Is the Pre-Tribulational Rapture
Teaching a Hoax? (Pt. 3)
Rock of Offence Special Commentary
*****************************************************
This is Part 3 of a three-part Bible study.
Click on the links below to access the
other parts of this study.
Part 1
-----
Part 2
*****************************************************
What is the Connection Between
a First Century Forged Letter and
Recent Accusations Made Against
a Plymouth Brethren Minister Named
John Nelson Darby?
The New Testament constantly warns us "not to be deceived". For this reason, we should be aware of some dangerous teaching, which has now, unfortunately, taken on the illusion of being a mainstream truth. It is especially concentrated on the Internet and now has the power to mislead many of God's people. There are some prominent Bible prophecy teachers (and their disciples), who claim that the "pre-tribulational rapture" teaching is a new doctrine created by John Nelson Darby and the Plymouth Brethren in the early 1800's. Even worse, they claim that John Darby's doctrine actually came from a young teenage Christian girl, whose name was Margaret MacDonald. The girl had a vision that she believed was from God involving the rapture. John Darby is accused of taking his rapture doctrine from her vision, which these Bible teachers are now claiming, in their opinion, was demonic (or "from the devil"). As a result, an amazing assumption is made. Since these Bible teachers consider Margaret's vision as being demonic, it also means that they consider John Darby's "pre-tribulational rapture" doctrine as also being demonic because it "allegedly" originated from Margaret's vision. As with any rumor - as it passes from one person to another, it tends to get more and more distorted.
There are serious problems with the accusations certain preachers make against Darby, who was a highly respected Bible teacher and scholar associated with the Plymouth Brethren. Down through Church history, there have always been ministers who defend certain Bible doctrines by claiming that a contrary teaching, is "demonic". The practice is acceptable when the accusation is proven to be true by comparing the teaching in question with Scripture. Yet, it often changes into a dangerous and destructive rumor (which, over time takes on the illusion of being fact) when it's actually based on falsehood.
Here’s an example of the same thing on a different topic :
Currently, there are prominent preachers and so-called evangelists, who claim that Grace (taught according to Scripture as the unmerited and undeserved favor of God) is really "a false grace" and therefore suggests that it originates with the devil (another way of saying that it's demonic). This is a common, yet dishonest accusation made by those who reject Christ's New Covenant and seek to illegally re-establish Old Testament Law as the Christian's "rule of life". A first century version of this erroneous theology was condemned by the leading apostles in Jerusalem in Acts chapter 15. Yet, it survived and exists today as a popular denominational theology embraced by millions of church members. It contradicts everything the New Testament teaches about God's purpose for the sacrificial death of Christ. Yet, it’s considered by many to be solid fundamental Bible teaching.
John Darby's doctrine stood in direct opposition to other popular, yet unbiblical teachings concerning the rapture; such as the mid-tribulational, pre-wrath and post-tribulational positions. This is one reason Darby became a target; to make these unbiblical doctrines appear to be valid. As a result, certain Christian websites now boldly warn that we should avoid pre-tribulational rapture teaching because it's a heresy and comes from the devil -- because it’s based on Darby’s so-called “new doctrine” (which isn't new). What is the justification given for their position? Darby's teaching is accused of being demonic because of its alleged connection with Margaret MacDonald's vision. In other words, the accusations were the result of biased religious opinion designed to discredit - and were not established on Biblical fact.
As we watched this accusation begin to appear on the Internet, some things just didn't add up. The Bible interpretation methods used by the Plymouth Brethren and John Darby are well known in various Christian circles. (Note: our ministry is not associated with the Plymouth Brethren) After doing some study about Darby's life, interesting truths began to surface.
DARBY TAUGHT A PRE-TRIBULATIONAL
RAPTURE BECAUSE THE APOSTLE PAUL,
WHO WROTE NEARLY HALF OF THE NEW
TESTAMENT CANON, TAUGHT THE SAME
THING. DARBY BASED HIS MINISTRY
ON THE THEOLOGY OF THE APOSTLE
PAUL, TAKEN FROM THE PAGES OF
THE BIBLE, WHICH CONTINUES TO
EXPOSE MANY OF THE FALSE END-TIME
TEACHINGS IN THE MODERN CHRISTIAN
CHURCH.
If a pre-tribulational bias existed in Margaret MacDonald's vision (whether her entire vision was authentic is subjective and difficult to judge), it would be in agreement with Saint Paul's teaching from Scripture. At some point, Darby probably mentioned her experience in his sermons and writings - as an example or illustration. This was all that was needed for those, who opposed and despised his rapture teaching, to design a story that would cast doubt on his theology. There is no better way to discredit a Bible teacher than to claim that their doctrine was based on some unreliable supernatural vision (especially one from a teenager) - and then make the unsubstantiated allegation that it came from the devil. Unfortunately, these kinds of tactics are used all the time in the institutional Christian Church to persuade spiritually inexperienced church members to side with a particular preacher and his doctrine. In the world of religion, just the accusation, whether it is true or not, is enough to do irreparable damage to the credibility of a minister. The Pharisees used these same tactics against Jesus because His teachings and miracles were exposing their ministry and doctrines as illegitimate. Their false accusations eventually led to His unjust crucifixion. This fact alone should warn us about the power of false rumors.
There is one glaring problem with the Darby accusations;
As a minister of Christ, who insisted only on preaching doctrine strictly established on the truth of Scripture - Darby didn't build his rapture theology on something as subjective as dreams and visions. His doctrine (and that of the Plymouth Brethren) was established on Paul's New Testament teachings before Margaret's vision had occurred - and makes this particular argument a cleverly designed lie. It continues to spread among those who teach an erroneous end-time Bible theology, which contradicts the one taught by Paul. If it opposes Paul's teaching, then it's false and unbiblical, regardless of how popular or godly the Bible teachers appear to be. The pre-tribulational rapture teaching was embraced by the early Christian church leadership. It is not some new Bible teaching or religious fad, which is what the critics want us to believe.
Belief in the Pre-Tribulational
Rapture is not Something New
and was Taught by Leaders in
the Early Christian Church
When the accusations against this so-called "new rapture teaching" went viral it was necessary to do some research into church history. The following information is taken from Chuck Missler's seminar on "The Rapture", where he debunks the popular rumor that the Pre-tribulational rapture is a new teaching created by John Darby in the 1800's. Before entering the ministry, Missler worked in military intelligence and had a passion for uncovering facts and information. However, you don't have to look any further than the Apostle Paul who taught the pre-tribulational departure of the Church in the first century. This made Saint Paul - and not Darby - the originator of the teaching. Yet, some church leaders that conducted their ministry after Paul's death (but before Darby’s ministry) are on record as having the same beliefs. We won't go into great detail in this section except to mention names and dates, and in one exceptional case provide a quotation.
According to Chuck Missler's research
and that of other Bible teachers such
as Grant Jeffrey and Dr. Thomas Ice,
the following ministers, writers and
church leaders also held the
"pre-tribulational rapture" position:
Epistle of Barnabas around A.D. 100
Irenaeus in his famous work, "Against Heresies"
(Around 202 A.D.)
Hippolytus who was a student of Irenaeus
Justin Martyr--Dialogue with Trypho
(Around 140 A.D.)
Ephraem, the Syrian (306-373 A.D.)
Also known as Ephraem of Nisibis
Major writer for the Eastern Christian
Church, who stated;
"For all the saints and elect of God
are gathered prior to the tribulation
that is to come, and are taken to the
Lord lest they see the confusion that
is to overwhelm the world because of
our sins."
Peter Jurieu,
"The Approaching Deliverance of of the Church"
(1687)
Phillip Doddridge,
"Commentary on the New Testament" (1738)
Dr. John Gill,
"Commentary on the New Testament (1748)
James Macknight,
"Commentary on the Apostolical Epistles" (1763)
Thomas Scott,
"Commentary on the Holy Bible" (1792)
Emanuel Lacunza (Ben Ezra) (1812)
Edward Irving (1816)
The real intended target in this spiritual attack is Paul’s pre-tribulational theology, which those in the anti-grace camp (or the Bible teachers, who seek to re-establish the Law as the Christian's "rule of life") attempt to redefine. Darby's credibility was attacked to indirectly discredit Paul and his New Testament teachings. In the military, this tactic operates according to the principles of "proxy warfare". It is commonly used by various governments (including our own) to avoid the appearance of being directly involved in an unethical or unpopular operation, which would turn public opinion against them. Unfortunately, this dishonest methodology is often used in religion as well.
This ongoing deception, masquerading as Biblical fact is very similar to the situation that motivated Paul to write his epistles to the Thessalonian Church. As we previously learned, someone wrote a letter to the congregation, explaining that the day of the Lord (or what we understand today as the Tribulation Period) had already started. The unknown author then forged Paul's signature to the letter. Paul had originally taught the Thessalonian believers that the entire Church would be removed before this time of judgment. In other words, he taught, what we refer to today as "a pre-tribulation departure or rapture". The forged letter terrorized the congregation, which required Paul to respond and expose the lie. The epistles of 1st and 2nd Thessalonians were the result. We find it interesting that the forged letter, written over 1900 years ago to discredit Paul and spread fear among Christian believers, represents the same false end-time theology of those who continue to spread the Darby-MacDonald disinformation.
Why are these things important? It continues to show that some so-called "Bible teachers" will misrepresent Scripture (use it out-of-context) and even lie, just as they did in Paul's time, in order to sell their unbiblical doctrine to the Christian community and the unsuspecting public. Today, it is often done to make money selling books and DVD's on the supernatural and fascinating subject of Bible Prophecy. When Paul told believers in the Church; "do not allow anyone to deceive you", his warning was given for a very good reason.
Regardless of these problems, we should still observe the following Scriptural admonition ;
"So Christ was once offered to
bear the sins of many; AND UNTO
THEM THAT LOOK FOR HIM shall he
appear the second time without
sin unto salvation."
(Hebrews 9:28)
Additional information is available
at the following link:
Accepting Christ’s Call To Be A Watcher
Eschatology is the study of Bible prophecy involving end-time events, which includes the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. It is estimated that 1 out of every 25 verses in the New Testament is directly related to Christ's promised return. However, when looking at all the Holy Scriptures (both the Old and New Testament), NEARLY ONE THIRD INVOLVES BIBLE PROPHECY. Spiritual leaders and their followers, who refuse to discuss these issues, are avoiding a large and important part of the Bible. Many believe that what is commonly referred to as “the rapture” falls under this area of “Eschatology”. For that reason many consider it “optional or nonessential”. Yet, this popular way of thinking couldn’t be further from the truth.
Disagreements are Often the
Result of Something Much Deeper
And More Important than the
Topic of the Rapture
It is true that Paul gives the student of the Bible a firm foundation for what is commonly called a pre-tribulational rapture. However, many of the fierce arguments tend to come from a perceived lack of detail in the Biblical text. As we previously learned (and as the critics remind us), the English word "rapture" is not in the Bible. But, phrases that mean the same thing, such as "caught up to meet Christ in the air" and "our gathering together unto Jesus” are used. We simply utilize the English word "rapture" as a convenient way to describe these events. Then, there's the debate over the timing connected to a word that isn't specifically used in Scripture. Similar to the word "rapture" neither Paul nor the Bible in general uses the specific term "pre-tribulational". Yet, the Bible does use other wording that mean the same thing, such as "we (meaning all believers in the Church) are not appointed to wrath (judgment), but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ"
(Note: Paul used this specific wording when teaching the Thessalonians about one of the reasons for the rapture).
This sets up a perfect environment for anyone who isn't necessarily interested in truth, yet seeks to argue in favor of certain pet doctrines or historical traditions, which are based on an out-of-context interpretation of God's Word. The critics often take full advantage of this confusion.
Throughout the epistles of Paul we
find the following major theme;
Jesus bore all the judgment of
the Church (and the individual
believer), which exempts them
from any future judgment for
sin - including God's wrath.
However, not everyone agrees with this free and unmerited salvation that the New Testament refers to as Grace. There's a large segment of the Christian Church that is "anti-grace". One retired Methodist pastor referred to them as "the Grace-haters", which is a group he considers to be deceptive and spiritually dangerous. They like to refer to themselves as devoted Bible believers and never openly claim to oppose grace. Rather, they replace the New Testament "unmerited favor" kind of grace (they call it "false grace") with their own "Old Testament Law and works-based grace", which they wrongly claim is God's original intention. Saint Paul wrote his ‘Epistle to the Galatians” in order to address this very same error. This dominant group in the institutional church is not some "fringe" insignificant minority. It is the anti-grace Old Testament Law-based teaching of this group that casts serious doubts on the sufficiency of the blood of Christ to completely redeem the believer.
If the blood of Christ is insufficient, then all living Christians will obviously need to face additional judgment from God during the future Tribulation Period. Therefore, the real crux of the argument is whether Jesus provided a complete salvation at the cross (no additional works or merit is needed) - or whether He provides only a partial and conditional salvation, which requires additional human works and merit; AND ADDITIONAL JUDGMENT FROM GOD. Here's another way of looking at it: Is the blood of Christ fully sufficient to cleanse us from all sin - or insufficient to totally cleanse us? The Apostle John leaves no doubt about this question when he said, "...the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us FROM ALL SIN." (1 John 1:7). If Christ's blood cleansed the believer from all sin, then no sin remains that requires God's judgment, especially during the Tribulation.
The root cause of the controversy and heated rhetoric is not specifically about the rapture or eschatology in general. The infighting is deeply rooted in a disagreement about the completed redemptive work of Jesus Christ. Jesus either bore all our judgment for sin at the cross; or He didn't.
Jesus as, "The Lamb of God
who takes away the sin of the
world" - either took all our
sin away; or what John said
about Him was a lie.
This is the real issue at stake
in the great rapture debate.
It's not some unimportant discussion
about Bible eschatology.
It's about an ongoing spiritual war
between Christ’s Grace-based
Salvation – and the counterfeit
‘Galatianized’ works-based
Salvation, which has existed
within the institutional Christian
Church for more than 1900 years.
*****************************************************
This is Part 3 of a three-part Bible study.
Click on the links below to access the
other parts of this study.
Part 1
-----
Part 2
*****************************************************
Return To Home Page
|