Pretribulationism

Recently, Dr. David Reagan has written a very brief critique of Prewrath here. As is custom of other pretribulational critiques of the Prewrath position, his article shows that he does not understand the Prewrath position, and I suspect he has not read any primary literature but has relied on skewed secondary sources.
Before I interact with his article, I want to preface a few words.
I have asked Dr. Reagan to engage in a public debate since I believe it would be beneficial for God’s people. He rebuffed my request for having meaningful interaction on a public level calling it a “total waste of time.” If he is not interested in public debate, then I think it would be good at least to have a written dialogue. Dr. Reagan and I can engage in meaningful interaction on our respective blogs. I will post his articles on my blog, and he can post mine on his blog. Then we can post each others’ respective rebuttals and so on concluding with closing articles. We both will have a word maximum on each article so it will be a fair exchange. This way, his readers will read my articles on his website, and my readers will read his articles on my website. If Dr. Reagan is averse to public meaningful interaction, then surely he cannot be against having a beneficial dialogue in writing.
Moving on to the article.
I come from the school of thought that credible scholarship requires at least two things: First, it requires that the one critiquing a position understands not just what the other position claims, but the reasoning behind the claims. Reagan has done neither.
Second, good scholarship requires interacting with both the claims and the reasoning. Again, this is lacking from Reagan’s article. If I failed at both of these activities my reputation as a researcher and theologian would diminish quickly.
As a prewrath rapturist, I am disappointed at the strawman that Reagan creates. I do not recognize almost any point he says that I am suppose to believe as a Prewrather. It is similar to a Muslim saying, “Christians believe the Trinity, which teaches that there are three Gods.” False representation is a sign of a failed argument.
Nevertheless, let us interact with his article.
He starts off saying:

“Can an argument be made for placing the Rapture near the end of the Tribulation?”

This is not what the Prewrath position affirms. Notice that he does not cite any prewrath documentation so his readers can verify his assertions.
The Prewrath position places the rapture sometime during the second half of the 70th week of Daniel. Jesus says we cannot know the exact day or hour (Matt 24:36). The rapture can occur anytime between a period near the midpoint and toward the end of the 70th week. Here is a chart that is available at our site that Reagan could have easily linked to.
Next, he writes:

“The cornerstone of this concept is that the terrifying events during the first half of the Tribulation are due to the wrath of Man and Satan, and not to God.”

The “cornerstone” of the Prewrath position is the first half? Um…I am stupefied. Prewrath teachers affirm that this period is the most insignificant. This is not to say that there will not be trials for believers at this time. But Reagan gets it completely wrong. Prewrath teaches that the terrifying events due to the wrath of Man/Satan are during the Great Tribulation, which occurs during the second half.
I am seriously not trying to be hard on Dr. Reagan. Whoever fed him distorted secondary sources on the prewrath rapture mislead him. But Reagan is to blame as well since his incompetency of not checking out the most basic facts of the Prewrath position undermines his credibility. Given that the Prewrath position is the fastest growing rapture position today, I would think that he would be on top of current issues.
Next, Reagan asserts that the Prewrath rapture undermines the sovereignty of God. I find this odd since all the writers on our prewrath website are Calvinists. He writes:

“This concept raises a serious theological problem because it questions the sovereignty of God. It assumes that Man and Satan can act apart from God’s will, when the fact of the matter is that neither can do anything God is not willing to permit.”

I truly do not see how Reagan is making a connection here that if someone believes that the Church will encounter Antichrist somehow requires a denial of God’s sovereignty. Believers are being persecuted even today, does that require that God is no longer sovereign? His reasoning is incoherent. He then writes:

“Any carnage wrought by Man or Satan during the Tribulation will still constitute the wrath of God.”

Essentially, his argumentation is such: “The 70th week of Daniel is entirely God’s wrath, therefore, you are wrong.” This is the classic logical fallacy called petitio principii, or most people know it as begging the question, where a conclusion is taken for granted in the premises.
And Reagan did not even bother to inform his readers of the most definitional tenet of Prewrath, which places a distinction between the Antichrist’s Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord’s wrath.
Incidentally, Reagan misunderstands the theology of sovereignty. It is not that God merely “permits” actions; instead he ordains them, or authorizes them. Case in point are the four malevolent horsemen who are sent out. The term used is edothē (was given), which is the divine passive indicating God’s authorization–not merely “permission”–indicating God’s sovereign power over everything including forces of evil.
Next he writes:

“There is another serious problem with the pre-wrath Rapture concept. It relates to the fact that all the wrath of Revelation is specifically portrayed as the wrath of God. Where do the seal judgments originate? The answer is from the throne of God as Jesus opens each seal of the scroll that was in the Father’s right hand (Revelation 6:1). And where do the trumpet judgments originate? The same place — from the throne of God (Revelation 8:2). When we arrive at the bowl judgments in Revelation 15:1, we are told that with them, ‘the wrath of God is finished.'”

Reagan reasons that the seals must be the wrath of God since they originate from the same place that the trumpet and bowls originate from. This reasoning is flawed since God ordains all things from his throne, not just wrath. And did not Reagan just affirm above that God is sovereign over all things? And this would include suffering of believers. And a believer cannot suffer unless it is ordained by God’s wisdom. Further, Reagan does not discuss any specifics distinguishing the seals from the actual content of the scroll. I have written an article showing that the seals are not God’s wrath here.
In addition, for Reagan to be consistent he must agree that believers suffer God’s wrath since the fifth seal is martyrdom. But this cannot be the case since God has promised believers exemption from his wrath. This is very problematic for pretribulationists who try to make the seals God’s wrath.
Next, he makes another blundering misrepresentation of the Prewrath position:

Occurring during the first half of the Tribulation? This is in error. What is definitional of prewrath is that the fifth through the seventh seal occur during the second half, not the first half. And all prewrath teachers agree that the placement of the first four seals are not essential to the Prewrath position.
He writes:

“There is no justification for putting the trumpet judgments at the end of the Tribulation. “

This is not what Prewrath affirms; he is again repeating this error. I addressed this above.
He concludes with saying:

“One final problem with the pre-wrath concept of the Rapture is that it disputes the fact that there is no purpose for the Church being in the Tribulation. The Tribulation is the 70th week of Daniel, a time devoted to God accomplishing His purposes among the Jewish people, not the Church.”

There are a couple of reasons why God would have his Church persecuted: (1) To refine his bride to become spotless (2) And to encourage other believers to stand firm in faith during persecution. These reasons are foreign to many western believers, particularly those in pretribulational escapist churches–but they are true, Biblical, and they exhort us to heed to what is coming upon us.
In addition, he calls the 70th week of Daniel a Jewish week. It is actually a Gentile week. This is the time of the Gentiles–490 years was decreed for Gentiles to trample on the Jews. And when that time expires, then salvation will come to the Jewish nation. God will be working sovereignly with his Bride, the Church, refining their faith; and, at the same time, he will be working with the Jewish remnant who will be included into the one people of God at the end of the 70th week of Daniel.