Kurtis DahlinWhat is Dispensationalism?In the foreword of Charles Ryrie’s book, Dispensationalism Today, Frank Gaebelein wrote, “Dispensationalism is not a theology but rather a method of interpretation” Ryrie also called it a “system of theology” He stated that it “would be more accurate to call it a system of interpretation . . . It involves the meaning and significance of the entire Bible” He added,
Dispensationalism, then, claims to be a help . . . in offering a satisfying philosophy of history, and in employing a consistently normal principle of interpretation. These are basic areas in proper understanding of the Bible. If dispensationalism has the answers, then it is the most helpful tool in Biblical interpretation. If not, it ought to be discarded as worthless.
Therefore, dispensationalism is a tool, a method, a complete system of interpretation involving the meaning and significance of the entire Bible and history. Supposedly, God administers the affairs of the world in distinct periods, ages or dispensations. Each dispensation is characterized by a particular way, order or condition in which God administrates his interaction with mankind . John Darby identified seven different dispensations:
1. Paradise to the Flood 2. Noah 3. Abraham 4. Israel 5. Gentiles 6. The Spirit 7. The Millennium
Dispensationalism, as systematic theology, has predetermined conclusions about such subjects as the Kingdom of God; the Church and Israel; the teaching of Jesus; the return of Jesus and when it happens, how it happens, who is involved; the millennial 1,000 year period; the cessation of spiritual gifts; the nature of salvation and prophecy.
However, the distinguishing feature of dispensationalism is the belief in a secret catching away or rapture of the church prior to the final seven years of Great Tribulation. Paul Enns wrote, “Dispensationalists hold that the church is entirely distinct from Israel as an entity . . .
Dispensationalists also believe that the church will conclude its existence upon the earth at the rapture, prior to the Tribulation (1 Thess. 4:16)”. The Great Tribulation is designed specifically to discipline Israel. Therefore, the church will be raptured or mysteriously snatched away prior to the final Tribulation of Gods wrath. Enns stated, “This is a major reason why dispensationalists hold to a pre-tribulation rapture”. Ryrie wrote, “The distinction between Israel and the Church leads to the belief that the Church will be taken from the earth before the beginning of the tribulation” A pre-tribulation rapture of the Church is the core eschatology of dispensationalism Thessalonians 4:16 is marshaled as the proof text for a new doctrine of a secret half coming of Christ, for the true church, before the Tribulation. The dispensationalist system is a hermeneutical infrastructure for pre-tribulational rapture eschatology. In other words, the entire systematic theology of dispensationalism was created to support the pre-tribulation rapture theory. The Bible is interpreted to agree with dispensationalism.
Where Did Dispensationalism Originate?
Charles Ryrie served as professor of systematic theology at Dallas Theological Seminary for many years. He is well qualified to be the spokesman for this subject in his book called Dispensationalism Today. In The Moody Handbook of Theology author Paul Enns stated that Ryrie's book “is undoubtedly the premier defense of dispensationalism”. It is Ryrie's expressed purpose to correct misconceptions and to give a positive, up-to-date presentation of what dispensationalists are teaching today.
So where does the pre-tribulational rapture come from?
Ryrie tells us that a large contribution toward the systematizing of dispensationalism came from John Darby in the late 1800's He wrote, “There is no question that the Plymouth Brethren of which John Nelson Darby, (1800-1882) was a leader had much to do with the systematizing and promoting of dispensationalism” The most prominent early leader was John Nelson Darby, who taught that Christ might return at any moment and in a “secret rapture” which would take away the members of the true church to dwell in heaven (Conrad Wright, The 1995 Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia). The rapture movement had its beginnings in Ireland and England in the 1820s, Plymouth being a main centre of activity. The name Plymouth Brethren identifies several small Christian sects of common origin found in Britain, continental Europe, and the United States that are conservative in theology and millenarian in outlook. Ryrie also demonstrated that the concept has changed much since that time of Darby. Dispensationalism has gone through an evolutionary refining and his book puts forth the current position that they hold today. In the development process, the dispensationalist system was adopted, adapted, and popularized by C.I. Scofield in his reference Bible Another prominent dispensationalist is Lewis S. Chafer, the founder of Dallas Theological Seminary. Charles Ryrie also has his own study Bible that incorporates his notes, which further develop the dispensationalist system.
Larry Crutchfield, an avid dispensationalist, described the origins of the dispensationalist pre-tribulation rapture movement:
Few would argue that Darby was the first to give a systematic presentation of the doctrine of a pre-tribulation rapture. With regard to the question of where Darby himself got the doctrine, however, there is not the same harmony of opinion. A fairly wide range of sources are suggested, most of them contemporaneous with Darby.
Another candidate for the source of [John] Darby's pre-tribulation rapture doctrine is Margaret Macdonald (c.1815-c.1840). According to Dave MacPherson, the young mystic from Port Glasgow, Scotland, had a great deal to do with the pre-tribulational views of both Darby and Irving. The source of Macdonald's information was a vision she supposedly had of Christ's second coming. Her own handwritten account of the vision, later printed in several publications, is completely reproduced by MacPherson.
It should be apparent from all that has been said previously that Darby's concept of the pre-tribulation rapture grows out of his understanding of the church as a special work of God, completely distinct from His purpose and plan for Israel. Darbys studies bring him to the conclusion that the church will be removed from the earth to set the stage for her glorification with Christ. And after this is accomplished, he believes that God can turn His attention to the remnant of Israel in the Tribulation and to her hopes associated with the millennial kingdom to follow. While Darby consistently refers to Scripture as the source of his views, a number of his detractors maintain that he got them elsewhere, either from the heretic Edward Irving (perhaps at the Powerscourt conferences), or a young Scottish woman named Margaret Macdonald, or someone else (189).
David MacPherson stated,Both Post-Tribs and Pre-Tribs may be shocked to learn that [John] Darby himself visited Margaret in her Port Glasgow home not long after the word got out that she'd succeeded in splitting the Second Coming "atom," and he tells what he saw and heard in a little-known work of his that has generally been overlooked by historical scholars (67).
It may be a bit unsettling to realize that the Pre-Tribulation Rapture’s birthplace is Port Glasgow, Scotland, that the date on its “birth certificate” is 1830, and that a young Scottish lassie originated it.
All knowledgeable Pre-Trib leaders of the present time trace back their distinctive prophetic view to John Darby, the famous organizer and promoter of the Plymouth Brethren movement. But such leaders never say that Darby originated Pre-Trib; they declare that Darby only rediscovered and systematized this concept.
And Darby himself never claimed to have originated Pre-Trib. Darby did reveal, however, the year he said he first separated the Rapture from the Second Coming. Commenting on II Thessalonians 2:1-2, he wrote: “It is this passage which, twenty years ago, made me understand the rapture of the saints before, perhaps a considerable time before, the day of the Lord (that is, before the judgment of the living).”
Analysing this statement, we find that when he began to adopt the “separate Rapture” view, his jumping off spot was the day of the Lord, which he equated with the judgment of the living. The study of his that contained this statement was published in 1850.
Therefore, “twenty years ago” refers to the key year of 1830 (50-51).
The most telling critique of this doctrine [i.e., Pre-Tribulation Rapture] is simply the fact of its newness. It developed from a series of visions experienced by a Scottish woman named Margaret Macdonald in 1830. She believed that a spirit of prophecy had revealed to her that, prior to Christs Second Coming, He would come secretly to remove all Christians from the earth. This novel idea was quickly adopted into both Catholic and Protestant doctrines, and spread throughout Europe and America (200-201).
Richard Reiter stated,
pre-tribulational dispensationalism advanced during this era [i.e., 1909-1952] because Gaebelein, Scofield, James M. Gray at Moody Bible Institute, Ruben A. Torrey at Bible Institute of Los Angeles, Harry A. Ironside at Moody Memorial Church, and Lewis Sperry Chafer at the Evangelical Theological College (later Dallas Theological Seminary) popularized its doctrines widely. The pre-tribulation rapture became the standard position of most Bible conferences and Bible institutes. Of greater influence than any other single factor was the Scofield Reference Bible (improved edition, 1917), which inculcated the eschatology of dispensationalism even while making its primary contribution as a popular defense of evangelicalism, when all else seemed to be falling before the flood of twentieth-century modernism. As a result, “soon the badge of North American evangelicalism was the Scofield Bible”.
Tim LaHaye published a book in 1998 titled, Rapture Under Attack. The book is the result of what Tim LaHaye called “The greatest research project of my life”. LaHaye “has undertaken the most comprehensive study and research effort of his career” to provide the definitive rebuttal of the growing arguments against the pre-tribulation rapture. His purpose is to convince and reaffirm the faith of readers in the pre-tribulation rapture. LaHaye attempted to systematically dismantle what he called the false charges being made against the pre-tribulation eschatology. He wrote, “I can honestly say that I am more convinced than ever of the pre Tribulation Rapture position”.
WHO IS JOHN DARBY?LaHaye informed us that John Darby was converted in 1825 and that same year entered the ministry with the Church of England (161). In late November of 1826, while Darby was convalescing from a broken leg, he recognized the distinction between the church and Israel. The separation of the church and Israel is key to pre-tribulation eschatology. During this time he also came to believe in the soon return of Jesus Christ. He was 27 years old when he formulated the basic principles of dispensationalism including the pre-tribulation rapture.
According to the best research done by devout Darbyists, John Darby was one year old in the Lord when he received his groundbreaking revelation from the Holy Spirit (LaHaye 162). Think about yourself when you were one year old in the Lord. What right did you command to hijack historical orthodoxy? I've had a broken leg that doesn't mean that I am allowed to create new doctrine. At what point in your Christian life are you authorized to introduce new doctrines?
Tim LaHaye wrote that Darby came to accept the soon return of Christ and the separation of the church and Israel between 1826 and 1827. LaHaye pointed out that for Darby, “the awareness of the coming of Christ at any moment was one of his earliest positions” (163).
THE ORIGIN OF THE PRE-TRIBULATION RAPTURE
Tim LaHaye attempted to show that Darby was led by the Holy Spirit to derive his doctrine from scripture. LaHaye stated that the pre-tribulation rapture doctrine was the work of “the Holy Spirit, who wanted to bring that truth to life for these last days…”. LaHaye quoted Darby who wrote, “the truths themselves were then revealed of God, through the action of His Spirit, by reading His Word. What was to be done? I saw in that word the coming of Christ to take the church to Himself in glory”. Darby claimed to have received direct revelation from God concerning the pre-tribulation rapture. Darby came to his rapture position through his personal study and translation of scripture.
Tim LaHaye quoted a church historian who stated, “Darby never indicated any source for his ideas other than the Bible…. In later years he seems to have felt that he was convinced about the doctrine as early as 1827”. There is some controversy surrounding the origin of the pre-tribulation rapture theory. Some argue that Margaret MacDonald first proclaimed it. Others believe that Edward Irving originated the theory. However, the Darbyists point out that it is “Darby's own claim to have arrived at the doctrine through his study of 2 Thessalonians 2:1 2” (LaHaye 165).
The early date of 1827 for Darby's discovery is important to Darbyists because it pre dates the supposed revelation given to Margaret MacDonald and Edward Irving. LaHaye noted, “This date is important because none of the current attacks suggesting Mr. Darby derived the pre Trib position from unsavory sources provide dates before 1831!. Apparently if the pre-tribulation rapture was revealed by the Holy Spirit to Margaret MacDonald or Edward Irving, it would be fanaticism or unsavory. However, if the secret rapture was revealed to Darby it becomes truth. LaHaye wrote, “It is safe for us to conclude that Darby did not receive his view of the Lord's return from any of the sources attributed to him by his detractors”. "
According to the Darbyists there is no other source for the pre-tribulation rapture other than Darby's own interpretation of the Bible. Darby stated that the Holy Spirit brought it to life as he studied scripture. In other words, Darby did not rediscover a truth hidden in church history. Darby would not say that he studied church history and recovered his doctrine from the early Fathers of the church. Darby did not get his doctrine from the orthodox flow of church history. In fact, all honest Darbyists agree that no one taught pre-tribulation dispensational eschatology before John Darby.
Tim LaHaye stated that Darby popularized dispensationalism. He wrote, “Mr. Darby may rightly be accused of popularizing the concept in England, in America and Canada, during the nineteenth century, but he certainly did not invent it”. Well then, who invented the secret rapture theory? Why doesn't anyone want to take the credit? Tim LaHaye and others do not want to admit that Darby not only popularized the doctrine but also invented it. Would the secret rapture be wrong if Darby invented it? LaHaye is a master in the clever use of words. However, Darby made no claim to having formulated his doctrine from church history. Darby did not care that his new doctrine was not taught anywhere in church history. Darbyists know that the earliest church was premillennial and posttribulational. LaHaye is correct when he stated that Darby “popularized” dispensationalism. Darbyists agree that no one, not even heretics in church history, taught Darby’s dispensationalism. It is a clever use of words to label the church Fathers as ancient dispensationalists and Darby as a modern dispensationalist. There is no connection between the eschatology of the early Fathers and the secret rapture developed by John Darby.
There is a fervent effort being made by Darbyists to find any crumb of support for their doctrine in church history. Their valiant effort is in vain! Darby did not get his theological system of dispensationalism from the orthodox stream of church history. He did not research the early Fathers and recover a lost eschatology. Darby did not believe that his doctrine was rooted in orthodoxy. Darby did not quote from the Fathers for his support. Darby quoted himself. If he did not get it from Margaret MacDonald or Edward Irving, where did he get it? Darby reported that he received revelation by the Holy Spirit. The pre-tribulation rapture of dispensationalism was a product of his own imagination.
We, as the church, are guardians of the apostolic repository of truth. Truth does not stagnate. Truth is not progressive. Truth is static. We receive truth. We do not invent truth! If the pre-tribulation rapture were the doctrine of Jesus, the apostles and Paul, wouldn't someone have known before AD 376, 784 or 1830? Wouldn't Jesus have taught such a great hope clearly? Wouldn't Paul have taught it to his churches clearly? Wouldn't John have passed it on to subsequent generations as the great hope for Christians? Wouldn't the pre-tribulation rapture have been passed down as apostolic doctrine just like every other essential Christian doctrine? However, there is no confusion in the early church. The earliest disciples taught that the Second Coming of Christ and the gathering of the saints were premillennial and after the great tribulation. There are some theological principles found in the early Fathers that are exploited by the Darbyists, but no honest scholar would say that Darby was faithful to the Fathers. The early Fathers must be maligned as “confused” and discredited in order for the pre-tribulation doctrine to flourish. Likewise, the Gnostics, the Arians and the Jehovah's Witnesses all reject the early Fathers and malign them as confused.
Tim LaHaye mentioned one obscure Father from AD 327 who supposedly promoted a pre-tribulation rapture. Then it took 1500 years to go anywhere and find a follower in Darby. However, did Darby know anything about this church Father? Did Darby know anything about the renegade Jesuit priest Lacunza in 1826? Did Darby know about MacDonald and Irving? Did he quote Mede or Victorinus as his forerunners? No. As far as Darby knew, he was the inventor of a new doctrine. The pre-tribulation eschatology is based upon Darby's private interpretation or revelation of scripture (120). Concerning the rapture of Christians before the revelation of the anti Christ, LaHaye wrote, “Darby is probably the first to identify it before the entire Tribulation, which he perceived as a seven year period” (168). LaHaye also noted, “It is true that pre Trib position was not formed in detail until 1826 1828” (169). How can Darby be the “first” and not the “first” at the same time? How can the pre-tribulation rapture doctrine not be formed until 1826 and yet be considered historical orthodoxy? Very cl
Tim LaHaye admitted, “The post Trib position (in its primitive form) is the oldest point of view”. LaHaye also stated that it never occurred to second and third century Christians “that Christ would come before the tribulation”. The eschatology closest to the apostles is posttribulational. There is no confusion about this orthodox and universal apostolic tradition. This means that the earliest disciples of the apostles believed that the Second Coming of Christ and gathering of the saints was posttribulational. How could the church universally misunderstand such a great hope? The answer is they didn't. The post tribulation coming of Christ for the saints is the correct doctrine that has been handed down to us from Jesus, the apostles and Paul to the church Fathers. We don't need a new eschatology, no matter how appealing.
We learn from Tim LaHaye:
1) That the earliest church was posttribulational (197).
2) The earliest church believed in the imminent return of Christ (71).
3) The earliest church was holy, evangelistic and ready to be martyred (71).
4) The earliest church was patiently waiting for the coming of Jesus Christ.
5) The earliest church thought they were in the great tribulation (198, 31).
6) The tribulation saints were given the days to count down for the blessed Return of Christ
The earliest church was posttribulational.
This early church was able to evangelize the world, protect the scripture, give us the Canon, protect apostolic doctrine, give us the Nicene Creed and bequeath every other apostolic doctrine that we consider orthodox to this day.
Tim LaHaye wrote,Many Independent, Baptist, and Methodist pastors readily saw the biblical justification for Darby's teachings readily saw the biblical justification for Darby's teachings on dispensations, the separation of Israel and the church, Futurism, imminency, and a pre Tribulation Rapture. Since they were biblical literalists who already believed in the pre Millennial return of Christ, it was a small step to incorporate these new concepts into their views of end time activities.
LaHaye called them “Darby's teachings.” He called them “new concepts” and he listed a number of those new concepts. What we discover is that Darby developed a major system of biblical interpretation called dispensationalism that is “his concepts, his teachings, his views.”
The debate over who originated the pre-tribulational secret rapture theory is of little consequence. Of course, the devotees of dispensationalism do not want to claim Margaret Macdonald or Edward Irving as the founders. However, the fact remains that the secret half coming of Christ “for the saints” was a new invention recently developed over the last 150 years. Either Margaret Macdonald, Edward Irving or John Darby created a novel interpretation of the End Times that has become authoritative for a large portion of Protestant Christianity. Yet, how can one man or woman exercise such authority in the church? A new doctrine cannot be based upon a few scattered references over 1800 years of church history. The Darbyists believe all we require is two or three isolated quotations from history to approve a new dogma. Usually Protestants are quick to find fault with Roman Catholics for adding new dogma and traditions based on popular consensus. Yet, many Protestants find no fault with John Darby who was the first to systematize and popularize dispensationalism. At least the Roman Catholics have a church council where consensus is required for the adoption of a new tradition. Yet, in certain Protestant circles new traditions are adopted simply by popular appeal. Roman Catholics claim equal authority for tradition and scripture. Roman Catholics argue on behalf of progressive revelation and the “Church’s right to authorize a legitimate development in doctrine.” The Roman Catholics consider the bodily rapture of Mary after her death to heaven to be “truth divinely revealed” (Hardon 161). Some Protestants claim equal authority for the tradition systematized by John Darby. What is the difference between the formulation of the pre-tribulation rapture and Purgatory or the bodily assumption of Mary? The pre-tribulation rapture is taught as canon in many Protestant circles. Apparently the canon is not closed for all Protestants. However, the Fathers and church history must be discarded, disparaged and ignored in order for Darby’s dispensationalism to flourish. A major doctrine such as dispensational eschatology should have been taught universally in church history. Yet, the lack of historicity is overlooked by the Darbyists. The Roman Catholics also argue, “we need not be able to trace historically through ecclesiastical documents the Church’s hierarchical teaching on some matter of faith and morals” (Hardon 233). Ultimately, we are not concerned with who invented the secret rapture, whether two or three people in history or if MacDonald or Irving or Darby made it up. It still is an error introduced into the mainstream of Protestant Christian theology. Dispensationalism is a needless manmade tradition added to the Canon of scripture.
Let us be honest. John Darby, as a 27 year old young man, and an untrained new Christian convert, without any accountability to orthodox church history, a denomination or Christian mentors, created a theological system that divided the Brethren Movement and further divided the church (LaHaye 162). The same people who teach that revelation ceased with the apostles now inform us that Darby received a monumental revelation as a result of his own individual study of the word of God.
Yet, Ryrie is not concerned about the newness of the dispensationalist secret rapture doctrine. Instead, he argued for the legitimate progress of dogma. Apparently, it is only now that the church is beginning to fully understand eschatology. He dedicated four pages of his book Dispensationalism Today to describing the dispensationalist interpretation of the End Times as progressive revelation. “The Bible interpreter must observe carefully this progressiveness of revelation, and dispensationalism helps promote accuracy in this regard”. Ryrie also understood that the early apostolic Fathers did not teach any tenets of the current dispensational system. He stated, “It is not suggested nor should it be inferred that these early Church Fathers were dispensationalists in the modern sense of the word”. Charles Ryrie clearly understood that pre-tribulational dispensationalism was not rooted in historic orthodoxy. He wrote, “Posttribulationalism was the position of the early church” (Doctrine 168). If posttribulationalism was the position of the early church--why change? Apostolic truth should not be subject to the whims, “revelations” and desires of consensus or well meaning individuals.
A wedge must be hammered between the new view invented one hundred and fifty years ago and historic orthodoxy. The early Fathers must be maligned as confused, embryonic or ill informed. Lewis Chafer wrote,
Until A.D. 190 the early church fathers were almost unanimous in holding to the premillennial interpretation of Scripture. They were confused by the fact that the Bible affirms that major events will take place before the Second Coming such as the appearance of the Antichrist and a single worldwide government. On the other hand they recognized the teaching of the Scriptures that the coming of Christ for the church is imminent. The early church fathers accordingly were confused and often they spoke of the Rapture as imminent and then later affirmed that some event must take place first which would deny its immanency.
Crutchfield wrote, “On the whole, the eschatology of the Fathers was embryonic and incomplete”. However, Engleman again recalled the historic position of the Fathers,
The concept of Christ rapturing believers was completely unknown during the first thousand years of Christian history, during which time there was but one Christian Faith throughout the world. The Seven Ecumenical Councils of A.D. 325 through 787, in which all the essential doctrines of Christian Truth were declared, never mentioned a rapture (Engleman 201).
Father Michael Pomazansky points out the traditional Christian teaching on this subject: that “even the elect will suffer on earth during the ‘tribulation’ period, and that for their sake this period will be shortened” (Matt. 24:21-22) (Engleman 201-202).
Historically the church has suffered incredible persecution. The Second Coming of Christ was to end the tribulation that Christians endured. Since the early Christians lived in the midst of vicious, brutal tortures how could they teach a pre-tribulational escape? They looked forward to the time when Christ would come and end their trials. The early church was post-tribulational. No one is confused about the eschatology of the Fathers. However, the hope of the Fathers is now ridiculed as a destructive deception of the devil. Richard Reiter explained the remarkable turn around and then quoted C. I. Scofield,
As early as 1895 C. I. Scofield asserted that both posttribulationism and postmillennialism lacked urgency, and said they “come perilously near to saying, ‘My Lord delayeth His coming.’” But when he addressed the Wilmington [Delaware] Bible Conference in 1913 he called posttribulationism a deceiving and destructive opponent of the pre-tribulation Rapture.
It seems to have been a prime object of Satan to confuse the minds of God’s people about that Blessed Hope, anything to turn their eyes away from expecting him. Well, our Lord said it would be so. . . . I dont think that the enemy of the Blessed Hope is now so much postmillennialism, but it is rather posttribulationism
Next, the authors of the new interpretation of scripture claim a special revelation from God. Ryrie stated,
Progressive revelation is the recognition that Gods message to man was not given in one single act but was unfolded in a long series of successive acts and through the minds and hands of many men of varying backgrounds.
Charles Ryrie then proceeded to link the revelation of dispensational eschatology with the Bible. “The principle of progressive revelation is evident in the Scriptures themselves”. Ryrie quoted from Milton Terry as further proof for the progress of revelation. “With each new series of generations some new promise is given, or some great purpose of God is brought to light.” Ryrie concluded that dispensationalism is the work of divine revelation.
It is the marking off of these stages in the revelation of the purpose of God that is the basis for the dispensational approach to the interpretation of the Scriptures.
The student of Christian history is presented with a clear choice. We can acquiesce in the authority of one woman or man with a “new progressive” revelation from God or we can acquiesce in the authority of the early Fathers. Let the Fathers prevail. The pre-tribulation rapture theory and all its necessary supports and arguments are essentially unorthodox. Dispensational eschatology depends on a new tradition imparted as a divine revelation either to Margaret Macdonald or John Darby. When a person is indoctrinated into the dispensationalist methodology, he or she approaches the study of scripture in a particular systematic way. It is like wearing dark glasses when studying the Bible. Everything is filtered or colored by the dispensationalist system of interpretation. The dispensationalist filter effects their approach to history and the interpretation of the Bible. Dispensationalism is a complete system of interpretation. The conclusions the dispensationalist arrives at concerning the Bible, are the very same ones they began with. History and the Bible no longer inform thinking but are forced to conform to their predetermined theology. Crutchfield wrote,
It is interesting to note that Scofield too goes straight to the Bible as his source for the doctrine of the pre-tribulation rapture of the saints. In February, 1902, issue of A. C. Gaebeleins publication, Our Hope, Scofield asserts that “We cannot allow the statement to stand that ‘until the days of Edward Irving, who was excluded from the Presbyterian Church for heresy, no one ever heard of the ‘coming for’ and ‘coming with His saints.’” Scofield goes on to cite 1 Thessalonians 4:15-18 in further proof of the Biblical origin of the doctrine.
However, the Second Coming of Jesus and the gathering of the elect as described in Matthew 24 is clearly “after the distress of those days” or post tribulation. Does the Coming of Jesus in 1Thessalonians 4 describe a different, unique and secret half coming prior to the days of distress? The Coming of Christ and gathering of the saints in Matthew 24 is the same Coming and gathering in 1 Thessalonians 4. Compare for yourselves.
Matthew 24:29 31
29 "Immediately after the distress of those days "'the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'
30 "At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory.
31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. (NIV)
1Thessalonians 4:15 18
15 According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep.
16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.
17 After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.
18 Therefore encourage each other with these words. (NIV)
Paul specifically referred back to “the Lord’s own word” as the authoritative reference point for his teaching in 1 Thessalonians 4. Jesus said his coming and gathering of the elect is “after the tribulation” (Matt 24:27; Mk13:24). What is it about “after the tribulation” that is so hard to understand? Where, according to the Lord’s own words, does he teach a secret coming to rapture endless Christians before the Great Tribulation? Jesus never taught a pre-tribulation rapture 7 years before his coming. His coming and gathering of the saints is “after the tribulation” not before the tribulation. It is clear that the only record of Jesus’ eschatology depicting his return and the gathering of the saints is post tribulation. There is no other coming and gathering in the teachings of Jesus.
Matt 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days (RSV)
Matt 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days (NKJ)
Matt 24:29 But immediately after the tribulation of those days (NAU)
It is impossible that Paul should have any other secret teaching or doctrine or knowledge of the Second Coming and gathering of the saints apart from the precise words of Jesus as recorded in the gospels. Jesus stated that his coming and gathering of the saints would be “Immediately after the tribulation of those days.” The nations that are alive and remain will see him coming on the clouds with glory and power. He will send his angels with a loud trumpet call to gather up the elect to be with him. Paul stated that his description of the Coming of Jesus and gathering of the elect in 1 Thessalonians chapter 4 was “According to the Lord’s own word.” Paul wrote that the Lord would descend with a loud command of power and glory. The first angel would blow the trumpet and those elect Christians of all nations who remain alive will be gathered up to be with the Lord. Historically, there was only one Second Coming and gathering of the saints as proclaimed by Jesus. According to the very words of Jesus his coming and gathering is after the tribulation. The apostolic church believed Jesus, literally, for 1850 years. The post tribulation return of Jesus to gather the elect was the complete and clear eschatology of Jesus, the apostles, Paul, the early Fathers and the universal church until Margaret Macdonald or John Darby’s revelation about A.D. 1830. The Secret Rapture was so secret that no one taught it for 1850 years. Apparently Darby’s personal interpretation of scripture has precedence over the very words of Jesus and the orthodox post tribulation eschatology of the apostles, Paul and the apostolic Fathers. Paul’s teaching in 1 Thessalonians 4 must be severed from “the Lords own word” in the gospels and applied to a novel, secret half coming according to “the words of John Darby.” Let the Fathers prevail. Let Jesus prevail.
Dispensationalism dismembers the body of Christ by disposing of powerful spiritual gifts. The weakened Church now cowers before evil hoping to escape the final battle. The Blessed Hope of the Darbyists is to escape the end time war between good and evil. Darbyists rob the Church of power, then they rob it of courage. The rapture is a feel good theology that appeals to Western Christians. The Darbyists do not pray for power to endure and bring glory to Christ. The Darbyists pray to escape honoring Christ. The Darbyists burn their draft cards.
ACCORDING THE DARBYISTS
John Darby was the first to systematize and popularize the pre-tribulation rapture and the theological infrastructure of dispensationalism. No one taught anything close to it in all the history of the world. Darby was the primary leader in the secret rapture movement. Darby dispensationalism has no root in apostolic tradition. Dispensationalism is progressive revelation. Darby was one year old in the Lord when he received his profound revelation from the Holy Spirit. Yet, supposedly he did not invent dispensationalism. If Margaret MacDonald or Edward Irving had the revelation first that would constitute an unsavory and fanatical source. Fortunately for the Darbyists, with new information, Darby’s revelation of the rapture predated both MacDonald and Irving. The post tribulation coming of Jesus and gathering of the saints was the universal teaching of the earliest church. However, post tribulationalism is now considered a deception of the devil and an enemy of the Blessed Hope. The earliest disciples of the apostles were confused. And all this is OK with you?
