Q. John’s gospel is the least chronological of the four gospels. Events are out of order and a very unequal amount of verses are applied to certain events versus other events in Jesus’ life. So it would seem unlikely then that John’s book of Revelation would be completely in time order. Perhaps some parts of the Revelation are chronological, and others are placed thematically. This is a critical issue, since from reading your material it appears the primary basis of your belief in pre-Trib is because Rev 4 & 5 in chapter order precede the rest of the book. Can you please enlighten me as to how you see it and why?
A. I’ve read lots of opinions about whether the Revelation is chronological or not, and the only exceptions to a chronological reading that makes sense to me are;
1) John could only write about one thing at a time so there are places where multiple things are happening together and he could only describe them one at a time,
2) where he brought a particular subject to its conclusion before back tracking to pick up another train of thought, or
3) where he’s providing some background to help us understand something. These are all obvious. Otherwise, I don’t think it makes sense to depart from a chronological reading.
It’s not fair to compare the Revelation with John’s gospel. In the Revelation John was essentially “taking dictation” from the Lord, and the writing style is so different that some scholars debate whether he even wrote it.
Finally, there are several much stronger proofs for a pre-trib rapture that make a chronological reading of Revelation unnecessary to support the case for one.