The Prewrath Rapture position is a biblical synthesis of pre-, mid-, and posttribulationalism, together with a refinement of the timing issue that brings harmony to all of the rapture passages in question. A thorough examination of the Prewrath position reveals that an unquestionable truth from each of the three positions is kept while the errors of each position are discarded. The proponents of these three major positions would probably concur that the major area of disagreement concerns the actual timing of the rapture which, they would have to admit, also influences their interpretation of many passages that deal with issues related to the rapture question. Each camp on the rapture question has committed followers of Jesus Christ as adherents. Dr. John F. Walvoord was an advocate of the pretribulational view. Having studied at Dallas Theological Seminary and spent time in his company, I can personally testify to Dr. Walvoord’s love for God and His Word. “A giant of the faith in modern time” is a fitting title for this man of God. The fact that he believed the church will be taken before Daniel’s Seventieth Week begins makes him no less an honorable man. Dr. Gleason L. Archer, Jr. on the other hand follows the midtribulational viewpoint. He argues that Christ returns to rapture His church at the mid-point of the Seventieth Week. I have not personally met Dr. Archer, but I have read and utilized his writings. As an Old Testament professor, Dr. Archer has distinguished himself as a first rate exegete of God’s Word. The fact that he believes the church will be taken at the mid-point of the Seventieth Week, before the “great tribulation,” makes him no less a serious student of the Bible. Dr. Douglas J. Moo endorses a posttribulational rapture. As a Professor of New Testament, Dr. Moo has demonstrated an outstanding mind for New Testament exegesis. The fact that Dr. Moo believes Scripture teaches that Christ will return at the end of the Seventieth Week to rapture His church, after the “great tribulation” and after the six trumpets and six bowl judgments, makes him no less a committed follower of Christ. The number of faithful followers of Jesus Christ who hold to each of the positions stated above are many. Logically, it makes sense that the correct position on the timing of Christ’s return is some combination of the three major views, given that each view is based on the same passages of Scripture. It is arrogant and illogical then to conclude that only one of these positions is absolutely right and the other two are totally wrong. The question that each position is attempting to answer concerns the timing of the rapture. This continues to be the irreconcilable difference. Countless hours of time and gallons of ink have been expended in order to prove the other two positions wrong. Scholars continue to search for the one argument that will close the debate in favor of their own particular position. The sad result is that the discussions have gotten so trivial and the distinctions between words so technical that the average follower of Christ cannot follow the arguments. The price of this continual infighting is, on the one hand, an uneducated laity convinced that the truth cannot be known. On the other hand, committed godly men and women support pre-, mid-, and posttribulationalism with fierce devotion to their position. For now, the debate is purely esoteric. No real danger exists, for all things continue as before. However, one day there will be a world full of people that will be called upon to be that final generation of humanity to experience the climactic events of history. The old adage that end-time events “will all pan out in the end” will not be taken so lightly by the generation that will see these things begin to happen.

The Prewrath Rapture position is a biblical synthesis of pre-, mid-, and posttribulationalism, together with a refinement of the timing issue that brings harmony to all of the rapture passages in question. A thorough examination of the Prewrath position reveals that an unquestionable truth from each of the three positions is kept while the errors of each position are discarded. The proponents of these three major positions would probably concur that the major area of disagreement concerns the actual timing of the rapture which, they would have to admit, also influences their interpretation of many passages that deal with issues related to the rapture question. Each camp on the rapture question has committed followers of Jesus Christ as adherents. Dr. John F. Walvoord was an advocate of the pretribulational view. Having studied at Dallas Theological Seminary and spent time in his company, I can personally testify to Dr. Walvoord’s love for God and His Word. “A giant of the faith in modern time” is a fitting title for this man of God. The fact that he believed the church will be taken before Daniel’s Seventieth Week begins makes him no less an honorable man. Dr. Gleason L. Archer, Jr. on the other hand follows the midtribulational viewpoint. He argues that Christ returns to rapture His church at the mid-point of the Seventieth Week. I have not personally met Dr. Archer, but I have read and utilized his writings. As an Old Testament professor, Dr. Archer has distinguished himself as a first rate exegete of God’s Word. The fact that he believes the church will be taken at the mid-point of the Seventieth Week, before the “great tribulation,” makes him no less a serious student of the Bible. Dr. Douglas J. Moo endorses a posttribulational rapture. As a Professor of New Testament, Dr. Moo has demonstrated an outstanding mind for New Testament exegesis. The fact that Dr. Moo believes Scripture teaches that Christ will return at the end of the Seventieth Week to rapture His church, after the “great tribulation” and after the six trumpets and six bowl judgments, makes him no less a committed follower of Christ. The number of faithful followers of Jesus Christ who hold to each of the positions stated above are many. Logically, it makes sense that the correct position on the timing of Christ’s return is some combination of the three major views, given that each view is based on the same passages of Scripture. It is arrogant and illogical then to conclude that only one of these positions is absolutely right and the other two are totally wrong. The question that each position is attempting to answer concerns the timing of the rapture. This continues to be the irreconcilable difference. Countless hours of time and gallons of ink have been expended in order to prove the other two positions wrong. Scholars continue to search for the one argument that will close the debate in favor of their own particular position. The sad result is that the discussions have gotten so trivial and the distinctions between words so technical that the average follower of Christ cannot follow the arguments. The price of this continual infighting is, on the one hand, an uneducated laity convinced that the truth cannot be known. On the other hand, committed godly men and women support pre-, mid-, and posttribulationalism with fierce devotion to their position. For now, the debate is purely esoteric. No real danger exists, for all things continue as before. However, one day there will be a world full of people that will be called upon to be that final generation of humanity to experience the climactic events of history. The old adage that end-time events “will all pan out in the end” will not be taken so lightly by the generation that will see these things begin to happen.