days of Noah were" must mean nothing catastrophic had happened yet, I direct you to this post where I discus overlooked details of Genesis 6.
https://midseventiethweekrapture.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-flood-did-not-destroy-earth-it.html

There is no Wrath before the Seventh Trumpet.

Alan Kurshner supports his position that the Eschatological Wrath of God is more then just the Seven Bowls by saying the word "Wrath" doesn't have to be used for the concept of "Wrath" to be in mind.

I do not disagree with that on it's own, after all the word "Parousia" isn't in Revelation at all but I strongly feel Revelation tells us when that happens by describing it's characteristics.

However my strong belief that we are not in Wrath during the first half of the book is based on more then just the rarity of the word itself popping up in the first 11 chapters.  It's based on specifically what we are told when Wrath is explicitly mentioned.

After the Seventh Trumpet is sounded Revelation 11:18 says that His Wrath is Come, Wrath starting is an effect of which the Seventh Trumpet is a cause.  The only time the word Wrath is used before the Seventh Trumpet is sounded is during the Sixth Seal events of Revelation chapter 6, but it's not any heavenly voice saying it there, it's the Kings of The Earth, not a credible source.  Again see my post on the Non Signs.

A common explanation of the difference between Tribulation and Wrath is that "Tribulation is what Man does and Wrath is what God does".  This definition is often promoted by Pre and Post Tirbbers, people who don't even consider such a distinction relevant to the timing of The Rapture.

Even if I partially agreed with that I would still say the events associated with the Seals and first 6 Trumpets are not directly God's doing the same way the Bowls are.  After all events Pre-Wrathers place before the Rapture (the first 5 Seals) are just as arguably caused by God as the Trumpets are.  In fact the seals being opened by the Lamb rather then Angels makes them if anything more directly God's doing.

But I don't agree with that definition, it isn't found in Scripture.

The doctrine that The Church won't be here during the Eschatological Day of The Lord's Wrath doesn't mean God inherently isn't judging the nations during the Church Age.  For one thing there are passages definitely about what happened to Jerusalem in 70 AD that called it God's Wrath.

In fact the accounts of the Trumpets specifically refer to Believers being here, unlike the Bowls.  No the 144 Thousand can't be interpreted as Post Rapture believers, they are described using clearly Church Specific terminology, like being the First Fruits.  In Paul's Epistles being Sealed is itself a Church specific Promise, tied to our Promise that The Holy Spirit won't leave us.

There is no evidence of believers on Earth during the Bowls, in fact Chapters 14 and 15 seem to have us in heaven already.  At best the first Bowl's account can be taken to imply there still exist people who didn't take the Mark.  But unlike most Christians I don't think only Believers will refuse The Mark.

Or if there are Saints during the Bowls period they can't be proven to be the Church specifically the same way the 144 Thousand are.  The people of God being told to come out of Babylon in the Wilderness is terrestrial Israel.

Biblically Trumpets are warnings.  I'm to lazy to go and make that argument right now, but google it I'm confident you'll find many have proven that.  The Trumpets are the warning signs we are supposed to be looking out for.

Also I will in the near future be making another post on how the removal of restraint refereed to in II Thessalonians 2 is the Fifth Trumpet in Revelation 9.

I made that Anti-PreWrath Meme I mentioned.

I would like to see someone else make a better version of it.

And I think actually a brief Twitter exchange with Christ White which I'll copy/paste here.

The Lamb's Waifu

@JaredMithrandir

I made an #AntiPreWrathMeme. But I've like for someone else to improve it.

@prewrathrapture

#PreWrath #MidTrib #PreTrib #TheRapture #PostTrib

9:37 AM · Nov 15, 2019·Twitter Web App

View Tweet activity

Chris White

@prewrathrapture

·

15h

Replying to

@JaredMithrandir

All this shows is that you are not familiar with prewrath view on rev 13, and for that matter most peoples view on the timing of rev 13 which is a biography which extends from his beginning to his end. By your logic the 6th seal comes before christ's birth in rev 12 lol.

1

The Lamb's Waifu

@JaredMithrandir

·

14h

I don't view Revelation 12 as the Birth of Christ and neither did Methodious of Olympus back before Nicaea. Revelation 11-13 is a clear sequence of cause and effects, Pre-Wrath aren't the only ones mistaken on that. But most still place the Abomination here.

1

The Lamb's Waifu

@JaredMithrandir

·

14h

In your view when the Abomination happens in the actual Timeline of Revelation it is barely commented on at all. The identity of the Man Child is revealed by Isaiah 66, it's New Jerusalem.