The Kingdom of Promise and Prophecy

by Robertson L. Whiteside

PHILADELPHIA AND THE HOUR OF TRIAL

Foy E. Wallace, Jr., passes over to me a document which was written in Detroit with a request that I say something about it. The document would fill my page. As much of it has no special bearing on the points sought to be made, I will make liberal and fair quotations from it. The passage commented upon first is Rev. 3:10: “Because thou didst keep the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of trial, that hour which is to come upon the whole world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.” I quote:

“The promise. ‘The hour of trial’ was ahead, but Philadelphia was to be kept from it. Not saved through it, but kept from it....

“That Hour. (1) It is the ‘hour of trial’ with emphasis on ‘the’. (2) It is the ‘hour of trial’ with emphasis on ‘trial’, for it is ‘to try them that dwell upon the earth.’ (4) It is yet future; ‘to come upon the whole world.’ Nothing has since occurred in history filling out this picture.... (5) the Philadelphia type of saints will escape.... Those who keep his word are of the Philadelphia type of saints. The church that is true to the word is a church of the Philadelphian type and can lay claim to this same promise.”

John wrote seven letters, dictated by the Lord, to seven churches in Asia; the church at Philadelphia was one of these churches. The Lord made a definite promise to the church at Philadelphia. Naturally the members of that church would understand that the promise was to them; but that church long ago ceased to exist. And yet we are told that the promise made to those brethren is yet future. If that be so, then that promise was not for those brethren at all! They are all dead; was that the way the Lord was going to keep them from the hour of trial? No, no; according to the foregoing quotation, the promise was not meant for the church at Philadelphia at all, but for the churches of the Philadelphian type! Such juggling with the record is both taking away from and adding to the words of the book. The promise was not made to the “Philadelphian type of saints”, but to the church at Philadelphia. It is true that some promises, general in their nature, though not to one individual or group of individuals, are to be enjoyed by all who fulfill the conditions; but certainly the ones to whom the promise is directly made are included in the promise! But, strange to say, according to the foregoing quotation, the church at Philadelphia to whom the promise was made was not included in the promise made directly to them! That promise is yet future, so we are told.

But the implication of the quotation is that the promise was made to the Philadelphian type of churches, and that it is to be fulfilled in “the rapture.” And what is it that a person cannot prove, if he is allowed to juggle words to suit his theory? If the hour of trial is yet future, the Lord kept Philadelphia from it by deferring it till all those saints died. But he conjures up a peculiar method of escape for those saints who long ago died: (7) “The method of escape is found in such passages as 1 Thess. 4:16, 17. It is often called the rapture, and properly so, from the expression ‘caught up,’ which rapture means.” But would not the saints of Philadelphia escape that supposed three and a half years of tribulation if they should remain in their graves?

I quote again: “Other Designations. Jesus used the term ‘that day,’ also the term ‘tribulation.’ Daniel calls it ‘a time of trouble’ such as is unequaled and never repeated. In Jer. 30:7 it is ‘the time of Jacob’s trouble; but he shall be saved out of it.’ Here is a parallel to the escape of the three Hebrews from the fiery furnace. Those who are ‘saved out of it’ are distinct from those who are kept from it. John has a vision of a number who ‘come out of the great tribulation,’ but the Philadelphians are kept from it!”

He affirms that the various terms he names applies to one certain period that is yet to be; but he gives not one word of proof. The terms, “that day,” “in that day,” “day of trouble,” “tribulation,” “tribulations,” “that hour,” are used many times in the Bible, and certainly do not all refer to the same period of time. Why then pick out a term here and there and arbitrarily apply them to one certain time? THE REASON: a certain theory demands it. And if the writer will examine the Greek in Jer. 30:7 and Rev. 3:10, he will find apo, from, in Jeremiah, and ek, out of, in Revelation, which completely reverses the point he seeks to make on the use of prepositions.

Again I quote: “Chronology.... The order of some outstanding things foretold is revealed. To get this order saves confusion. From Jesus’ prophecy on the mount (Matt. 24 and 25; Mark 13; Luke 21) avoiding all forced interpretations, we learn ‘the tribulation of those days’ leads up to the darkening of the sun and moon, the falling of the stars of the heaven, the powers of the heaven being shaken, and the glorious appearing of the Son of man. Note the expression ‘immediately after’ in Matt. 24:29. Note also Mark 13:24-27 ... even up to the tribulation there are foretold ‘wars and rumors of wars,’ and ‘nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.’ Again, attention is called to the fact that those days of unprecedented tribulation ‘shall be shortened.’ Obviously they are terminated by the Son of man in connection with his appearing. The times foretold in this connection constitute ‘the days of the Son of man.’ (see Luke 17:26.) The ‘rapture’ precedes ‘the tribulation of those days,’ ‘the days of the Son of man.’ And the rapture awaits nothing that is foretold.”

There are difficulties in the discourse Jesus delivered to the disciples on Olivet; but it is certain that no one will get a correct idea of what was said if he ignores the questions that gave rise to the speech. Jesus was answering questions put to him by the disciples. The disciples had called his attention to the temple and its adornments. Jesus said: “As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in which there shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.” When they had crossed to the mount of Olives, Peter, James, John, and Andrew said to him: “Teacher, when therefore shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when these things are about to come to pass?” Put yourself in the place of these disciples: would you not understand that everything Jesus said was in answer to those two questions? Would Jesus confuse them by saying a lot of things which they would understand to be in answer to their questions, but were not? In Mark’s record we have: “Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when these things are about to be accomplished?” To say that most of the answer Jesus gave related to something about which they had not inquired is to accuse Jesus of not dealing fairly with them. In Matthew’s record we have: “Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?” For the last clause the marginal reading has, “Or, the consummation of the age.” To say that Matthew’s report of these questions does not mean the same as the reports of Mark and Luke is to accuse some one of making a false report of the questions.[1]

It is singular that so many commentators take it for granted that the disciples were, in Matthew’s report, asking about the second coming of Christ; but that could not be. Jesus had not taught them anything about his second coming; besides, they had never believed that he would be put to death! The Jews held to the idea that when the Messiah came, he would abide, forever, ruling as a great king in Jerusalem. How then could the disciples have been asking questions about the second coming of Christ, when they did not believe he would go away? It is astonishing that commentators have overlooked this plain fact. The disciples referred to his coming in judgment on Jerusalem. The tribulation was the suffering of the Jews when the Romans destroyed their nation and Jerusalem. The temple was utterly destroyed. The Jewish nation ended; darkness and gloom settled down over the people. The fulfillment of what Jesus had said was a sign that he was what he claimed to be—that the Son of man was also the Christ, the Son of God. For the natural phenomena mentioned you get some explanation by reading Isa. 13:1-10.