Israel's hiding place in The Wilderness during The Day of Yahuah

I still believe the doctrine that Israel will have a Hiding Place in the Wilderness during the three and a half years between The Rapture and the start of the Millennium.

The Woman of Revelation 12 is Israel, and verses 6 and 14 refer to her hiding in the Wilderness in a place prepared by God.

Matthew 14 also records Jesus warning to flee to the Wilderness when you see The Abomination of Desolation.

What I have come to disagree with is the popular view that this hiding place is in the land anciently ruled by Edom but today part of Jordan, Biblically identified with Bozrah, though for some reason popularly identified with the distinct Petra.

Daniel 11:41 is taken as assurance that Edom, Moab and at least part of Ammon (all in modern Jordan) will escape The Antichrist.  But I've already shown that Prophecy was about Caesar Augustus, and refers to those lands being ruled by the Nabatean kingdom of Aretas.  And even if it does have a second fulfillment, this passage still doesn't directly connect itself to this doctrine, and that lack of control is not guaranteed to be permanent, Rome did eventually conquer the Nabatean Kingdom under Trajan, the same Caesar who conquered Babylon for Rome interestingly.

The main basis for placing their hiding place in Bozrah is Micah 2:12.

I will surely assemble, O Jacob, all of thee; I will surely gather the remnant of Israel; I will put them together as the sheep of Bozrah, as the flock in the midst of their fold: they shall make great noise by reason of the multitude of men.

Thing is Bozrah is also a Hebrew term that means Sheepfold, and in context it looks like that is what's being said here, not a place name.  There are no near by references to Edom or other Edomite place names to verify this being the Edomite city.  And to further complicate things Jeremiah 48:24 refers to a Bozrah in Moab.

Amos 1:12 and Isaiah 34 refers to Bozrah specifically and Edom as a whole as being subject to God's Wrath during the Day of Warth.  Now I think that is arguably about Eschatological Edom being Rome/The West, but I think the geographical lands of Ancient Edom could play a role in that, Edom returning to their roots in a sense, not unlike Mystery Babylon returning to Shinar in Zechariah 5.

The final passage cited to prove this theory is Isaiah 63 where Jesus, described similarly to how he is in Revelation 19, is coming from Edom and Bozrah.  This passage also doesn't directly connect itself to the Wilderness hiding place doctrine but I think it's more likely to be relevant then Daniel.

It could be Jesus is traveling through Edom/Bozrah and it's neither the starting or ending point.  However it certainly is not the ending point, so this theory is dependent on saying he goes where Israel is hiding first and then marches to Armageddon.

I however think based on Genesis 28:17 that when Revelation 19:11 says Heaven Opened, that opening is in Beth-El.  Destroying The Armies of The Beast is the first thing Jesus will do, then he'll go to Israel to lead them back to Jerusalem.

So I think the reference to Edom and Bozrah in Isaiah 63 is the same as in Isaiah 34 and other Prophecies about Edom's final Judgment, like Obadiah, of Ezekiel 35-36.

So where do I think Israel will be protected?

I have argued before for seeing the Day of Yahuah as being a typological repeat of much of the history of The Exodus.  In that context I think perhaps this will be the same place they wandered in The Wilderness for 40 years in the days of Moses.  In fact I think the reference to her being fed there in 12:6 possibly alludes to a return of the Manna miracle.  Also Exodus 19:4 uses Eagles' Wings terminology, as does Isaiah 40:31.

We do also see a pattern throughout The Bible of individuals returning to this same location.  David spent some time in Paran which is also a place Israel spent some of the 40 year wandering.  Elijah spent some time at Mt Sinai.  We're never told where Jesus 40 days in the Wilderness was.  Paul in Galatians 1:17 says he was in Arabia for some of the time between his conversion and the beginning of his ministry.  Paul places Sinai in Arabia in Galatians 4:24-25.

That of course leads to debates about where those locations are.

I believe Mt Sinai is in Midian, possibly Jabal El Lawz, a view first popularized in The West by Ron Wyatt but later verified by the more reliable and trustworthy Bob Cornuke.

I've expressed in the past a willingness to believe certain Muslim claims that most modern Western Christians are adverse to.  Doesn't change my complete rejection of the Theology, Christolgoy and Soterology of Islam, or that Muhammad is not eligible to be a Biblical Prophet.  These issues come up in any post I give the Ishmael label to.

The Mt Sinai debate ties into that.  If Sinai is in what we today call the Sinai Peninsula then the Desert of Paran can't be in Arabia either, since Paran is also one of the locations mentioned during the 40 year wandering.

We're used to thinking of the total geography of the 40 year wandering as pretty small because The West since the time of Constantine has been forced to limit it to the Sinai Peninsula.  But once you place Mt Sinai in Arabia, then things can open up.

I want to point out that the Islamic view of Paran is not that it's just Mecca, they view the Wilderness of Paran as the entire Hijaz, that's pretty much all of Saudi Arabia that borders the Red Sea.  But there is also a more specific Mt Paran.

Eusebius and Jerome were Pre-Islamic non Arab Christians who placed Paran in Arabia Desertia, which is the Roman name for Saudi Arabia basically, south of Nabatea (Jordan mostly) and north of Arabia Felix (Yemen).

There are Samaritan sources like some texts of their Pentateuch and their apocryphal Book of Moses that seem to agree with identifying Paran with al-Hijaz and linking Ishmael to Mecca.  However a claim that Abraham built the Kaaba remains incompatible with Genesis.

Immanuel Velikvosky when arguing for his view of the Amalekites (which I agree with, with some qualifiers) in Ages in Chaos saw identifying Paran with al-Hijaz as supporting his theory based on his use of Arab Historians.

I'm even willing to consider valid the identification of the Baca of Psalm 84:6 with Bakkah an ancient name for Mecca.  Though that is pretty difficult to prove.

In context it does sound like a Desert or Wilderness location, I'm even wondering now if Psalm 84 could be directly applicable to Israel's End Times wildness protection.

Psalm 84 being a Davdic Psalm is taken as meaning it's probably a location linked to a place David was during his exile.  Well 1 Samuel 25:1 says David went to Paran after Samuel died.

The usage of Psalm 82 by Islamic apologists remains wrong in that Baca is not the destination of this Pilgrimage.  They basically try to argue Zion just means Sacred Land and thus can mean the Kaaba.  Zion only came to mean that after David placed his Tabernacle on Mt Zion, this being a Daivdic Psalm shows David's Zion is what he meant.  While he was in Paran he longed to return to Zion.

If you take the size of New Jerusalem in Revelation 21-22, and place it's center at Jerusalem or Beth-El, it's total land would include Mecca and Medina, and one or two of it's southern gates would be just south of them in Arabia.  So you could have people pilgrimage through those gates and past Mecca towards Zion.

So basically I think Arabia, not Jordan is where Israel will be protected during the last 1260 days.

Or maybe this and the Petra view don't conflict, since another suggested location for Mt Sinai is Jabel al-Madhbah near Petra.  Petra isn't named as such in the Bible being a Greek name and the city as we know it from the Greco-Roman period.  It was the Nabatean capital making it actually Ishmaelite territory just outside of Edom.   But again during the NT era the Nabateans ruled Edom, Moab and much of Amon.  But being connected to Ishmael's oldest son makes it logical to be near Paran.

It is named in The Bible as Cela/Sela/Selah, often translated Rock. Possibly first being given that name in 1 Samuel 23:25-28.  And having being given another name in 2 Kings 14:7.  It's refereed to in Obadiah 3 and Jeremiah 49:16.  Showing at times Edom did have it.  But it's linked to Kedar in Isaiah 42:11.  And it identified as being in The Wilderness in Isaiah 16:1.

It is used of the Rock Moses smote the second time, when smiting it wasn't what he was supposed to do, in Numbers 20, and mentioned in Psalm 78:16.  And it's used in Number 24:21 about the Kenites, the clan of the Father in-law of Moses.  And in Deuteronomy 32:13.  It's also possibly being mentioned in Judges 1:36.

Isaiah 17, past or future?

I've been on the Isaiah 17 is about modern Syria's political turmoil bandwagon since before it was a Bandwagon, as far back as at least 2004 saying it on IMDB message boards.  I was with it before it was popular.

But I've read an article that makes important points arguing that it is already fulfilled.  The people behind this article might be Preterist in general which I would disagree with, I'm not very familiar with the site.

What's important is how the "it can't be already fulfilled" arguments are strongly linked to a Translation error that has it's origin in the Septuagint.  Because I've argued that the Septuagint is a problem before.  [And now I would argue Aion doesn't mean forever either.]

I certainly agree that Damascus won't cease to be a City "forever" since Ezekiel 47&48 clearly has Damascus existing in the New Heaven and New Earth.  Babylon is the only City permanently destroyed forever, and Edom the only entire nation.

And what is pointed out here about the "Day of the LORD" terminology can be good for weakening the flawed logic of Post-Tirbbers and Pre-Wrathers and others who want to garble the chronology of Revelation.  And those who insist that day must be a literal 24 Hour day.

That Isaiah 13 is in the future is something I will not be shaken on however.

What I don't get is this article not addressing how the end of the Chapter describes a FAILED invasion of Israel by the nations, not the Northern Kingdom's fall.

Indeed the second half of the Chapter has everything sounding rather Millennial to me.  I've talked before about how I don't view the Millennium as a Utopia.  Also my view that there is more time between the end of the Millennium and the Gog and Magog invasion then most people assume.

Zephaniah says The Day of The LORD's Wrath is The Day of The Trumpet

Zephaniah 1:14-18

The great day of the LORD is near, it is near, and hasteth greatly, even the voice of the day of the LORD: the mighty man shall cry there bitterly.  That day is a day of wrath, a day of trouble and distress, a day of wasteness and desolation, a day of darkness and gloominess, a day of clouds and thick darkness, a day of the trumpet and alarm against the fenced cities, and against the high towers.

 And I will bring distress upon men, that they shall walk like blind men, because they have sinned against the LORD: and their blood shall be poured out as dust, and their flesh as the dung.  Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them in the day of the LORD'S wrath; but the whole land shall be devoured by the fire of his jealousy: for he shall make even a speedy riddance of all them that dwell in the land.

The word translated "alarm" in verse 16 is Teruah, the same word used to define the First of Tishri in Leviticus 23.  The Feast of Trumpets.

We are not Appointed to Wrath

1 Thessalonians 5:9.

"For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ"

It may surprise many people that I didn't even cover this in my main post against Post-Trib. The real difference between Post-Trib and the other major views is how we view the nature of The Church and Israel, and how that overlaps with how we view the sequence of The Resurrection.  But this distinction about Wrath is often cited as a favorite Proof Text on the issue.

To me the Dispensational view of this verse is fairly well backed by Mid-SeventiethWeek arguments.  And the two Pre- views weaken the usefulness of this by misunderstanding just how much of Revelation is the Wrath of God.

By viewing when we're taken out as Between the Trumpets and Bowls, and using parallels between the 7th Trumpet and Revelation 14 to classic Rapture passages to back that up.  The argument that this verse reveals something about the Timing of The Rapture makes sense.  But I can't see a Post-Tribber being impressed by the way Pre-Wrathers presents their chronology, and certainly not by Pre-Tribbers who don't place the Rapture in Revelation at all.

Thing is however, I cannot in all honestly consider the Post-Trib answers to this verse (of which there are two I can think of) completely invalid.

1. It doesn't mean we're not on Earth during the Pouring out of Wrath, but simply that we're protected from the Wrath.

Indeed the first Bowl specifically says it only affects those who take the Mark.  But no such qualifier exists with the other Bowls, and I can't see believers being unaffected by them without explicit divine intervention that Revelation 16 doesn't mention for them.  I believe the First Bowl is directly linked to the mark to show it happens soon after The mark is introduced.

But my interpretation of that is hardly doctrinal proof against that possible Post-Trib view.

2. It's not eschatological at all, Wrath here simply means Hell or The Lake of Fire, God's eternal Anger against Sinners.

On the one hand, being in 1 Thessalonians 5 gives a context linked to The Rapture and End Times.

But on the other, some uses of the word Wrath in non eschatological contexts (even of the more Specific Wrath of God) do support that view.  Particularly John 3:36  "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.".  And they also point out the fuller context of the verse in 1 Thessalonians 5 "For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ".

So even though eschatology is in mind a little earlier.  That Post-Trib interpretation of that verse is doctrinally solid.

So those are the only two options I can think of they have.  Unless they break the traditional definition of Post-Trib in some way.

There are actually two completely different Greek words translated Wrath in the New Testament.  Orge (Strong# 3709) and Thumos (Strong# 2372).  Unfortunately my study of them hasn't really revealed any compelling common denominators in how they're used to distinguish between them mystically, at least not one to help the Dispensational case against Post-Trib.  Both are used in Revelation, and both are used with "of God".

Orge is the one used in both 1 Thessalonians 5:9 (every occurrence of Wrath in Thessalonians actually) and John 3:36.  As well as Romans 2:5's reference to the "Day of Wrath".

In Revelation.

 Thumos is the one used every-time you see Wrath in chapter 14-16:1, both when referring to God's Wrath and the "Wrath of her Whoredom" referring to the Whore of Babylon, which also occurs in 18:3.  It's also Thumos used of The Devil's Wrath in 12:12

Revelation 16:19 used both for the "fierceness of his wrath" against Babylon.

But in both Revelation 6 and 11, in the wake of both the Sixth Seal and Seventh Trumpet, Ogre is the word for Wrath used.

I'm afraid I reluctantly (since it doesn't suit my agenda) have to admit we can't solidly build Prophetic doctrine on the references to Wrath.

Now that the "Day of the LORD" refers specifically to the Second Half of Daniel's 70th Week is probably still a more solid argument.  And it's possible link to the "Day of Wrath", which would be a more solid chronological reference to Wrath.

Zephaniah 1:15-18 refers to "the day of the LORD'S wrath".  And 1 Thessalonian 5 also earlier refers to the Day of The Lord.    Both of the only times the NT speaks of a "Day of Wrath" in Romans 2:5 and Revelation 6:17 the Greek word is Ogre.

The Pre-Wrath camp might feel it backs up their view, the Sixth Seal being the only time Revelation mention the Day of Wrath.  But the fact remains that you can't build doctrine on what's said by fallible humans.  Interestingly the book of Job which I point to to make that point also has two references to the "Day of Wrath", in 20:28 and 21:30.  When Joel discuses the Sixth Seal event in 2:28-32 he clearly says this is BEFORE the "Day of he LORD'", not during it or when it starts, but before.

Mid-Trib and Pre-Wrath

This post won't be an in depth study.  I've already explained all the core reasons I'm Mid-Trib, and not any other Position.  And even touched a little on Futurism over Preterism, and Premillennial over Amillennial.

So future posts I make on The Rapture will mostly be minor anecdotes, responses to recent things said by people, which will direct reading to earlier for more details.  My future in depth studies posted here will be on other Eschatological issues, which may or may not also touch on The Rapture.

What I want to say briefly today is about Mid-Trib and Pre-Wrath.  To me the terms should be synonymous, because to me Wrath is the Second half of the 70th Week.  And the Seven Bowls of God's Wrath.  Nothing more or less.

But instead the Pre-Wrath position defines itself as being predicated on a garbling of the chronology of Revelation.  My Sixth Seal post primarily dismantles their logic, the foundation of which is a flawed understanding of how the Sixth Seal relates to Matthew 24.  And my Seventh Trumpet study and the very first post I made here shows how Revelation 9 renders the Pre-Wrath position impossible.

In a certain sense though Pre-Wrathers remains the most similar to me.  They don't deny the Uniqueness of The Church like Post-Trib does.  But don't insist we'll never see The Antichrist like Pre-Trib does.  Since fellow Mid-Trib teachers are rare now, I spend a lot of time listening to Pre-Wrath teachers like Chris White.

That's all I felt like saying today.  If you haven't read my earlier studies yet please do so.  And don't be afraid to point out to me any grammatical mistakes so I correct them.  And feel free to leave comments disagreeing with me, I want an open robust debate.

Isaiah 61 and Luke 4, The concept of Two Advents.

Luke 4: 17-21

And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord," And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.  And he began to say unto them, "This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears."

This is Quoting Isaiah 61:1-2

"The spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;" Jesus stopped on a comma here, which is why the people were finding it odd before he even made his declaration of it's being fulfilled.  He quoted only what was fulfilled that Day. The rest is for the Future yet still.

Now I don't know how much I qualify as a Dispensationalist. I certainly don't agree entirely with Darby. And the idea of different Dispensations of Biblical history exists even in Preterism.

It annoys me that even some Futurists/Premillennials tell me I'm torturing the text where I need leaps forward in Prophecy for certain Antichrist passages, like Daniel 11 or Daniel 9.

The fact of The Messiah having two advents was not obvious to The Jews, and still isn't. I could point to Micah 5, or Zachariah 9-11 and they just ignore the point.

But of course that wouldn't be enough for a Preterist or Amillennial, who sees even the prophecies of the Second Advent done within only a generation of The First.

So this demonstration of how Jesus Himself dealt with The Prophets I find vitally important.

The Church Age (and any period roughly analogous to it) isn't the only Gap the New Testament reveals in Old Testament Prophecy however. The Millennium is also one, looking at how Daniel 12 and even John 5:28-29 seem to see the Resurrection of the Saved and Unsaved as seemingly at the same time. But Revelation 20 clarifies there is a Thousand years between them. But many people with weird views on The Millennium insist it's Revelation's more detailed accounts that shouldn't be taken at face value. Never mind what the word Revelation means.

The Sixth Seal

Revelation 6:12-17

And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.  And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

First of all, I want to explain that I don't believe most of the other Prophecies people see as the same as the Sixth Seal actually are.

People like to talk about a frequent Prophetic pattern of "Signs in the sun, moon and stars", which may or may not also feature an Earthquake. But they're all actually pretty specific on those signs, and their not all the same. And the Sixth Seal is NOT the only time in Revelation there are signs involving the sun, moon and stars, and certainly not the only Earthquake.

Only two other Bible passages refer to the Moon becoming like Blood. Joel 2:31, and Acts 2 where Peter Quotes that part of Joel. I'll get to the significance of that latter.

Isaiah 13:10 says that neither the sun, moon or stars will give their light. People act like this is effectively the same, but not only are they not, they're mutually exclusive. If the Moon has a visible color it is giving light. Joel has two verses interestingly that do describe that kind of event, one in a context I believe places it between the Sixth and Seventh Trumpets. The others in Joel chapter 3 along with Isaiah 13 I think refers to the Fifth Bowl of God's Wrath, when the Kingdom of The Beast is darkened.

Matthew 24 and Mark 13's account of The Rapture speak also of both the Sun and Moon not giving light (no Blood Moon). Here stars also fall, but it's still distinct.  The event is also linked to a Trumpet, not to a Seal.  The Sixth Seal doesn't mention lightening either.

These aren't referring to Lunar and Solar Eclipses, since they're happening simultaneously. Dr. Robert Thieme tells us of the eruption on August 27th 1883, there were Earthquakes and tidal waves. And also that because of the volcanic ash the sun was blotted out and the moon looked red.

I love how Pre-Wraht people tend to argue against the idea of a Lunar Eclipse being described here.  but will also use the concept of what a Lunar Eclipse is to justify saying that the Moon turning like Blood can be the same as it being Darkened.

Even if it is valid to see the Cosmic Signs aspect of the Olivtie Discourse as having some connection to the Sixth Seal.  It's clearly to me only that the Sixth Seal begins those kinds of signs.  Pre-Wrath people want to dogmatically build doctrine on placing The Rapture in the Sixth Seal based on it having a small subsets of the Rapture related signs, signs that are not in Paul's Rapture accounts at all.  The far more universal defining features (Trumpet, Voices in Heaven, Son of Man coming on a Cloud, Resurrection of The Death, Harvest imagery)  Are not in the Sixth Seal, their Revelation parallels are in chapters 11-14.

I believe firmly that Joel 2:28-32 and the Sixth Seal are the same.

And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit. 
And I will show wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke.  And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call.

Now no Earthquake is mentioned in Joel. But Peter in quoting this in reference to his time clearly sees the basis for the Sun being Darkened in the Darkness that happened when Jesus was on The Cross, and there was an Earthquake there. Clearly this event in Peter's day was only a lesser near fulfillment. Revelation 6 sees a worldwide Earthquake, that rearranges Terrestrial geography like something from The Silmarillion or the Akallabêth.

Remember that the Chapter divisions are not part of the original text. So Revelation commentaries, and weeks long Bible Studies always separate the Sixth Seal from Revelation 7 and the sealing of the 144,000. But when we remember to look at this in the Context of Joel and Acts, it seems to me that this is in fact still the same event, even if some time has passed.

The concept of believers being Sealed is discussed outside Revelation in Paule's Epistles. In 2 Corinthians 1:22 and Ephesians 1:13 and 4:30. All of them sound to me like their about conditions unique to The Church, that don't apply to Pre or Post Church Age believers. So I reject allegorizeing the 144,000, I believe their specific people living at a specific time, and that specific number, or each of the 12 Tribes. Not simply representing the entire Church. But I do believe their part of The Church. They're also described in chapter 14 in terms that sound a lot like The Bride of Christ to me.

To the Pre-Tribulation Rapture view this must be after The Church age has ended. To the Pre-Wrath view this is right where it ends. But I see it far more likely that this is still during the Church Age, but near it's end. A sort of Culmination or Climax. One Last Great Outpouring of The Holy Spirit, greater even then the original at the Pentecost of 30 A.D. (Maybe this will also be linked to the Passover-Pentacost season). So the Church Age can end like how it started. I reject the common Baptist view that the Spiritual Gifts were only until the Canon was complete, but I'm not strictly a Pentecostal since my Soterolgoy is Baptist. And I'm certainly not Charismatic.

Some have decided to claim all of the 144,000 will be male, because their described as men. Greek and Hebrew did NOT use any word for both of the meanings we use "man" for. The 144,000 are Anthropos, which means Man as in Mankind, the Human Race. Typically the Greek stand in for Adam, but also for Enos. So not only can they include women, but Joel saying "your sons and your daughters shall prophesy" tells us that clearly many (maybe exactly half) will be. I would not rule out Transgender and Intersex individuals either.

So like the first outpouring this finale one will be initially upon The House of Israel. 12,000 of each of the 12 Tribes.

Because it follows the Fifth Seal, which shows the Martyrs of all persecutions of The Church, who we see again in chapter 7, but in the context of the finale great persecution. I believe this happens after we've already entered the major World Wide persecution of Jesus warned us of in Matthew 24:9-14. So the usage of the term "Great Tribulation" tells us nothing about timing, as I have another study on.

There will be a falling away as Paul warns in 2 Thessalonians 2 when this happens, because in The West we'll be unprepared for Persecution. Some of those who recant and leave may be people who weren't really saved but just nominal Christians, in the Church only because they were raised in it, or some other convenient reason. But I don't believe it's impossible for truly Saved people to fall away. They could lose their inheritance because of this but not their Salvation. I recommend Chuck Missler's explanation of Hebrews 6.

But regardless of those problems, The Church has also historically grown under persecution. So while at first we react badly, in time I believe we will grow from it. So I think possibly most or even all of these 144,000 will be individuals Saved after this persecution started. So the witness of those Martyrs faithful unto death won't be in vain.

I do not believe the Multitude is already Raptured/Resurrected in Chapter 7. That their now wearing White Ropes isn't enough. I'd expect certain more specific poetic imagery if that was the case. The kind of terminology that is used in the 144,000 when they reappear in Chapter 14, of being the First Fruits and Redeemed out of The Earth. Perry Stone says the Bema Seat Judgement must have already happened here. How come no one has crowns then Perry? Their all martyrs so they should all have at least a Crown of Life. The Bema Judgment happens after the sounding of the Seventh Trumpet.

The account of The Sixth Seal is the only time the word "Wrath" occurs before the sounding of the Seventh Trumpet. And the problem is you can't build Doctrine on dialogue uttered by fallible human beings who aren't anointed Prophets of God.

That hermeneutic is of course lost on many people, there are teachers out there building doctrine on the things Jobs' idiot friends said, or justifying referring to Joseph as Jesus's father because Mary did in Luke 2 when Jesus was 12. The Bible is an infallible Book, but it still records humans saying very wrong things.

The Sixth Seal is one of the more recognizable parts of Revelation. My first memory as a small child of hearing anything from Revelation quoted is when watching the movie Ghost Busters, where Ray (Dan Aykroyd) recites it (getting the chapter it's in wrong). The world I believe will recognize the Sixth Seal when it happens. but they may not exactly get what it means right, and many Bible Prophecy teachers who are Pre-Trib or Pre-Wrath, or even Post-Trib are only helping to get people confused on what it means.

Joel 2:31 says this is BEFORE the Day of The LORD, not during it, or on it, or right when it starts, Before.

It's after the Seventh Trumpet is sounded we first see voice sin heaven declaring that God's Wrath is at hand. And then again in Chapter 14.

Only the Seven Bowls are defined as being God's Wrath. Trumpets are Biblically, among other things, warnings. The sounding of Trumpets was the warning before the fall of Jericho. The judgments from the Trumpets are merely lesser warning shots. The Seven Bowls dwarf them.

Joel 2:1-16 I believe describe the last two Trumpets, and very much back up my viewing the Seventh as The Rapture, and hence my Mid-Tribulation view. We will NOT go through God's Wrath.

I believe Revelation shows us how to fit all other Prophecy together, so that Joel might seem to contradict Revelation's order isn't an issue. Joel was given a vitally important glimpse but not the whole picture. Joel 2:23 talks of the former rain and the latter rain. These I believe are the two great outpouring of The Holy Spirit at the beginning and culmination of The Church Age. I think it is also this that prompts Joels' vision to look back before what was just described. But then Joel 3 returns to the Day of Wrath.

To add additional support to the idea that the Cosmic and Terrestrial disturbances when Jesus was on the Cross were a type of those that occur at the Sixth Seal, I'd point to Joshua 10.

In verses 12 and 13 the Sun and Moon aren't darkened or turned to a different color.  But usual behavior with them occurs.  But the Key is verse 17-18.  "But these five kings fled, and hid themselves in a cave at Makkedah.And Joshua said, Roll great stones upon the mouth of the cave, and set men by it for to keep them: "  Sounds like a parallel to "And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us".

But latter, those Five Kings are hung on trees in verse 26.  Not Strangled with a rope like you might assume, Biblical execution requires Bloodshed as shown by Genesis 9.  No the logical conclusion is they were Crucified.  And verse 27 "And it came to pass at the time of the going down of the sun, that Joshua commanded, and they took them down off the trees, and cast them into the cave wherein they had been hid, and laid great stones in the cave's mouth, which remain until this very day."

In Esther, Haman was hanged (also really Crucifixion, the Persians are the ones usually credited with inventing it) on the 17th of Nisan, and his sons on the 14th of Adar.  Jesus was made Sin for us. Even though he was completely without Sin, God poured out his Wrath upon him as if he where just as Evil as Haman or Hitler.

The term "Great Tribulation"

On The Rapture I've mostly settled into a Mid-Trib position. But your typical Mid-Trib believer says that the "Great Tribulation" refers only to the second half of the 70th Week (and so from their POV their Pre-Trib) and is basically synonymous with The Wrath/Day of The Lord.  I'm different however, I view the term "Great Tribulation" as not such a specific term at all.

The Pre-Wrath position also believes both "Great Tribulation" and "Wrath" are only the last 3 and half years. But they divide it up, with the Rapture being were the split is.

Chris White, who's Pre-Wrath, makes an amusing mistake, he says the term "Great Tribulation" occurs only twice in The Bible, in Matthew 24, and Revelation 7. There is in fact another usage of the term I shall discus.

The word "Tribulation" alone occurs a lot, and is a term that most serious students of The Bible realize is synonymous with persecution, and is not at all limited only to a specific End Times time period. It is the term "Great Tribulation" that we tend to insist on making more specific, to some it refers to the entire 70th week, to some only the first half. And as I pointed out above some view it variantly as the second half or part of it. Some Pre-Tribbers would also say the entire 70th week is Tribulation but only the second half the "Great Tribulation".

The usage of the term that gets overlooked is in Revelation 2:22, where it's part of the message to the Church at Thyatira. "Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds."

Typically people insist this should still be viewed as strictly end times because of the typological applications that clearly make Thyatira characteristic of The Catholic Church (I actually see Pergomos as equally or more Catholic in character), and perhaps also other Paganized "Christian" religions, like the Orhtodox, or Anglicans, or Mormons, ect. And I see some validity to those typological views, but it still must also apply to the original immediate context, or else the type tells us nothing. I think this was first fulfilled by the Christian persecutions that broke out in Asia Minor early in the reign of Hadrian.

And even looking at the type, it doesn't fit the way many Protestants want to see the Catholic Church's role in the Tribulation period. If it applies to the Vatican's End Times role then they will be victims of The Beast's persecution as much as any other Christians. Of course Revelation 17 does say the Beast will turn on Mystery Babylon. I don't view Mystery Babylon as the Catholic Church alone however, but as all Pagan religion.

One could say this has happened to the Catholic Church via Henry VIII's persecutions, or the massive Christian Persecution during the French Revolution, which was mostly against Catholics because the Protestant Reformation never made much ground in France. But those Atheists and Deists certainly hated other Christian sects just as much.

The point is, when we take this verse seriously the term "Great Tribulation" is no longer just one time period.

Some may point out that "the" is in the Greek text in Matthew 24 and Revelation 7 but not Revelation 3.  But Greek used it's definite article far more loosely then English.  Including using it before personal names.  As a KJV only believer in principle I trust they had good reasons grammatically to leave it out of the English Translation.

Matthew 24:21 is the main basis for insisting that the term applies specifically to the second half "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be." the timing of this verse being what's happening in the wake of the Abomination of Desolation.

First off, I feel the wording can indeed work as saying we were already in Great Tribulation, but now it's escalating to it's most severe phase. Indeed Jesus had clearly already described a massive worldwide persecution before he reached the Abomination of Desolation.  In fact to me the wording, "such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time", absolutely implies there was "Great Tribulation" before.  But this shall be even greater.

The typical Pre-Wrath position seems to be that he describes the persecution then looks back to describe how it began. But it's funny because there are other places were their main objection to other views is their not interpreting the Olivte chronologically. I make no absolute claim that the Olivte Discourse is strictly chronological, as I've explained elsewhere Revelation is the key to how to unlock the Chronology of other Bible passages that summarize the End Times.

Revelation 7:14 "And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes   , and made them white in the blood of the Lamb."

The Pre-Wrath position is that Matthew 24 tells us when "Great Tribulation" is, so we must be in the second half of the 70th week already here. To me it's absurd to think Revelation has reached the midway point of the 70th week any sooner then the 7th Trumpet in Revelation 11. I've explained why elsewhere.

I agree that this Multitude is the same as we see in The Fifth Seal.  And I agree the Fifth Seal's opening correlates to the specific End Times persecution Jesus warned of in Matthew 24.  But the multitude isn't limited to those, it's clearly defined as all the Martyrs of The Church Age starting with Stephen.  They all came out of "Great Tribulation".

Western Christians tend to view persecution of the Church as limited to specific eras of Church History.  But there have always been believers being persecuted, either by non Christians or fellow professing Christians.  Even today, most of the Body of Christ is under the threat of death, in China, North Korea and various Islamic and other third world countries.

"Great Tribulation" is a term describing severe persecution. I view there as being two great  End Times persecutions coming.

1. A persecution of The Church during the first half, which will have a corresponding "Falling away" Paul describes in 2 Thessalonians 2, and clearly placed before the unveiling of the Man of Sin.

2. A massive attempted Genocide of Israel, that begins as soon as the Abomination of Desolation happens which is why Jesus warned Israel to flee immediately (see my Olivite Discourse study). Revelation 12 likewise describes God as having a hiding place for her in the wilderness. Isaiah 63 hints at that place being in Edom. Petra is a popular theory.

Now the persecution of Israel we know for certain has The Beast and The False Prophet (The Antichrist) as the force behind it. The Church's persecution earlier may or may not be also, it isn't clear. The original Antichrist heresy may be what we're being persecuted for not accepting or maybe not. I've explained in other threads why I feel there may be decoy Antichrists during the first half of the 70th week.

But that's besides the point, the point is there will be a major worldwide persecution of Christians BEFORE the Abomination of Desolation happens. The Pre-Wrath people think their the ones most prepared for the coming persecution, but the ones I've studied at least (like Chris White) are clear that it doesn't happen till after the unveiling of the Man of Sin, and that the first half of the 70th week will be a seemingly good time for all Judeo-Christians. So to me their unprepared just as much as people thinking we'll be taken out first, because they think they'll be safe so long the Abomination of Desolation hasn't happened yet.

But it can also be valid to view this escalated "Great Tribulation" of Matthew 24 as simply a very brief time period between the Abomination of Desolation and His Coming.  It may seem like a lot happens in Matthew's account between those, but it's all described pretty broadly, and sometimes a lot can happen in very little time.  To me this could all fit easily into the three and a half days the Two Witnesses are lying dead in the streets of Jerusalem.

So that's why to me "Great Tribulation" characterizes the entire 70th week in a sense but also the entire Church Age. But there is no single individual "The Great Tribulation", that three word phrase is never in The Bible.

Based on Matthew 24:29, The Great Tribulation of The Church by definition ends at The Parusia.  No matter when The Parusia happens.

Post-Tribbers love to keep citing "immediately after the tribulation of those days" as if it proves their model, because they as much as Pre-Tribbers are in the habit of viewing "tribulation" and the 70th Week as synonymous.  But in fact that isn't Biblical.  The verse simply tells as the a tribulations has ended when the Rapture happens, alone it tells us nothing of the Rapture's timing.