Maria Zeee with David Sorensen - Israels Agenda for World Domination

Argentinian president to build third temple so Messiah can rule the world

TIME OF 3RD TEMPLE IS HERE 2-9-24@6-00PM (SHARED 2-10-24)

Τhe Chronology Of The Two Witnesses In Revelation 11

By John A. McLean

[John A. McLean is President, Manthano Christian College, Westland, Michigan.]

Αmong dispensational expositors the chronological and sequential timing of the two witnesses in Revelation 11 has been one of the most puzzling and debated issues in the book. Although much has been written about the identity of the two witnesses, relatively little has been written about when they will appear. Some writers believe the two witnesses will minister in the first half of the Tribulation,[1] and others believe the witnesses will be in the second half.[2] The purpose of this article is to evaluate whether the two witnesses will minister during the first half of Daniel’s seventieth week (the Tribulation)[3] or the second half. Several arguments for the first half are presented here, and in each case a rejoinder is given in support of the view that the two witnesses will appear in the second half.

The Use Of Time Indicators

Whitcomb comments, “There seems to be an intentional distinction between the time of the Gentile occupation of the Temple’s outer court and the city, and the time of the two witnesses, by means of the different time-units used: 42 months for the Gentile domination and 1,260 days for the two witnesses. If the same time period is intended for both groups, why is not the 42-month time-block sufficient to cover both?”[4]

However, the Bible does not distinguish by means of names the time period of three and a half years in the Tribulation. If Whitcomb’s interpretive principle were applied to Revelation 11-12, it would lead to an obvious misunderstanding of the text. The woman, Israel, will be protected by God from the dragon for 1,260 days (12:6). This is exactly the same phrase as in 11:3 regarding the time of the two witnesses. The woman will be “nourished for a time and times and half a time from the presence of the serpent” (12:14), and the serpent/dragon is given authority to act for forty-two months (13:5). Are these phrases referring to three different time periods? No, because there is no intentional distinction between the phrases; they are used interchangeably. Actually four phrases are used in Scripture for this same time period: (a) “time, times, and half a time” (Dan. 7:25; 12:7; Rev. 12:14); (b) half a week (Dan. 9:27); (c) forty-two months (Rev. 11:2; 13:5); and (d) 1,260 days (Rev. 11:3; 12:6). These terms should be understood as synonymous, all referring to the same time period, namely, the second half of the Tribulation.

As Thiessen writes, “If a ‘week’ is seven years, and this seventieth week is the future Tribulation, then the period is one of seven years’ duration. This agrees with the other time references to this period. Dan. 9:27 represents the last week as divided into two equal parts. The latter half, sometimes called the ‘great’ tribulation, is referred to elsewhere as a time, times, and a half a time (Dan. 7:25; 12:7; Rev. 12:14), meaning three and a half years. It is also referred to as forty-two months (Rev. 11:2; 13:5), and as 1,260 days (Rev. 11:3; 12:6; cf. Dan. 12:11, 12).”[5] Thus it seems inappropriate to say one half of the Tribulation is designated by one phrase and the other by a different phrase, thus placing the two witnesses, as Whitcomb does, in the first half of the Tribulation.

The Witnesses And Malachi 4:5-6

Newell says that the two witnesses are the fulfillment of Malachi 4:5-6, which predicts the coming of Elijah “before the great and terrible day of the Lord.” Newell says the witnesses will call on people to repent during the first half of the Tribulation.[6]

To say that the two witnesses fulfill the ministry of Elijah as predicted in Malachi is an assumption, however, since Revelation 11 says nothing about this. The ministry of Elijah could have been fulfilled by John the Baptist (Matt. 11:14) or will be fulfilled in another way in or even before the Tribulation. The Day of the Lord is also broader than just the last half of the Tribulation so that if Elijah were to come before the Day of the Lord, he may have to appear before or at least at the beginning of the first half. Though many expositors believe one of the two witnesses is Elijah, the Bible does not identify either witness.[7] Great numbers of people will become saints during both halves of the Tribulation (Rev. 6:9-11; 7:9-17). Preaching of the gospel will be prolific throughout the Tribulation.[8]

The Witnesses And The 144,000

Hoyt argues, “The importance of their testimony cannot be overestimated (Rev. 11:4). . . . By their testimony, it is my opinion, they bring about the conversion of the 144,000 who will become witnesses during the final half of the tribulation period.”[9]

However, the Bible does not state that the two witnesses will evangelize the 144,000 (Rev. 7:1-8).[10] The 144,000 will be sealed by God about the midpoint of the Tribulation, that is, between the sixth and seventh seals.[11] They will be sealed for their protection before the execution of the seventh seal, which contains the seven trumpets (7:1-3). The sealing of the 144,000 will protect them from the trumpet judgments, including the demonic assault from the abyss (9:4-5). Obviously the sealing of the 144,000 will take place before Revelation 9 as the first four trumpets must be executed before the Beast arises out of the abyss. (The chapters in Revelation flow in a chronological sequence.)[12] It is difficult to understand how the two witnesses could evangelize the 144,000, if the latter are being martyred by the beast from the abyss. It is better to see the 144,000 and the two witnesses as distinct but complementary in their ministries during the second half.

Nothing in Revelation 11 suggests that the two witnesses evangelize anyone. As prophets (vv. 3, 6), they, like witnesses required by the Mosaic Law (Deut. 17:6), offer testimony of coming judgment. Even if the two witnesses are evangelists, why could they not have evangelized the great multitude of martyrs who will come out of the second half, which is the Great Tribulation (Rev. 7:9-12)?

The Witnesses And Famines In The First Half

Stevens observes that the two witnesses will have power to shut up the sky so that rain will not fall during the days of their prophesying, which will result in a drought in Israel (Rev. 11:6).[13] The argument is that this relates directly to the third and fourth seals of Revelation 6:5-8, which suggests that a drought will cause a shortage of food.

Famine will occur in several geographical regions throughout the seven years of the Tribulation. The third seal indicates that food staples will be sold at inflationary prices, which may be the result of war or famine (6:5-6). The fourth seal mentions famine in the context of war and pestilence rather than drought (6:7-8). Revelation does not indicate whether rain will or will not occur in the first half of the Tribulation. The covenant that Israel will make with “the prince who is to come” (the Antichrist) will bring peace and prosperity during the first half rather than judgment and troubles (Dan. 9:27).

Famines will also occur in the second half of the Tribulation (Rev. 18:8). Drought fits better in the context of the second half, which will be a time of judgment. The two witnesses will be able to turn “the waters . . . into blood” and “to strike the earth with every plague, as often as they desire” (11:5-6). These acts of judgment are more characteristic of second-half events. The only “rain” that will fall from heaven during the second half will be various judgments of hail, fire, blood, and stars (8:13; 16:1-21).

The Beast And The Witnesses

Knowles comments, “The two witnesses are represented as ‘confirming the covenant’ for half of the week through their activity of preaching. . . . The appearance of Antichrist in the middle of the week is the explanation for the cessation of the sacrifice and the oblation which the nations have been making to God. The Antichrist also causes the two witnesses to be put to death and introduces the abomination of desolation, which consists of his making war on the saints for the last three and a half weeks.”[14]

Hitchcock agrees. “The two witnesses will witness and [then] be martyred when the temple is desecrated. . . . [They] will eventually be overcome and killed by the beast, but their bodies will be resurrected after three and a half days (Rev. 11:7-11). The desecration of the temple and the murder of the two witnesses form a unit and function as catalysts that bring the hand of God in judgment on His enemies (vv. 13-14).”[15] Also Ryrie believes that “the coming of the beast onto the scene in power [will] terminate their witness.”[16]

The rise of the Antichrist to power at the midpoint of the Tribulation does not, however, mean that he will kill the witnesses when he takes control of the temple mount. There may be a misunderstanding of the grammar of verse 7. The description of the beast out of the abyss incorporates an adjectival participle that is descriptive of his identity (“the beast that comes up out of the abyss”), not a circumstantial participle as a temporal indicator. The point is that the verse is not stating that when the beast will arise out of the abyss he will murder the witnesses, but rather when the two witnesses have completed their testimony, the beast, “the one who arises out of the abyss,” will murder them. The beast who begins his reign of terror and deception (Rev. 13) will make war against the two witnesses for three and a half years, ultimately conquer them, and martyr them at the close of their ministry. This time frame is at the end of the second half of the Tribulation and just before the second coming of Jesus Christ.

Thomas comments, “Τὸ ἀναβαῖνον ἐκ τῆς ἀβύσσου (To anabainon ek tēs abyssou, ‘Who ascends from the abyss’) tells the permanent cast of the beast’s character (cf. 17:8). The abyss is the haunt of demons (cf. Luke 8:31), so his demonic orientation is no surprise (Mounce). This passage gives no time frame for his ascent from the abyss (Lenski, Caird), but later discussion will suggest it coincides with his ascent from the sea in 13:1.”[17]

The beast will arise at the midpoint of the Tribulation (13:5), and then he will lead his demonic horde out of the abyss (9:1-2, 11). The demons will not be allowed to kill anyone for five months (9:4-6), but they will torment those who do not have the seal of God on their foreheads (vv. 5-10). On the other hand those who are sealed by God—which probably includes the 144,000 other saints, and the two witnesses—will be protected during this period.[18] Therefore the witnesses cannot be killed by the beast when he arises at the midpoint because of the five-month moratorium on death (9:6).

The two witnesses will be protected from the power of the beast (11:5-6). As Walvoord argues, “That the two witnesses pour out divine judgments upon the earth and need divine protection lest they be killed . . . implies that they are in the latter half of the seven years when awful persecution will afflict the people of God, as this protection would not be necessary in the first three and one-half years. The punishment and judgments the witnesses inflict on the world also seem to fit better in the great tribulation period.”[19]

The Antichrist And The Temple Mount

Whitcomb writes,

Putting the two witnesses into the last half of the Week compromises the totality of Antichrist’s dominion during that same period. How can he bring fire from heaven upon his enemies (through the False Prophet, Rev. 13:13) if the two witnesses are simultaneously bringing fire from heaven upon their enemies (Rev. 11:5)? We are clearly dealing with two different time periods: the first half of the Week with the overwhelming power of the two witnesses, and the last half of the Week with the overwhelming power of the Beast and the False Prophet. When the world asks the rhetorical question, “Who is able to make war with [the Beast]?” (Rev. 13:4), it seems obvious that no one can answer, “The two witnesses are able to make war with him,” for their 1,260 days of ministry will have ended, and they will be gone.[20]

However, the Antichrist will have dominion over the world but not in “totality” over all people. Great numbers of Tribulation saints will not accept the mark of the beast. Many will be martyred, but many will live to the end. The bowl judgments will afflict the Antichrist and his kingdom (Rev. 16), even though he will have control over the world. The two witnesses will not necessarily be making war against the beast or their enemies. Instead they will employ their powers in a defensive mode when someone tries to harm them (11:5). The fact that people will ask, “Who is able to wage war against the beast?” (13:4), does not mean that no one will make war with the beast. The beast will face opposition throughout the Tribulation for he will seek to supplant kings and kingdoms during the Tribulation.

During the ministry of the two witnesses the outer court of the temple will be trampled by the Gentiles for forty-two months (11:2), but the inner court of the temple mount will be protected by God (11:1). The Antichrist will be in control, but God will preserve the inner portion of the temple as a place for the two witnesses to minister and prophesy. As Walvoord reasons, “The act of measuring [in v. 1] seems to signify that the area belongs to God in some special way. It is an evaluation of His property. . . . Since the Gentiles are said to tread the holy city underfoot only forty-two months, this ill treatment better fits the latter half of the week. If the former half were mentioned, Jerusalem would be trodden underfoot for the entire seven-year period rather than only forty-two months.”[21]

Celebration Of The Death Of The Two Witnesses

Cohen argues that the celebration over the death of the witnesses cannot be reconciled with the events at the second coming of Jesus Christ. “At the end of the second 3 ½ year period the Beast’s followers are lamenting over Babylon and the vials, gathered for the great battle of Armageddon, and finally slain by Christ whose coming is surrounded with the powers of the heavens being shaken (Rev. 16-18; 19:11-21; Matt. 24:29-30). This picture does not harmonize well with the 3 ½ days of rejoicing and gift giving in which the earth dwellers participate following the murder of the witnesses (Rev. 11:10).”[22]

Daniel 12:7-13 states that a transitional period of thirty to seventy-five days will occur between the end of the Tribulation and the beginning of the millennium. The death of the witnesses could possibly take place in that transitional period. The Second Coming could occur then a few days after the celebration of the death of the witnesses. A transitional time is possible since there is no definitive statement in Daniel 9:27 that Jesus will return immediately at the close of the seventieth week.[23]

The Ascension Of The Two Witnesses

Newell argues that if the ascension of the two witnesses (Rev. 11:12) were to occur in the second half of the Tribulation, this would conflict with the second coming of Jesus Christ. It would mean that when they are ascending to heaven they will meet Christ in the clouds and return with Him to the earth.[24]

However, since, as noted above, there will be some transitional time between the end of Daniel’s seventieth week and the beginning of the millennial kingdom, there is sufficient time for the witnesses to be resurrected and ascend to heaven before Jesus Christ returns to the earth and defeats His enemies in the battle of Armageddon (Rev. 19). As the two witnesses are raised to heaven, their enemies on earth will observe them returning from heaven with the Lord Jesus to bring judgment (11:12). Thomas writes,

The progressive sequence of the seals, trumpets, and bowls does not rule out some measure of recapitulation in sections of intercalation, however. In particular, the interlude in 11:1-13 regarding the two witnesses, that in Revelation 12-14 between the sounding of the seventh trumpet (11:15) and the description of the seven bowls (chaps. 15-16), and that in Revelation 17-18 between the announcement of the seventh bowl (16:17) and the personal intervention of the Warrior-King (19:11-16) are partially recapitulatory.

The passage about the two witnesses (11:1-13) presumably gives another perspective on the same period covered by the first six trumpets that precede it in the sequence of visions. That observation presupposes that the six trumpets carry to the time of the end described in the seven last plagues that compose the seventh trumpet.[25]

The Judgment Of An Earthquake

Cohen suggests that the two witnesses will minister in the first half, since the judgment by an earthquake, which will follow their ministry (Rev. 11:13, 19), would have little significance or impact in comparison with cataclysmic earthquakes that will take place at the end of the Tribulation.[26] The earthquake in Revelation 11, which will result in the death of seven thousand people, must therefore occur in the first half of the Tribulation, if it is to have any significance.

The fact that there will be major judgments on the harlot of Babylon and the kingdom of the Antichrist (Rev. 17-18), however, does not nullify the significance of a judgment that will fall on Jerusalem (11:13). Earthquakes will take place throughout the Tribulation as a sign of God’s judgment (6:12; 8:5; 11:13, 19; 16:18). The Greek phrase in 11:13 translated “people” is literally “names of men” (ὀνόματα ἀνθρώπων). This may indicate that the seven thousand people who will die will be prominent people within the political and/or religious realm of the Antichrist. An earthquake in which seven thousand prominent people die would certainly be an attention-getter. The fact that there will be cataclysmic judgments in Babylon (16:18-19) does not negate the impact of a significant earthquake in Jerusalem. Both could take place just before the coming of Jesus Christ.

The Repentant Attitude Of The People

When seven thousand people in Jerusalem will die from an earthquake, the survivors will be terrified and give glory to God (11:13). Hodges argues that this does not harmonize with the unrepentant and hostile attitude that will prevail at the second coming of Christ (Rev. 19:11-19).[27]

Although most people will not repent under God’s judgment (16:11), a remnant will repent and accept the Messiah before His second coming (7:9; 14:6). These people will help populate the millennial kingdom. They will be saved and give glory to God (Zech. 12:10-14). Others in Jerusalem will be terrified because of the death of the seven thousand.[28] This terror may be heightened by recognition of the deaths of the prominent people.

To “give glory to God” is a technical phrase in Revelation for those who put faith in God for their salvation (4:9; 14:7; 16:9; cf. Rom. 4:20). The resurrection and ascension of the two witnesses will cause many people of Jerusalem to reflect on the gospel of Jesus Christ, and the Jerusalem earthquake will cause many to turn to Christ. Revelation 14:7 commands the people, “Fear God, and give Him glory, because the hour of His judgment has come; worship Him who made the heaven and the earth and sea and springs of waters.”

The Obedience Of The Witnesses

Whitcomb writes,

The Lord Jesus issued this command to Jews of the tribulation period: “when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place . . . then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. . . . For then there will be great tribulation such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be” (Matt. 24:15-21). Here an obvious question arises: Would the two Jewish witnesses remain in Jerusalem during the 42 months of Antichrist’s dominion if the Lord Jesus, their Messiah, told them to flee to the mountains?[29]

McKinley responds to this argument this way: “It should be clear that the statement of Matthew 24:22 does not apply to the escaped remnant divinely protected in the wilderness, but rather to the remainder of the Jews who are exposed to the wrath of the Beast. Therefore, the fact that the elect flee Jerusalem when the image is set up in the temple, in no way affects the view that the two prophets minister in the last half of the week, for they witness to this exposed remnant.”[30]

Thomas states, “The alleged problems of having a witness in Jerusalem during this period, a period following the flight of the woman in 12:6, 14 (Smith), is not serious. The absence of the bulk of Israelites does not exclude a concurrent witness to the city by the two witnesses. In fact, a witness facing stern opposition is what 11:3-13 describes. So the period is a literal forty-two months just before Christ returns in power (19:11-21).”[31]

The two witnesses will have a special ministry that will override the general warning to the people of Jerusalem. Like the 144,000, they will have a particular ministry that they must fulfill during the Tribulation.

An Additional Argument For The Second-Half View

The witnesses will “have the power to shut up the sky, so that rain will not fall during the days of their prophesying; and they [will] have power over the waters to turn them into blood, and to strike the earth with every plague, as often as they desire” (Rev. 11:6). The word “plague” does not occur in connection with any of the events in the first half of the Tribulation. Every reference to a plague is in the context of second-half events (9:18, 20; 11:6; 15:1, 6, 8; 16:9, 21; 18:4, 8; 21:9). The bowl judgments are particularly identified as plagues (15:1, 6, 8). It is conceivable that the witnesses will be involved in carrying out God’s final judgments. They will turn water into blood (11:6), which parallels the first two trumpet judgments (8:7-8) and the second and third bowl judgments (16:3-4), and these are clearly events in the second half.

Conclusion

The view that the two witnesses will minister in the first half of the Tribulation is weak because most of the support is based on arguments from silence, perceived sequential conflicts, or erroneous assumptions. The strength of the arguments for the second-half view lie primarily in the understanding of the overall chronological and sequential structure of Revelation, and the consistent use of the four terms for the three and a half years, all of which refer to the second half of the Tribulation.

The immediate context (Rev. 11:1-16) provides time indicators for the second half of the Tribulation (forty-two months, v. 2; and 1,260 days, v. 3). The secondary context (chaps. 10-15) is about events that focus on the second half of the Tribulation (10:7; 11:2-3, 14; 12:6, 14; 13:5; 14:7, 15; 15:1, 7). Revelation 11 is part of a larger interlude that gives detailed information about major characters and events of the second half of the Tribulation. The little book relates to nations and kings from second-half events (chap. 10). The Gentiles will trample the temple mount for forty-two months during the second half (11:1-2). The woman, Israel, will be protected for 1,260 days, which is the second half (12:10-16). Satan, the dragon will be cast out of heaven and will persecute the saints for time, times, and half a time, the second half of the Tribulation (12:13-17). The beast out of the sea will carry out the will of Satan, the dragon, for forty-two months (13:5), and that will be during the second half. The throne of God will prepare to send the seven angels with the seven bowl judgments to finish the wrath of God that will fall during the second half of the Tribulation (15:1, 5-8; 16:1-21). Thus the context strongly argues that the two witnesses will minister in the second half of the Tribulation.

Notes

1. For example Gary Cohen, Understanding Revelation (Chicago: Moody, 1978), 134; H. A. Ironside, Lectures on the Book of Revelation (New York: Loizeaux, 1919), 191-92; Alan F. Johnson, “Revelation,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, rev. ed., vol. 13 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006), 684; Tim LaHaye, Revelation Unveiled (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999), 187; William R. Newell, The Book of Revelation (Chicago: Grace, 1935; reprint, Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1994), 151-52, 158-59; Charles C. Ryrie, Revelation (Chicago: Moody, 1968), 22; and J. B. Smith, A Revelation of Jesus Christ (Scottdale, PA: Herald, 1961), 170-71.
2. For example Grant R. Osborne, Revelation, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002), 414; Walter Scott, Exposition of the Revelation of Jesus Christ, 4th ed. (London: Pickering & Inglis, n.d.), 230-31; Henry Barclay Swete, Commentary on Revelation (London: Macmillan, 1911; reprint, Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1977), 134; Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 8-22: An Exegetical Commentary (Chicago: Moody, 1995), 85; and John F. Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ (Chicago: Moody, 1966), 178.
3. For the meaning of “week” as a literal, seven-year period, see John A. McLean, The Seventieth Week of Daniel 9:27 as a Literary Key for Understanding the Structure of the Apocalypse of John (Lewiston, NY: Mellen, 1995), 58-64.
4. John Whitcomb, “The Two Witnesses,” in Dispensationalism Tomorrow & Beyond, ed. Christopher Cove (Fort Worth, TX: Tyndale Seminary Press, 2008), 359.
5. Henry C. Thiessen, “Will the Church Pass through the Tribulation? Part 1,” Bibliotheca Sacra 92 (January–March 1935): 50.
6. Newell, The Book of Revelation, 151-52, 158-59.
7. On the question of whether John the Baptist fulfilled Malachi’s prediction about Elijah see Craig A. Blaising, “Malachi,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Old Testament, ed. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton, IL: Victor, 1985; reprint, Colorado Springs: Cook, 1996), 587-88.
8. See Daniel K. Wong, “The Two Witnesses in Revelation 11,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154 (July–September 2002): 344-54, for an extensive discussion on the ambiguity of the identification of the two witnesses.
9. Herman Hoyt, Studies in Revelation (Winona Lake, IN: BMH, 1977), 74. See also Alva J. McClain, The Greatness of the Kingdom (Winona Lake, IN: BMH, 1977), 74.
10. See Kenneth F. McKinley, “The Chronology of the Revelation” (Th.D. diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, May, 1957), 162-64, for a detailed rebuttal of the view that the 144,000 will be evangelized by the two witnesses.
11. See John A. McLean, “The Chronological and Sequential Structure of Revelation,” www.pretrib.org, for arguments that the midpoint of the Tribulation will begin with the sixth seal judgment in Revelation 6:12-17.
12. McLean, The Seventieth Week of Daniel 9:27, 187-258.
13. William C. Stevens, Revelation—The Crown-Jewel of Biblical Prophecy (Harrisburg, PA: Christian Alliance, 1928), 181.
14. Louis E. Knowles, “The Interpretation of the Seventy Weeks of Daniel in the Early Fathers,” Westminster Theological Journal 7 (1944): 142. See also Herman A. Hoyt, “The New Testament Doctrine concerning the Antichrist,” Grace Journal 4 (1963): 32.
15. Mark L. Hitchcock, “A Critique of the Preterist View of the Temple in Revelation 11:1-2,” Bibliotheca Sacra 164 (April–June 2007): 227.
16. Ryrie, Revelation, 72.
17. Thomas, Revelation 8-22: An Exegetical Commentary, 92.
18. G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 409-11. See Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 1-7: An Exegetical Commentary (Chicago: Moody, 1995), 469-71, for an excellent discussion on the sealing of the saints.
19. Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, 178.
20. Whitcomb, “The Two Witnesses,” 361 (italics his).
21. Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, 176-77.
22. Cohen, Understanding Revelation, 134.
23. See McKinley, “The Chronology of the Revelation,” 167-69, for further discussion.
24. Newell, The Book of Revelation, 158.
25. Robert L. Thomas, “The Structure of the Apocalypse: Recapitulation or Progression?” Master’s Seminary Journal 4 (1993): 63 (italics his).
26. Gary Cohen, “The Chronology of the Book of Revelation” (Th.D. diss., Grace Theological Seminary, May, 1966), 254.
27. Zane Hodges, Power to Make War (Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1995), 48-49.
28. The word ἔμφοβος (“terror”) is an intensive form of φόβος (“fear”).
29. Whitcomb, “The Two Witnessses,” 360.
30. McKinley, “The Chronology of the Revelation,” 173.
31. Thomas, Revelation 8-22: An Exegetical Commentary, 85.

Did Jesus Correct the Disciples’ View of the Kingdom?

By John A. McLean

[John A. McLean is president of Michigan Theological Seminary, Ann Arbor, Michigan.]

Just before Jesus ascended to heaven, His 11 disciples asked Him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?” (Acts 1:6, NIV). He responded, “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority” (v. 7, NIV). This brief answer (along with Jesus’ words in verse 8 about the coming of the Holy Spirit) did not reveal much about the kingdom.

This fact has led students to speculate on what Jesus meant in these verses. For example Neil suggests that a group larger than the 11 disciples was present, a group that therefore did not understand the true nature of the kingdom. He argues,

The question, implying the common expectation of a national triumph for the Jews over the Romans by the agency of the Messiah, could hardly have been asked by those who had so recently been enlightened. It could, however, have been asked by others who had not heard the Lord’s words on the subject, and who had now gathered together for this final scene before his Ascension.[1]

This explanation depends on at least two assumptions that cannot be proven and that in fact contradict the context of Acts 1. Acts 1:13 clearly shows that the group with Jesus included only the Eleven. Furthermore, since Jesus had appeared to them “over a period of forty days…speaking of the things concerning the kingdom of God” (v. 3), His audience just before His ascension was not ignorant of His teaching of the kingdom of God. Harrison points out that the disciples continued to expect the kingdom in spite of Jesus’ clear teachings that He was to suffer and die, and after the postresurrection appearances they would certainly have concluded that He would restore the kingdom.[2]

Neil’s second assumption is that the true nature of the kingdom of God had nothing to do with a common expectation of national interests by the Jews.[3] However, he offers no evidence to demonstrate that the kingdom of God did not involve such national interests. Furthermore Jesus did not correct the disciples but only informed them that the timing of the kingdom’s restoration was not for them to know.

Lüdemann maintains that Jesus meant the kingdom was to be replaced to Israel by the Spirit. He states, “The kingdom is replaced by the Spirit (v. 3b, Jesus’ preaching of the kingdom of God, is to be interpreted in this pneumatological, ecclesiological sense). In this way the time of the parousia is shifted into an indeterminate (but not uncertain: v. 11; 17.31) future.”[4] Without any significant argumentation Lüdemann simply assumes that the Holy Spirit’s coming replaced the kingdom.

The mention of the promise of the Father, which was the baptism of the Holy Spirit, however, probably gave rise to the disciples’ question about the timing of the kingdom’s arrival. “In Jewish expectations, the restoration of Israel’s fortunes would be marked by the revived activity of God’s Spirit, which had been withheld since the last of the prophets.”[5] The coming of the Holy Spirit was anticipated in Old Testament prophecy (Isa 32:15; 44:3; Ezek 39:29; Joel 2:28; Zech 12:10). Haenchen argues likewise that “the earliest Christians regarded the outpouring of the Spirit as a sign that the end of the world was at hand,” and the coming of the kingdom was associated with this consummation.[6] Jesus did not redefine Israel’s kingdom but only declined to give the timing of the kingdom. Also if the coming of the Spirit replaced the kingdom, Jesus would have contradicted Himself. Though Jesus said they were not to know the time of the kingdom, He did give them an idea of the timing of the coming of the Holy Spirit (“not many days from now,” Acts 1:5). They were to wait for the Holy Spirit’s coming, which would be soon, and then they were to be witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria, and the remotest parts of the earth (vv. 4, 8).

Another view is suggested by Carter and Earle.

Christ mildly rebukes the disciples’ query concerning the restoration of the kingdom. He does not deny that He has a kingdom to restore. In fact He admits that His plan provides for a universal kingdom over the souls of men (vs. 8), though that plan is not for a narrow, limited, material kingdom such as His Jewish disciples had conceived.[7]

The mild rebuke Carter and Earle suggest is difficult to establish from the text. Jesus did not rebuke the disciples; He only declined to reveal to them the timing of the kingdom (cf. Mark 13:32).[8] He had already promised them they would “eat and drink at My table in My kingdom, and you will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:30). Therefore it is implausible that Jesus would rebuke the disciples for believing in something He had previously taught them.

Kistemaker maintains that the kingdom is a spiritual kingdom[9] rather than a national, political entity. The difficulty with this position is that he gives exegetical evidence why the kingdom could be understood as a nationalistic, political kingdom, and then dismisses it for a spiritual kingdom. He assumes an interpretation of a spiritual Israel but offers little proof. Even Lenski, who does not accept a future for national Israel, maintains that the disciples thought of a glorious earthly rule for Israel, the Jewish people, through Jesus, the Messiah, when He would return. Jesus answered only regarding the times and the seasons and did not explain the kingdom (see v. 3) and how Israel (the remnant, Rom 9:27; 11:5) would have the kingdom restored. The fact that the apostles still expressed strong earthly conceptions by their question can scarcely be denied.[10]

Kistemaker seems to suggest that since there is a spiritual dynamic to the kingdom it cannot also have a national or political aspect. He says that since Jesus referred to the timing of the kingdom and a universal witness, the passage refers to the restoration of spiritual Israel.[11]

These disciples, however, were the same ones to whom Jesus had explained the Scriptures (Luke 24:32), whose minds He had opened to understand the Scriptures (v. 45), and with whom He had spent 40 days speaking about the kingdom of God (Acts 1:3). Therefore it is highly unlikely they would have thought He meant to alter the meaning of the kingdom by excluding its national, political character. Therefore rather than correcting the disciples’ understanding of a kingdom He led them to expect a kingdom at some undisclosed time period.

Bruce also contends that the kingdom for Israel must be redefined as a spiritual kingdom.

The question in v. 6 appears to have been the last flicker of their former burning expectation of an imminent political theocracy with themselves as its chief executives. From this time forth they devoted themselves to the proclamation and service of God’s spiritual kingdom.[12]

The difficulty with this proposal is that Jesus did not redefine the kingdom by mandating the proclamation of the gospel. The proclamation of the gospel was a central focus of Peter’s sermons and his anticipation was that “the times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord…whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time” (Acts 3:19, 21). Peter’s language reflected his continued expectation of the coming of the kingdom (cf. Acts 1:11; Matt 17:11).

Jesus’ response seems to affirm the disciples’ belief in the restoration of the kingdom to Israel. He did not rebuke them nor did He correct them by suggesting there was no future for Israel. Instead He affirmed their belief but informed them that it was not their privilege to know the timing of the restoration.

The fact that Jesus did not correct the disciples’ view of the kingdom suggests the correctness of their perception of it. An examination of the Gospels demonstrates the weight of this argument. Much of the ministry of Jesus is presented in the form of rebuke or correction. Nearly half of Matthew and Mark includes “correction materials” and nearly one-third of Luke and John consists of such material. Jesus employed many different means in His teaching ministry in order to correct the errant thinking of the people.[13]

The Gospel of Luke records 26 questions asked of Jesus.[14] All but two of these questions received an answer from Him (Luke 22:64; 24:18). Jesus answered questions and corrected misconceptions the people had. This pattern is typical of the other Gospels. The Gospels record more than one hundred questions addressed to Jesus. He did not reply to two questions that needed no answer: one before the high priest (Matt 26:62–63), and a second before Pilate (27:13). He answered one question with a question (21:23–27), and offered a partial reply to another (John 12:34). In all the others He responded with a full answer in which He corrected wrong thinking by the audience. The ministry of Jesus focused, in part, on correcting false doctrine and rebuking errant teachers. However, it is noteworthy that Jesus did not correct the disciples’ question about the restoration of the kingdom to Israel. Therefore in view of the consistent ministry of Jesus to correct the disciples when they were in error, it seems correct to conclude that in their question in Acts 1:6 they properly anticipated a future restoration of the kingdom for Israel.

Exegetical Questions about the Question

To understand the significance of Jesus’ silence in not correcting the 11 disciples in Acts 1:7, a number of exegetical questions need to be considered. What did the disciples mean when they suggested a “restoration” of the kingdom (v. 6)? What was the disciples’ concept of the kingdom as presented in Luke’s writing? What does the term “Israel” mean in Luke-Acts? How did the disciples understand Jesus’ answer?

What Does It Mean to “Restore” the Kingdom?

Jesus addressed the concept of the restoration of all things immediately after His transfiguration. The disciples asked, “Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first” (Matt 17:10; Mark 9:11)? Jesus’ responded, “Elijah is coming and will restore all things” (Matt 17:11; Mark 9:12). This prophecy relates to Malachi 4:4–6, which predicted that Elijah would come before the great and terrible day of the Lord. Jesus affirmed that John the Baptist had come to fulfill this role, but John was rejected (Matt 17:12–13). As the forerunner of Jesus, John did prepare the way for a future restoration based on the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Peter referred to a “period of restoration of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time” (Acts 3:21). Jeremiah spoke prophetically of the restoration (ἀποκαθιστᾶν, LXX) of Israel to the land of Palestine (Jer 15:19; 16:15; 23:8; 24:6; 50:19; cf. Hos 11:11). Peter argued from Genesis 12, Deuteronomy 18, and all the prophets who spoke from Samuel onward (Acts 3:22–26), that Jesus is the greater Prophet who would bless them when they turned from their wicked ways. If the statements of Jesus and these Old Testament prophecies are part of the formation of the disciples’ concept of restoration, then the disciples were thinking in terms of the reestablishment of some kingdom for national Israel.

What Was The Disciples’ Concept of the Kingdom in Luke’s Writings?

Luke presented the kingdom (βασιλεία) as having present and future aspects. The concept of a kingdom is first recorded in Luke as part of the announcement of the birth of Jesus. The angel announced, “The Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David; and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever; and His kingdom will have no end” (Luke 1:32–33). This everlasting kingdom is identified with national Israel by the phrase “over the house of Jacob.”

Jesus preached “the kingdom of God” (Luke 4:43; 8:1; 9:11), and He commissioned the disciples to preach this same message (9:2, 60). He told the disciples that they should inform the people that the kingdom of God was near (10:9–11), and He told the Pharisees that the kingdom of God was in their midst (17:21).

When Jesus taught the disciples to pray, “Thy kingdom come” (11:2), this pointed to the future. This future kingdom will include the patriarchs, prophets, and apostles (13:28–29; 22:30; Matt 8:11). Before the Triumphal Entry, as the disciples approached Jerusalem, they anticipated the immediate appearance of the kingdom of God (Luke 19:11). Jesus gave the disciples a number of signs (21:25–28) by which they could recognize that the kingdom of God was near (21:31). At the last Passover Jesus referred to the future aspect of the kingdom of God when He stated He would not eat the Passover meal again “until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God” (22:16–18).

This future aspect of the kingdom is further defined in Jesus’ response to the disciples’ arguing over which of them was the greatest. “And you are those who have stood by Me in My trials; and just as My Father has granted Me a kingdom, I grant you that you may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom, and you will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:28–30). Jesus clearly led the disciples to believe in a future kingdom for Israel in which they would reign with Him over the 12 tribes.

The preaching of the kingdom of God continues as a central focus in Acts, but little definition is given to the phrase. Philip preached “the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 8:12). Paul taught that “through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God” (14:22). Paul made the kingdom of God a central topic in his preaching (19:8; 20:25; 28:31), and in Rome he sought to convince the Jews, “explaining to them by solemnly testifying about the kingdom of God, and trying to persuade them concerning Jesus, from both the Law of Moses and from the Prophets” (28:23). The phrase ἀπό τε τοῦ νόμου Μωῢσέως καὶ τῶν προφητῶν probably modifies both participles διαμαρτυρόμενος and πείθων, suggesting that the understanding of the kingdom of God included a definition shaped by the Old Testament. The kingdom of God in the Old Testament is certainly depicted as a kingdom for the nation Israel, in the land of Palestine, with a descendant from the Davidic line ruling over it (2 Sam 7). The disciples’ concept of a kingdom involved national Israel.

What Does the Term “Israel” Mean in Luke-Acts?

Luke recorded that Jesus taught a present and future aspect to the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God was present in their midst, probably because of Jesus’ presence among them. Yet, there was a future aspect that was yet to be fulfilled. The disciples were taught that they would share in the future kingdom of Israel by reigning with Christ over the 12 tribes of Israel. They also anticipated that it could come at any moment. The preaching of the early church contained the message of the kingdom of God, and Paul argued for this kingdom based on the writings of Moses and the Prophets. The future kingdom for the nation Israel is defined by Old Testament prophecy and will be fulfilled by Jesus Christ when He returns to reign. This kingdom will involve a banquet in which the disciples and patriarchs will participate. Jesus Christ will share in a Passover festival when this kingdom is fulfilled.

A survey of the Lucan writings demonstrates that Luke used the word “Israel” in an ethnic and national sense. “Israel” occurs 12 times in the Gospel of Luke, and each time it clearly refers to national Israel and/or its people.[15] When the disciples thought about Israel, they thought about God’s people, the Jews, who composed the 12 tribes, for whom the kingdom of God meant deliverance and redemption and over whom they would someday rule with Jesus Christ.

This same meaning continues in Acts. Peter addressed the many “Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men, from every nation under heaven” (Acts 2:5) as “Men of Israel” (῍Ανδρες =Λσραηλῖται, 2:22; 3:12). When he called the people to repentance and faith, he addressed them as the “house of Israel” and the “people of Israel” (2:36; 4:10; also see 5:21; 10:36). Luke continued this national identification of Israel as he identified the ruling Council, which was directing the persecutions, as “all the Senate of the sons of Israel” (5:21; cf. v. 35).

Paul’s ministry also maintained this national identification of Israel. Ananias was told by the Lord that Paul was “a chosen instrument of Mine, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel” (9:15).

The terms “Israel” and “Israelite” occur 32 times in Luke-Acts. In each occurrence the terms refer to the people of Israel as a national entity. Therefore it seems correct to understand that the disciples’ question in Acts 1:6 referred to a restoration of a kingdom to the nation of Israel. They were asking Jesus about the timing of the future restoration of the Davidic kingdom of Israel as described and defined in the Old Testament.

What Was the Disciples’ Understanding of Eschatology?

What did the disciples understand about future things, based on the information Jesus gave them just before His ascension? No doubt they understood these five points.

1. The Holy Spirit will come (1:5, 8).
2. The Holy Spirit will baptize them (1:5, 8).
3. The power of the Holy Spirit will enable them to witness (1:8).
4. Jesus will come again in the same way He ascended (1:11).
5. The Father has fixed the time by His own authority for restoring the kingdom to Israel (1:7).

In Peter’s sermon in Acts 3:12–26, he used language that shows he anticipated that the kingdom would be restored to Israel. Peter’s audience consisted of Jews, whom he exhorted, “Repent therefore and return, that your sins may be wiped away” (v. 19). Repentance is a prerequisite to the reception of the blessings of salvation (2:38).[16] As a result of repentance the “times of refreshing [καιροὶ ἀναψύξεως] may come from the presence of the Lord” (3:19, UBS, v. 20) and the Father will send the Son at the “period [χρόνων] of restoration of all things” (v. 21). Krodel notes that “kairoi and chronoi appear in reverse sequence in 1:7 and the verb ‘restore’ of 1:6 reappears as the noun ‘restoration’ or ‘establishing’ in 3:21 .”[17] This parallel language indicates a parallel in subject content.

What is the meaning of the phrase “times of refreshing” (καιροὶ ἀναψύξεως) in 3:19 ? It is difficult to determine the meaning partly because of the limited usage of ἀνάψυξις in the Scriptures. One occurrence of ἀνάψυξις is in the Septuagint translation of Exodus 8:15: “When Pharaoh saw that there was relief [ἀνάψυξις], he hardened his heart and did not listen to them, as the Lord had said.” =Ανάψυξις refers to the relief Egypt experienced after the plague of the frogs had ceased. The ἀνάψυξις in Acts 3:19 that will result from repentance is more than the absence of judgment because it also involves the positive benefit of the personal presence of the Lord (v. 20).[18]

Bock argues for two separate time periods for these events in support of his “already, not yet” view on the Davidic kingdom.[19] He says the “periods of refreshing” refer to the present time when sins can be wiped away through repentance,[20] and that the “times of restoration of all things” refers to the millennium. “Among the points in support of this distinction is that in the LXX translation by Symmachus, a reference to the descent of the Spirit in Isaiah 32:15 uses the term ἀνάψυξις (refreshment), a term related to the one in Acts 3:20.”[21] However, the context of Isaiah 32:15 refers to millennial blessings to national Israel, a fact that supports the single-stage restoration view, not a two-phase “already, not yet” restoration.

Walker suggests a two-stage restoration in Acts 3:19–21. He, like Bock, maintains that the καιροὶ ἀναψύξεως (“times of refreshing”) relates to special experiences of grace and blessing in this age, whereas the χρόνων ἀποκαταστάσεως (“period of restoration”) in verse 21 refers to the climactic age of blessings for the nation of Israel in fulfillment of Old Testament messianic promises.[22]

Lenski maintains that the phrase “times of refreshing” (καιροὶ ἀναψύξεως) refers to “longer or shorter periods of spiritual enjoyment when men who repent and are justified are given times in which to feel the sweetness of God’s grace in Christ without disturbance.”[23] Though Walker’s and Lenski’s suggestion may be true of the Christian experience at times, it is not supported by the reading of the text. These times of refreshing will take place in the personal presence of Christ when God the Father sends Him to earth again. These times of refreshing will occur at the period of the restoration (ἀποκατάστασις) of all things (v. 21). Interestingly Josephus used ἀποκατάστασις to refer to the restoration of the Jews to the land of Palestine.[24]

The main weakness in dividing these two events into separate time periods is that the text connects the events with a coordinating και (“and”) in Acts 3:20. The syntactical structure coordinates the two verbs ἔλθωσιν (“come,” v. 19) and ἀποστείλῃ (“send”) of the subordinate clause ὅπως ἂν in verse 20 with the two main verbs μετανοήσατε (“repent”) and ἐπιστρέψατε (“return”) in verse 19. Repentance and turning to God result in the coming of the times of refreshing and the sending of Jesus Christ at the restoration of all things God spoke about in the prophets. The sending of Jesus Christ will provide the personal presence that will result in the times of refreshing. These results are not events separated by time. They are mutual benefits that will come when the Father sends the Son so that believers may be refreshed in His presence. Conzelmann argues that “the parallelism between the two halves of the verse shows that the καιροὶ ἀναψύξεως, ‘times of refreshing,’ are not intervals of respite in the eschatological distress, but rather the final salvation (like the χρόνοι ἀποκαταστάσεως, ‘restoration’).”[25] Peter referred to this restoration in 2 Peter 3:13: “But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells.” The promise of new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells is given in Old Testament passages such as Isaiah 60:21; 65:17–25; 66:22.[26]

The second result of Israel’s repentance is that God will “send Jesus, the Christ appointed for you, whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration [ἀποκαταστάσεως] of all things about which God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from ancient time” (Acts 3:20–21). These verses parallel points four and five of the disciples’ understanding from Acts 1 (see p. 222).

Bruce suggests that ἀποκατάστασις should be translated “fulfillment” or “establishment.” He maintains that the fulfillment (ἀποκατάστασις) in 3:21 is much wider in scope than the restoration (ἀποκαθιστάνω) in 1:6. He concludes, “The ἀποκατάστασις here appears to be identical with the παλιγγενεσία (‘regeneration’) of Matthew 19:28. But the idea of restoration is not excluded; the final inauguration of the new age is accompanied by a renovation of all nature (cf. Rom 8:18–23).”[27]

However, a weakness in this view is that Bruce relates ἀποκατάστασις to παλιγγενεσία rather than accepting the relationship between ἀποκαθιστάνω and ἀποκατάστασις. This disregards textual and lexical parallels in Acts 3.

It is this writer’s view that in Acts 3 Peter was not offering the kingdom to Israel, but rather was preaching a message of repentance that reflected his understanding of eschatology. The timing of the kingdom, the nature of the Church Age, and the inclusion of the Gentiles were not fully understood by Peter at that time. What Peter was preaching was accurate but it was not complete. He was correct but not exhaustive because of his limited understanding at that time.

This lack of understanding and need of further revelation is demonstrated in Acts 10. After having received the vision of the great sheet that was filled with unclean animals, Peter was instructed by the Holy Spirit to go to the home of Cornelius in Caesarea. This was a difficult request for Peter because devout Jews did not have intimate dealings with the Gentiles. After Peter had entered into Cornelius’s home, he stated, “You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a man who is a Jew to associate with a foreigner or to visit him; and yet God has shown me that I should not call any man unholy or unclean. That is why I came without even raising any objection when I was sent for” (Acts 10:28–29). Later he added, “I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality, but in every nation the man who fears Him and does what is right is welcome to Him” (vv. 34–35).

These verses demonstrate that there were doctrinal facts that Peter did not understand until several years after Pentecost. Peter learned that the Gentiles were not to be considered unclean, for God had accepted them. He understood for the first time that all men from every nation who trust the Lord are accepted by Him (10:35). This acceptance is based on knowledge of the gospel of Jesus Christ (vv. 38–43). The evidence of Peter’s ignorance of these truths argues for the disciples’ understanding of a national Israel in Acts 1–3 since they did not have any concept of the church as a so-called “spiritual Israel.”

The issue of the inclusion of the Gentiles in the church was still unsettled many years later as verified in Acts 15 (Autumn, A.D. 49).[28] The question faced by the Council of Jerusalem was whether a Gentile had to become a Jew in order to become a Christian. This debate was settled by the testimonies of Peter, Paul, and Barnabas that God was taking from among the Gentiles a people for His name. Acts demonstrates the fact of progressive revelation concerning the nature of the church and eschatology. Therefore it seems probable that Peter’s sermon in Acts 3 was not a reoffer of the kingdom, but rather was an exhortation to repent in view of God’s future restoration of the kingdom. It was not Peter’s prerogative to offer the kingdom since the timing was appointed by the Father’s authority (Acts 1:7; 3:20–21). Peter’s sermon reflected his belief that repentance was necessary so that God could someday restore the kingdom to Israel.

The following shows the parallels between Acts 1 and 2–3 concerning truths about the Holy Spirit and eschatology.

Acts 1	Acts 2–3
1. The Holy Spirit will come (1:5, 8).	1. The Holy Spirit came (2:1–4).
2. The Holy Spirit will baptize them (1:5, 8).	2. The baptism of the Holy Spirit occurred (2:1–4).
3. The power of the Holy Spirit will enable them to witness (1:8).	3. The Holy Spirit enabled them to witness (2:14–42; 3:12–26).
4. Jesus will come again in the same way He ascended (1:11).	4. Jesus will come again (3:19–20).
5. The Father has fixed the time by His own authority for restoring the kingdom to Israel (1:7).	5. The Father will send Jesus the Messiah for the restoration of all things (3:20–21).

 Conclusion

Throughout the Gospels Jesus corrected the disciples’ and others’ false ideas on a number of occasions. But He did not correct the disciples in Acts 1:6–8; therefore it must be concluded that their perception of a future kingdom was correct.

The disciples’ conceived of a future national kingdom for ethnic Israel in which they will reign with Christ. This restoration was shaped by the writings of the Old Testament Law and the Prophets, which anticipated a fulfillment of the Davidic kingdom that will be literal, political, geographical, and national. Peter’s sermon in Acts 3:12–26 evidences his continued belief that this national kingdom would be restored. Therefore believers should anticipate not only the second coming of Jesus Christ but also His establishment of a future kingdom for the nation Israel.

Notes

1. William Neil, The Acts of the Apostles (Greenwood, SC: Attic Press, 1986), 65–66. See also I. Howard Marshall, The Acts of the Apostles (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 60, for a similar proposal.
2. Everett F. Harrison, Acts: The Expanding Church (Chicago: Moody, 1989), 39.
3. Neil, The Acts of the Apostles, 65.
4. Gerd Lüdemann, Early Christianity according to the Traditions of Acts (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989), 26.
5. Richard N. Longenecker, “The Acts of the Apostles,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, 12 vols. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981), 9:256.
6. Ernst Haenchen, The Acts of the Apostles (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1971), 143.
7. Charles W. Carter and Ralph Earle, The Acts of the Apostles (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1959), 8. Longenecker accepts a future for national Israel but suggests the disciples’ question was misguided (“The Acts of the Apostles,” 256).
8. Marshall, The Acts of the Apostles, 5.
9. Simon J. Kistemaker, Exposition of the Acts of the Apostles (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1990), 52.
10. R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Acts of the Apostles (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1961), 29–30.
11. Kistemaker, Exposition of the Acts of the Apostles, 52.
12. F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 38. Also see John R. W. Stott, The Spirit, the Church, the World, the Message of Acts (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1990), 40–41.
13. The following are categories in which the “correction materials” may be grouped: correction by miracles (e.g., Mark 2:10–11); by discourse (e.g., Matt 5–7); by parable (e.g., Luke 15); by direct rebuke (e.g., Matt 23:13–36); by example (e.g., John 13:1–20); and by questions and answers.
14. Luke 2:48; 4:34 (two); 6:2; 7:20; 8:28; 9:54; 10:25, 29, 40; 12:41; 13:23; 17:37; 18:18, 26; 20:2, 22, 33; 21:7 (two); 22:49, 64, 70; 23:3, 39; 24:18 .
15. Luke 1:16, 54, 68, 80; 2:25, 32, 34; 4:25, 27; 7:9; 22:30; 24:21 .
16. David J. Williams suggests that “repentance and faith become almost synonymous (cf. 9:35; 11:21; 14:15; 15:19; 26:18, 20; 28:27)” (Acts [San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1985], 55).
17. Gerhard A. Krodel, Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1986), 104–5.
18. The phrase ἀπο προσώπου occurs six times in the New Testament (Acts 3:19 [UBS, v. 20 ]; 5:41; 7:45; 2 Thess 1:9; Rev 6:16; 12:14). Each time it represents the personal presence of the objective genitive that follows.
19. Darrell L. Bock, “The Reign of the Lord Christ,” in Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church, ed. Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 56–59.
20. Ibid., 57. Bock footnotes (57, n. 29) two major works in support of a two-period view: William Lane, “Times of Refreshment: A Study of Eschatological Periodization in Judaism and Christianity” (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1962), 164–86, and P. F. Feiler, “Jesus the Prophet: The Hidden Portrayal of Jesus as the Prophet Like Moses” (Ph.D. diss., Princeton University, 1985), 81–90. Bock acknowledges that his view on the Davidic kingdom, however, can be maintained apart from a two-period view of Acts 3:19–20.
21. Bock, “The Reign of the Lord Christ,” 57.
22. Thomas Walker, The Acts of the Apostles (Chicago: Moody, 1965), 77–78. Also see Kistemaker, Exposition of the Acts of the Apostles, 136. For additional support Walker footnotes references to the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, s.v. “ἀποκαθίστημι,” by Albrecht Oepke, 1:391; the New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, s.v. “ἀποκατάστασις,” by Hans-Georg Link, 3:148; and John Albert Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament, ed. Andrew R. Fausset, 5 vols. (Edinburgh: Clark, 1877), 2:545.
23. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Acts of the Apostles, 141-42.
24. Josephus, The Antiquities of the Jews 11. 3. 8.
25. Hans Conzelmann, A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987), 29.
26. Williams, Acts, 56. Williams suggests that “the holy prophets” may refer to passages such as Isaiah 34:4; 51:6; and 65:17 .
27. Bruce, The Book of Acts, 91, n. 36. Also see F. F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles, 3d ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 143–44.
28. H. Wayne House, Chronological and Background Charts of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981), 124.

Have Mercy | Sandra McCracken (Official Live Video)

Another Look at Rosenthal’s “Pre-Wrath Rapture”

By John A. McLean

[Associate Professor of Bible, Grand Rapids Baptist College and Seminary, Grand Rapids, Michigan]

Marvin Rosenthal’s book, The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church,[1] presents an unusual view of the sequence of events in the seven-year period preceding the millennium in relation to the rapture.[2] Formerly he was a pretribulationist, defending and advocating the view that the rapture will occur before the seven-year tribulation. Now he has renounced that view and holds instead to a position that places the rapture within the tribulation. However, he says the rapture will occur toward the end of the seven-year period, just before the outpouring of God’s wrath (the day of the Lord) in the seven trumpet judgments. In this way he can say the rapture is “pre-wrath.” Yet in Rosenthal’s view the rapture is not pretribulational. He distinguishes God’s wrath from tribulation in the 70th week of Daniel.

Rosenthal relentlessly attacks pretribulationism. For example he writes, “Pretribulation rapturism is exegetically indefensible. Some of the best theological minds of the twentieth century have not been able to exegetically defend it.”[3] “Pretribulation rapturism is once again mortally wounded, this time by an unstrained, dispensational, premillennial, and literal interpretation of Paul’s teaching in 2 Thessalonians 2.”[4]

Rosenthal presents the following theses.

1. The Rapture of the church will occur immediately prior to the beginning of the Day of the Lord.
2. The Day of the Lord commences sometime within the second half of the seventieth week.
3. The cosmic disturbances associated with the sixth seal will signal the approach of the Day of the Lord.
4. The Day of the Lord will begin with the opening of the seventh seal (Rev 8:1).[5]

He adds, “It will also be demonstrated that the seventieth week of Daniel has three major, distinct, and identifiable periods of time: the ‘beginning of sorrows,’ the Great Tribulation, and the Day of the Lord—all found in the Olivet Discourse.”[6]

The following chart represents Rosenthal’s position.[7]

In this view the seal judgments in Revelation are man’s wrath, not God’s wrath. “The seals are not God’s wrath; they are God’s promise of eternal protection during man’s wrath.”[8] The trumpet judgments, he says, are God’s wrath on mankind in the day of the Lord, and the bowl judgments are God’s wrath on the nations.

This article evaluates some of the points in Rosenthal’s theory and seeks to demonstrate that a proper, biblical view of the pre-wrath rapture means that the rapture is also pretribulational.

Can the Entire 70th Week of Daniel Be Called “The Tribulation”?

Rosenthal’s major thesis is that the church must be removed before the wrath (ὀργή) of God comes on the world. The passages he uses to defend this point are 1 Thessalonians 1:10, which reads in part, “Jesus, who delivers us from the wrath to come,” and 1 Thessalonians 5:9, “For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.” Pretribulationists agree that these verses indicate that the rapture will precede God’s wrath. Rosenthal disagrees with pretribulationists, however, when he asserts that the wrath of God is to be identified not with the full seven years of the 70th week of Daniel, but only with a small portion of it, and that God’s wrath and the tribulation are distinct.

The designation the tribulation period should properly be omitted from any honest consideration of the time of the Rapture of the Church. The term tribulation period is normally used by pretribulation rapturists as a synonym for the seventieth week of the book of Daniel (Dan 9:27); that is, to describe the seven years that immediately precede Christ’s physical return to the earth to establish His millennial kingdom. Although popular and used by many competent preachers, teachers, and theologians, such a designation has no biblical justification.[9]

He adds,

A clear fact emerges from an examination of the word tribulation as used in the Bible. In a prophetic context, it is used to describe only the period of time that begins in the middle of Daniel’s seventieth week—never of the first half of it. Based on that indisputable fact, to call the entire seven-year time frame the tribulation period is to coin a technical phrase and superimpose it upon the Scriptures, reading into the biblical text that which it does not itself declare.[10]

Rosenthal has overstated his case and has also stated as true what is clearly false. The word θλῖψις (“tribulation”) is used in prophetic contexts to refer to both the first and second halves of the 70th week of Daniel. Matthew 24:9 chronologically relates to the first half of the 70th week because it precedes the midpoint, when the abomination of desolation will be set up (Matt 24:15–21). Verse 9 states, “Then they will deliver you to tribulation [θλῖψιν], and will kill you, and you will be hated by all nations on account of My name.” The first half of the 70th week, then, is a time of tribulation.

The second half of the 70th week is also described as a time of tribulation. “When the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire” (2 Thess 1:7), that is, at Christ’s second coming, God “will repay with affliction [θλῖψιν] those who afflict [θλίβουσιν] you” (1:6). Therefore it is proper and even biblical to refer to and even describe the 70th week of Daniel as “the tribulation,” or “a time of tribulation.”

Is the Great Tribulation Shorter Than Three and One-Half Years?

With Rosenthal, most pretribulationists hold that the designation “the Great Tribulation,” should be reserved for the second half of Daniel’s 70th week. However, Rosenthal denies that the term “the Great Tribulation” can refer to the entire second half (Matt 24:21; Rev 7:14).

This, then, is clear. The entire seventieth week is not shortened. The last three and one-half years of that seventieth week are not shortened. What the Lord Himself teaches is shortened is the Great Tribulation. It is less than three and one-half years in duration. It begins in the middle of the seventieth week, but it does not run until the end of the seventieth week…. The Great Tribulation begins in the middle of the seventieth week, but it does not run to the end of that week. It is cut short.[11]

Once again a reading of the biblical text demonstrates the error of Rosenthal’s statement. Daniel 12:1 states, “Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard over the sons of your people, will arise. And there will be a time of distress [LXX, καιρὸς θλίψες], such [LXX, θλῖψις] as never occurred since there was a nation until that time; and at that time your people, everyone who is found written in the book, will be rescued.” Matthew 24:21 echoes the language of Daniel 12:1 while referring to events that include and follow the midpoint of the seven-year period: “For then there will be a great tribulation [θλῖψις μεγάλη], such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall.”

Obviously Daniel 12:1 and Matthew 24:21 are both referring to a time that is further defined as “the Great Tribulation.” Daniel 12:6–7 speaks of the length of this period of time: “And one said to the man dressed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, ‘How long will it be until the end of these wonders?’ And I heard the man dressed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, as he raised his right hand and his left toward heaven, and swore by Him who lives forever that it would be for a time, times, and half a time; and as soon as they finish shattering the power of the holy people, all these events will be completed.”

Revelation 12:14 correlates with Matthew 24:21 and Daniel 12:7. Michael and his angels will wage war with the dragon and his angels with the result that the dragon will persecute the woman (Israel), who will be protected by God “for a time and times and half a time.” The phrase “time and times and half a time” is defined by parallel statements as “one thousand two hundred and sixty days” (Rev 12:6) and “forty-two months” (13:5). Therefore the great tribulation is a period of “a time, times, and half a time,” or 1,260 days, which is three and one-half years of 30 days per month. The great tribulation spans the entire second half of Daniel’s 70th week.

Is the Day of the Lord Completely Separate from the Great Tribulation?

A further difficulty for the pre-wrath rapture theory is the separation of the day of the Lord and the great tribulation into two distinct time periods. This distinction is foundational for Rosenthal’s pre-wrath theory, since the day of the Lord is the time of God’s wrath and tribulation, from which the church will be removed. Rosenthal writes:

The error of such logic [that the day of the Lord begins the tribulation] is that it assumes that the Day of the Lord commences when the seventieth week of Daniel begins. But a careful examination of the biblical data will clearly indicate that it does not! The false assumption [according to Rosenthal, this assumption is made by pretribulationists] just mentioned is perhaps the single greatest error in the debate concerning the timing of the Rapture.[12]

Most (though not all) the passages that refer to the day of the Lord focus primarily on events leading up to and accompanying the return of Christ. Isaiah 2 and 13 suggest the day of the Lord covers the same time period as the great tribulation.

Some statements in Isaiah 2 are echoed by the events of the sixth seal of Revelation 6:12–17. “In the last days” (Isa 2:2), when “the common man [will be] humbled, and the man of importance…abased,” they will “enter the rock[s] and hide in the dust from the terror of the Lord and from the splendor of His majesty” (vv. 9–10) “for the Lord of hosts will have a day of reckoning” (v. 12). As Revelation 6:15–16 states, great and humble people alike will hide in caves and rocks of the mountains.

A further example is seen in a comparison of catastrophic cosmic phenomena in Isaiah 13:6–13 and the sixth seal of Revelation 6. Isaiah wrote that in “the day of the Lord” (Isa 13:6), when God “will punish the world for its evil” (v. 11) and put an end to man’s arrogance and haughtiness (v. 11), the stars, sun, and moon will be darkened (v. 10) and the heavens and the earth will shake (v. 13). These occurrences are amazingly similar to the phenomena of the sixth seal (Rev 6:12–13). The day of the Lord, then, is not separate from the great tribulation; though broader than the great tribulation, the day of the Lord certainly includes it. Therefore the rapture must certainly occur before the sixth seal, which begins the second half of Daniel’s 70th week. This contradicts Rosenthal’s position that the rapture will occur after the sixth seal.[13]

Is God’s Wrath a Part of the Sixth Seal?

Under the catastrophic judgments of the sixth seal the unsaved will exclaim that “the great day of their wrath [ὀργῆς] has come [ἦλθεν]; and who can stand?” (Rev 6:17). Rosenthal argues that the aorist tense ἦλθεν can be translated “is come” in the sense that God’s wrath is about to occur,[14] thus making God’s wrath come after the sixth seal rather than being a part of the seal judgments. Granted, ἦλθεν may occasionally have a future sense, as perhaps in Revelation 19:7. But it normally refers to a past action. In Revelation 5:7; 7:13; 8:3; 11:18; 17:1, 10; 18:10; and 21:9 ἦλθεν is used of events that will have already occurred.

The unsaved living at the time of the sixth seal will state that God’s wrath “has come,” not that it is about to occur. The day of the Lord, which includes an outpouring of God’s wrath, will include the events of the sixth seal. It is therefore wrong for Rosenthal to suggest that the day of the Lord does not begin until after the sixth seal.

Does Revelation 4:1-6:11 Refer to God’s Judgment?

A further question to be asked in relation to the pre-wrath rapture theory is whether Revelation 4:1–6:11 should also be included as part of God’s tribulation judgment of wrath on the world. Christ, the Lamb of God, will take the scroll with seven seals (Rev 5:4–7) and open the seals (6:1), which will usher in the judgments of the six seals (6:2–17). However, Rosenthal argues that since the first five seals are carried out by man, the seals are not part of God’s judgment. This logic sets up an artificial principle of interpretation that ignores the plain teaching of God’s control and execution of events throughout the Book of Revelation. One example is found in the destruction of the harlot of Babylon (Rev 17–18). This judgment is the will of God, but it is carried out by the beast (the Antichrist) and his cohorts: “And the ten horns which you saw, and the beast, these will hate the harlot and will make her desolate and naked, and will eat her flesh and will burn her up with fire. For God has put it in their hearts to execute His purpose by having a common purpose, and by giving their kingdom to the beast, until the words of God should be fulfilled” (17:16–18).

Another reason this opening of the seals by Christ indicates that the seals are God’s judgment on mankind, not merely man’s judgment on man, is that the Apostle John wrote in his Gospel that Christ is the One who will execute judgment on the world. “For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, in order that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father…. and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man” (John 5:22–23, 27). Therefore, since the seals contain God’s judgments executed by Christ (and not by man), the church must be removed before the seal judgments.

In addition each of the series of seven judgments (seals, trumpets, and bowls) as well as other plagues in Revelation are preceded by cosmic phenomena such as lightning, thunder, and earthquakes (Rev 4:5; 6:12–14; 8:5; 11:19; 16:17–18). These occurrences signal the outpouring of God’s judgment on the world—judgments that are filled with His wrath and that bring devastating destruction. The presence of these signals of judgment immediately before the breaking of the seals (4:5) certainly indicates that the seals will be part of God’s judgment during the tribulation.[15] If the rapture of the church is defined as “pre-wrath,” which is biblically and theologically correct, then the church must be removed before the beginning of God’s seal judgments, not after the sixth seal judgment as Rosenthal suggests.

The second seal judgment will result in death for many people by the sword (6:3–4), and the third seal judgment will bring famine (vv. 5–6). The fourth seal judgment will include death by the sword, famine, pestilence, and wild beasts (vv. 7–8). These are clear indications of God’s wrath, as seen in Ezekiel 14:21: “For thus says the Lord God, ‘How much more when I send My four severe judgments against Jerusalem: sword, famine, wild beasts, and plague to cut off man and beast from it.” Leviticus 26:22–26; Deuteronomy 28:21–26; Jeremiah 15:2–4; 16:4–5; and Ezekiel 5:12–17 also refer to these four—the sword, famine, plague, and beasts—as instruments of God’s wrath. Thus the seal judgments, which include these four elements, will be expressions of God’s judgment on mankind. Therefore the rapture, to be “pre-wrath,” must occur before the seal judgments and not after the sixth seal.

Is the Rapture of the Church Found in Matthew 24 and Luke 17?

Rosenthal confuses the rapture of the church with the second coming of Christ in Matthew 24:40–41 and Luke 17:20–37. He writes:

In a classic Second Coming text, the Lord taught, “For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven, so shall also the Son of Man be in his day” (Luke 17:24). The phrase “in his day” is a clear reference to the Day of the Lord…. The point of the Lord’s teaching is clear. Noah entered the ark, then the judgment began—on the same day. For emphasis, the Lord gave another illustration of the same truth…. On the same day that Lot fled Sodom, the Lord judged Sodom…. Deliverance of the righteous immediately precedes judgment of the wicked. To postulate a period of time between rapture (deliverance) and wrath (judgment) is to contradict the Scriptures.[16]

Rosenthal’s argument of a “same-day” rapture with the day of the Lord does not stand up to biblical scrutiny. After Noah’s family and the animals entered the ark, the Flood waters did not begin for seven days (Gen 7:7, 10). Genesis 19:15–24 suggests that a period of time may have elapsed between Lot’s escape from Sodom to the small town of Zoar and God’s outpouring of judgment on the wicked in Sodom and Gomorrah. Lot’s escape began at dawn (v. 15) and brimstone and fire did not fall on the twin cities till Lot reached Zoar and “the sun had risen over the earth.” Also Revelation 4:1–6:1 suggests a brief span of time may occur between the rapture and the beginning of the seal judgments on the wicked.

Rosenthal further confuses the identification of who “is taken” and who “is left” in Matthew 24 and Luke 17.

At Christ’s coming there will be those inside the ark, as it were through faith in Christ, and those outside the ark, because of having rejected Christ. The Lord illustrated that truth: “Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken [in rapture], and the other left [for judgment]. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken [in rapture], and the other left [for judgment]” (Matt 24:40–41).[17]

Rosenthal’s understanding is the reverse of what the text is teaching. The ones taken in the days of Noah and Lot, as well as at Jesus’ second coming, are taken in judgment. Luke 17:34–37 is clear: “I tell you, on that night there will be two men in one bed; one will be taken, and the other will be left. There will be two women grinding at the same place; one will be taken and the other will be left. Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other will be left. And answering they said to Him, ‘Where, Lord?’ And He said to them, ‘Where the body is, there also will the vultures be gathered.’“ This passage clearly indicates that the ones “taken” will be killed and their bodies will be eaten by vultures, a further reference to the time period of the battle of Armageddon (Rev 19:17–18). Matthew 24:39 also shows that unbelievers are “taken” in judgment. The unbelieving in Noah’s day “did not understand until the flood came and took them all away.” Then Matthew added, “So shall the coming of the Son of Man be.”

Is Michael the Archangel the Restrainer of 2 Thessalonians 2:6-7?

Rosenthal identifies Michael as the “restrainer” of 2 Thessalonians 2:6–7.[18] He follows Rashi’s interpretation of עמד in Daniel 12:1, which reads, “Now at that time Michael, the prince who stands guard [הָעֹד] over the sons of your people, will arise [יַעֲמֹד].” Rashi was a French Jewish rabbi who was born in 1040 and died in 1105. Rosenthal presents his view in this way.

But what does the Hebrew word for stand up (amad) mean? Rashi, one of Israel’s greatest scholars and one who had no concern regarding the issue of the timing of the Rapture under discussion in this book, understood stand up to literally mean stand still. The meaning, according to one of Israel’s greatest scholars, would be to stand aside or be inactive. Michael, the guardian of Israel, had earlier fought for her (Dan 10:13, 21), but now this one “who standeth for the children of thy [Daniel’s] people” would stand still or stand aside. He would not help; he would not restrain; he would not hold down. The Midrash, commenting on this verse, says, “The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Michael, ‘You are silent? You do not defend my children.’“[19]

Apparently Rosenthal accepts Rashi as his authority because Rashi gives a definition that is acceptable to Rosenthal’s view. However, it seems contradictory for Daniel to describe Michael as “the great prince who stands guard [הָעֹד] over the sons of your people,” and then to suggest that when Michael “will arise” (יַעֲמֹד), he will stand aside and give no help to Israel. The Hebrew (עמד) here means “to arise, appear, come on the scene.”[20] It occurs 39 times in Daniel but never with the meaning “to stand still.” The Septuagint translates יַעֲמֹד in Daniel 12:1 with ἀναστήσεται. Ανίστημι {sic} and cognate forms occur hundreds of times in the Septuagint and never once refer to one who stands aside out of the way.

Besides misunderstanding עמד in Daniel 12:1, Rosenthal fails to recognize the parallel account of the ministry of Michael to the Jewish people in Revelation 12:7–17. Michael and his angels will stand up on behalf of Israel, waging war against the dragon (Satan) and his angels. Satan and his angels will then be cast out of heaven (v. 9). This will occur at the beginning of the second half of the tribulation. During that three and one-half years (1,260 days, v. 6, and “a time and times and half a time,” v. 14), Israel will be protected from Satan (vv. 6, 14), who will try to defeat Israel (vv. 13–17). Obviously, then, Michael will not “stand aside” and offer no help, but rather will “stand up” and help Israel—not the church. Michael cannot be the restrainer of sin, whose actions will be removed at the rapture (2 Thess 2:7), because at the middle of the tribulation he will oppose the forces of the Antichrist.

Will the Bowl Judgments Follow the Second Coming of Christ?

In Rosenthal’s view, Christ’s second coming will occur at the seventh trumpet and thus before the bowl judgments. He states, “Christ will literally return to assume His kingdom at the seventh trumpet (Rev 11:15–17).”[21] He identifies the last trumpet of 1 Corinthians 15:52 with the seven trumpets of Revelation.[22] Though he squeezes the seven trumpets (plural) into one trumpet (singular), he suggests, “That interpretation is unstrained and biblically accurate.”[23] The difficulty with this view is that it wrenches the bowl judgments (Rev 15–16) out of John’s chronological order by placing them after the second coming of Christ (Rev 19).[24] But in reality, after the bowl judgments are poured out, one of the seven angels of those judgments will show John the coming destruction of Babylon (17:1). Then after the destruction of Babylon, Christ will return.

“After these things I heard, as it were, a loud voice of a great multitude in heaven, saying, ‘Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God…. He has judged the great harlot…. And I saw heaven opened; and behold a white horse, and He who sat upon it is called Faithful and True; and in righteousness He judges and wages war” (19:1–2, 11). Therefore since the bowl judgments will precede the destruction of Babylon, and since the destruction of Babylon will precede the second coming of Christ, it is impossible to place the bowl judgments after the coming of Christ without disregarding the plain sequential statements of the text.

The Pre-Wrath Rapture Is Also Pretribulational

Rosenthal’s basic thesis is that the rapture must precede the wrath of God, and that the rapture will follow the tribulation. The sequence, he argues, is (a) the great tribulation, (b) the rapture, (c) God’s wrath (or the day of the Lord), and (d) Christ’s second coming. But can the tribulation and God’s wrath (which he says involves only the seven trumpet judgments) be separated in this way? Ephesians 5:6 states, “Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath [ὀργή] of God comes upon the sons of disobedience.” Second Thessalonians 1:5–8 states that, as a result of the persecution of the Thessalonians, “This is a plain indication of God’s righteous judgment…. For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction [θλῖψιν] those who afflict you, and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.” The term ὀργή is parallel to θλῖψις in these two passages. Therefore ὀργή should not be restricted to a definition that cannot also incorporate tribulation.

Luke 21:23 and its parallel Synoptic accounts (Matt 24:21; Mark 13:19) provide another parallel: “Woe to those who are with child and to those who nurse babes in those days; for there will be great distress [ἀνάγκη; Matt 24:21 and Mark 13:19 have θλῖψις] upon the land, and wrath [ὀργή] to this people.” These parallels indicate that the wrath of God does involve tribulation. Tribulation can be seen as a part of God’s wrath. First Thessalonians 5:9 and 1:10 clearly state that God has not appointed believers to wrath (ὀργή) and He will deliver them from it.

This article has sought to show that the first half and even the entire seven years of Daniel’s 70th week should be designated as “the tribulation,” or “a time of tribulation.” The second half is certainly “the Great Tribulation.” Revelation 4–19, which spans the 70th week of Daniel, reports the forthcoming judgment of God, that is, His tribulation and wrath. Therefore the church must be removed before the beginning of the 70th week of Daniel, which is elaborated in Revelation 4–19. The following chart presents the sequence of major events in the 70th week of Daniel, according to the pretribulational rapture view. In this view the rapture will precede not only God’s wrath during the latter portion of the second half of the tribulation (a portion Rosenthal calls the day of the Lord) but also God’s wrath and judgment in the entire seven-year tribulation. The rapture, then, is not only “pre-wrath” but is also pretribulational.

Notes

1. Marvin Rosenthal, The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1990).
2. Gerald B. Stanton’s excellent critique of Rosenthal’s view, “Review of The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church,” was published in Bibliotheca Sacra 148 (January-March 1991): 90-110. The present article is an effort to build on that article, supplementing it with additional observations and critiques of Rosenthal’s unusual view.
3. Rosenthal, The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church, p. 160.
4. Ibid., p. 210.
5. Ibid., p. 60.
6. Ibid., p. 61.
7. This chart combines many of Rosenthal’s charts.
8. Ibid., p. 145 (italics his).
9. Ibid., p. 103 (italics his).
10. Ibid., p. 105 (italics his).
11. Ibid., pp. 109-10.
12. Ibid., p. 117 (brackets added; italics his).
13. Ibid., p. 18. He places the rapture at Revelation 8:1.
14. Ibid., pp. 163-80.
15. See Richard Bauckham, “The Eschatological Earthquake in the Apocalypse of John,” Novum Testamentum 19 (1977): 224-33.
16. Rosenthal, The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church, pp. 139-40 (italics his).
17. Ibid., p. 220 (brackets his).
18. Ibid., pp. 257-61.
19. Ibid., p. 258 (italics and brackets his).
20. Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962), p. 764.
21. Rosenthal, The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church, p. 146. Also see his charts on pp. 147 and 276.
22. Ibid., pp. 193-94.
23. Ibid., p. 194.
24. For a complete discussion of the chronological order of events in the Book of Revelation, see John A. McLean, “The Seventieth Week of Daniel 9:27 as a Literary Key for Understanding the Structure of the Apocalypse of John” (PhD diss., University of Michigan, 1990).