Page 256 - The Rapture Question by John F. Walvoord
P. 256

The Rapture in the Book of Revelation
   nians 5 that the day of wrath does not come until Armaged­
   don, and accordingly he is forced by his previous position to
   ignore the sweeping character of the judgments of Revelation
   6 up to the sixth howl of the wrath of God. He must also move
   around the fulfillment of the seals, trumpets, and bowls to
   accommodate this rather strange approach. Even with this
   accommodation, however, it is difficult to explain how a
   fourth of the earth’s population can be destroyed in the fourth
   seal (Rev. 6:7-8), followed by the sixth trumpet where one-
   third of the earth’s population is destroyed (Rev. 9:15), and
   account for all the other tremendous judgments such as are
   itemized in the first five bowls of the wrath of God. According
   to Revelation 15:7, all seven bowls arc “filled with the wrath of
   God.” How, then, can the wrath of God begin in the sixth
   bowl?
      It should be obvious to the objective reader that Gundry
   has adopted a strange and an unnatural exegesis in an effort to
   accommodate some of his unusual views in support of post-
   tribulationism. It would be far more consistent for Gundry to
   spiritualize all these judgments, as many posttribulationists
   do, rather than to take them literally and then move them
   chronologically to the end-time just before the Second Com­
   ing. His motive in his exegesis was obviously to avoid the
   concept that the church before Armageddon will experience
   the wrath of God. The unsupportable nature of his conclu­
   sions is its own refutation.
       Gundry linked Armageddon in Revelation 16 with Reve­
    lation 14:14-20, in which he attempted to find a description of
    the Rapture. Even a casual reading of this section will reveal
    no supporting evidence, except that there happens to be a
    white cloud. This passage deals almost entirely with judgment
    and says nothing about resurrection or translation. Only an
    expositor desperate to support an unsupportable view would
    appeal to a passage like this.
       Intrinsic in Gundry’s view, however, is the concept that
                        265
   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261